# Kaby Lake Overclocking Guide [With Statistics]



## BoredErica

*Kaby Lake Overclocking Thread*

*Haswell Overclocking Guide [With Statistics]*

*Skylake Overclocking Guide [With Statistics]*

Welcome to the Kaby Lake Overclocking Thread. Nobody has made a thread to chart all of people's overclocks, so I decided it's time for me to make a thread. Hopefully you will find this thread useful. If you are new to OCN, know that you can open an image in a new tab to view it in full size. This guide is based on the Skylake guide but has been improved.



Spoiler: Disclaimer



I am a hobbyist with no electrical engineering background. While I've put thought into this thread, I am not responsible if your CPU blows up, your motherboard blows up, or your life blows up. Nobody really knows what voltage is 'safe' and what 'safe' means is vague. Everybody stresses their CPU in different ways and I'm writing this guide for free on my own free time. I can't afford to break multiple chips to even try to come up with a good answer. In a nutshell: I'm just some random dude on the internet.





Spoiler: Kaby Lake General Info



*What is Kaby Lake?*
Kaby Lake is the 7th generation line of consumer CPUs for the mainstream platform. The enthusiast platform can feature more connectivity (such as PCIE lanes and quad channel memory controller as opposed to dual channel) and more cores, but the best single-threaded performance remains at the mainstream platform. Of course, the mainstream platform is generally cheaper to boot. The two most interesting CPUs for overclocking remain the top i5 and i7 skus. They are the 7600k and the 7700k. However, the i3 7350k is new. It is an unlocked 2 core processor with hyperthreading. The price (as shown soon) is a bit overboard in my opinion.

*How does performance differ?*
When it comes to those two processors, in terms of performance the Kaby Lake processors are Skylake processors that are able to clock higher due to a refined manufacturing process (14nm vs 14nm+). This follows the current cycle of tick-tock-optimization cycle (process shrink, microarchitecture update, process refinement). This means IPC (instructions per clock) shouldn't change. Testing shows that 4.5GHz on Kaby Lake will be basically the same as 4.5GHz on Skylake. Whereas one can expect 4.7-4.9GHz on Skylake chips, the Kaby Lake counterparts can achieve 4.9-5.2GHz with similar voltages. Note that some testing by HardOCP suggests that power consumption is a bit less than Skylake with Kaby Lake. 

*How are the 7600k and 7700k different?*
Please reference this chart by PCPer in their review of Kaby Lake. You can find their review HERE.


Past experience shows that once overclocked the difference between the i5 and i7 chips are small. (Differences may be attributed to i7 owners having better cooling and deciding to overclock further, for example.) The usual 2MB increase in cache has minimal differences (probably 1% if that much at all). As usual the i7 part has hyperthreading, which is useful for most applications that could use more than 4 cores. Remember that this will cause the chip to be hotter. And finally, there is the difference in price.

*How do the chipsets differ?*
The release of Kaby Lake comes with the usual release of a new chipset. This new chipset is the z270 chipset. Kaby Lake processors will work on Skylake motherboards (which use the z170 chipset) with a BIOS update. In that situation, the new features of the z270 chipset which the CPU is capable of supporting will not work. They use the same socket (LGA 1151). This means cooling solutions that worked for Skylake/Haswell/etc will work here.

*PCIE Lanes:*
First let's be clear about what Skylake brought to the table. With Skylake there were 16+4 PCIE lanes. 16 of them are direct to the CPU and can get used for graphics cards. The extra 4 could be used by motherboard vendors however they want, but in practice allowed for a x4 PCIE SSD to run. Typically this was run with a PCIE NVMe SSD like the 950 Pro. Those 4 extra lanes are connected via the *D*irect *M*emory *I*nterface (DMI) and could not be used for graphics cards. It runs at PCIE 3.0 speeds, allowing for up to 4 GB/s, but with overhead the figure might be around 3.5 GB/s. DMI lanes have higher latency than direct PCIE lanes but the differences should be minor.

With Kaby Lake we have an extra 4 lanes through the DMI, bringing us to 16+8 lanes. It is important to note that the extra 4 PCIE lanes through the DMI we get with Kaby Lake compared to Kaby Lake does not increase the amount of data that can pass through to the DMI. It is still ~3.5 GB/s. Those extra lanes simply allow for better connectivity (like having multiple 950 Pros). Esoteric setups involving strange RAID setups and such will not be covered in this thread.

*RAM:*
With Skylake we saw the transition from DDR3 to DDR4 RAM on the mainstream platform, catching up to the enthusiast platform (x99 chipset). While with Skylake we had a few motherboards that supported both types of memory, it was not recommended. We've moved on past a year since then, so expect to run just DDR4. Fortunately, DDR4 prices have fallen a lot since it was only used on x99. Prices vary, but snatching DDR4 3200 RAM would involve a very small premium in the United States.

*Optane:*
At this point Optane is not out yet. Whereas modern motherboards support Optane as a normal storage drive, z270 motherboards support using Optane as a cache drive to speed up slower drives. This seems to be similar to hybrid drives, which are sort of a SSD/HDD hybrid.

*What about the chip Skylake PCBs?*
To my knowledge the PCBs of Skylake and Kaby Lake chips are the same in thickness. A month or two after the release of Skylake there was a scare about a chip supposedly breaking under normal operation due to thin PCBs. This has not been proven and it has not been replicated since the incident. In other words, this is not a problem.

*Delidding:*
Delidding is the process of removing the *I*ntegrated *H*eat *S*preader from a CPU package and reapplying the thermal compound found underneath. A popular option is to use CoolLaboratory Ultra (CLU) or Kryonaut Conductonaut as the compound. It is not recommended to use normal thermal paste for this. We are past the age of delidding via razor blade or vice, so please do not use such unsafe methods. There exist tools to make it safer (Dr. Delid, Rockit 88, Delid Die Mate). Once the delid is done the user might want to glue the IHS back on, and for that there are multiple options such as super glue (Der8auer recommends UHU High Temperature Silicone glue). If you do not want to delid yourself you can always purchase a delidding service from Silicon Lottery, and that includes resealing of the package.

Expect 15C better temps with a proper delidding job. It is possible to run the processor without the IHS. This is called 'bare die' and must be done with caution. If the cooler is mounted overly tight on the processor then the die may crack.

*Is there any insurance for my CPU?*
Yes. The Intel Protection Plan still exists. For $25-$30 you can stop worrying about overclocking leading to death of your CPU. This is on top of the warranty you get with a CPU purchase. Visit here for details. In general people found that Intel has been pretty lenient in accepting replacements.





Spoiler: Pre-Overclocking Information



Here are some things to consider before overclocking:


Coolermaster 212 Hyper Evo < Noctua D14/D15 < x60/x61 Kraken/H100i < Custom Loop
Thermal transfer is pretty bad because the die and the IHS are small, and without delidding it's even worse.
Do you want to delid?
Lower temperatures improve stability, which means one needs less voltage to stabilize. With fine grain adjustment of bclk small headroom can be exploited.
Ripjaws 4 were around before Skylake. There were some reports of those kits not overclocking as far as Ripjaws 5 of similar specifications.
Like Skylake, *L*oad *L*ine *C*alibration affects core voltage and adaptive voltage mode is not dangerous under heavy synthetic loads like Prime95.
C-states decrease the voltage and in turn power usage during idle. This has a marginal effect on SSD performance.
The recommended utility for looking at your stats is HWInfo available *here**.*
Terminology Check:

Uncore = Cache Ratio = Ring Bus (Not technically 100% true, but when people say these things that's what they mean.) 
BLCK = Base Clock
100 (Base Clock) x 45 (Multiplier) = 4500MHz or 4.5GHz

Changing the base clock affects ram speeds. You will have to readjust the ram setting accordingly if you change the base clock. It is typical during a launch for there to be new BIOs updates. Keep your eyes peeled.
If you Bsod, you can look at some details from the crash log. BluescreenView will pull up the information for you. If you want, you can download it here.
VID is the voltage the processor requests. Generally it is not a useful reading in HWinfo. Vcore when read in real-time in a tool like HWinfo is a measurement of the voltage actually given. When you put in 1.3v into core voltage in the BIOS, maybe only 1.25v is given to the cores under load. This discrepancy is called Vdroop. To counteract that you can simply raise the voltage you entered or you can use *L*oad *L*ine *C*alibration or LLC. This setting impacts the real-time Vcore reading and increases it. Voltage delivered can have very quick drops, so quickly that specialized gear is required to detect it. LLC helps counteract that.
Can't find Vcore reading in HWInfo? Don't know where F-clock (Fclk) is on HWinfo?









If too many overclocks are going on at once or you change too many settings at one time it would be unclear what caused the crash.
If you are nearing the limits of your processor it makes no sense to increase more than one multiplier at once. You could increase by less than that via BCLK tweaking.
It may be helpful to write down settings and whether it passed or not.






Spoiler: Overclocking Instructions



*Core Overclocking*

The instructions for Kaby Lake overclocking is basically the same as Skylake's.

0. Update your UEFI.
1. Manually set your cache ratio and ram to stock. Don't even use XMP profiles. Hell, turn your GPU's overclock off.
1a. Decide on your voltage mode. (More information at the end of this spoiler.)
2. Try 4.8GHz at ~1.35v. It should work and be stable. For those who are very new to overclocking, this means changing the core multiplier to 48. Core multipliers are always integers (meaning no decimals).
3. Just go up a multiplier. Increase voltage if you crash during stress testing with our x264 test. Refer to the recommended voltage section. Check the temperatures for the first minute or two to make sure everything is okay. Crashing from unstable settings will not harm your hardware, but may break your operating system if done excessively.
4. Eventually you will find the highest overclock you can hit without breaking 1.4v and this overclock will pass x264 test overnight. Another option is to try Prime95 v27.9, but v28.10 is overkill. To read more about different stress tests and to access quick download links to them (including our modified x264 test), check the "Stress Testing" spoiler.
5. You now know how far your core can go without changing Bclk. What happens next depends on the user's patience. Pick either the lazy method or the patient method.

Blck, or "base clock", affects multiple things including: Core, cache, ram frequency, and Fclk. The core frequency tends to have a larger impact on performance compared to cache or ram frequency. That in turn has a larger impact on performance compared to Fclk. In other words, put more time and energy on the things that matter more.

*The Lazy Method*


Since at this point you already know your maximum core clock without changing the bclk, just change the cache to something that will be stable for sure, like 4.4 or 4.5GHz. Don't sweat the last 200-300MHz, it really doesn't make a difference to performance.

*The Patient Method*

Essentially what you want with base clock changes is this:

Bclk that is not too far from 100 to cause instability.
Bclk when combined with a core multiplier, gives you the absolute highest core frequency that is stable.
Bclk when combined with a Fclk multiplier (4, 8, or 10) has to result in an overclocked, but stable Fclk.
Bclk when combined with a right memory divider, gives you a ram frequency that is overclocked somewhat near its maximum.

How do we achieve this?
Since you know your maximum core clock without changing the bclk, now it's time to figure out what it is with bclk changes. If you are at 4.8GHz that means 4.9GHz is unstable. Try a setting that results in a frequency in between 4.8 and 4.9GHz. While doing this keep an eye on cache, ram, and Fclk to make sure they remain near stock speeds and stable.
Then, increase cache multiplier until it crashes, and back off one multiplier. (We don't fine tune cache with bclk because we did it for core and core matters more.) Unlike Skylake, there is a decent chance that your cache will not go as high as your core.
Overclock your ram.
Set Fclk multiplier to something that results in above 1GHz clock speed with your bclk.

Let's look at things more closely. This is important particularly for those who don't know how bclk works.



Spoiler: Fclk & You



Fclk is a setting that has to do with the way the GPU contacts the CPU. The default setting is 1000MHz. Fclk is supposed to be a GPU-oriented setting, so CPU benchmarks won't show a difference. The difference between various Fclk settings is relatively small. It varies depending on the configuration (especially from GPU to GPU), but for a 980ti the difference is within the margin of error. Here are Anandtech's results from the Skylake era:



Spoiler: Fclk Benchmarks





Notice how different the gains are depending on the GPU used.



From what I can gather, the performance gains of overclocking the Fclk is really quite small, even on graphical benchmarks like Unigine Valley. If the difference in performance past 1GHz Fclk doesn't even show under some graphical benchmarks, the difference is really quite small.

The exact settings will vary because motherboard vendors love assigning different names to the same thing. The instructions below are meant for Asus z170 Hero boards but it should be similar enough to whatever you have to make sense.

There should be a setting to adjust the Fclk directly in your BIOS, allowing you to set the Fclk to 400MHz, 800MHz, or 1000MHz.

For example, in the Asus Hero z170 UEFI, under "Tweaker's Paradise", there is an option called "FCLK Frequency for Early Power On". What this setting actually does is set the Fclk multiplier to 10, and if the base clock is 100, 100 x 10 = 1000MHz Fclk. In HWinfo, under "System Agent Clock" (refer to Pre-Overclocking Information spoiler), it should now read 1000MHz.

So, if you choose to only overclock the Fclk through the dedicated Fclk setting, make sure your base clock makes sense. If you have it set to 1000MHz and you forget about it and you go back to changing the bclk to overclock your core clock, you won't understand why you won't POST at 170 bclk. The answer is that your Fclk has been overclocked to an insane value.

So let me state it again: *Your Fclk frequency is affected by both your Bclk and the setting you've chosen in the dedicated Fclk setting.*

Fclk setting at 1000MHz (Fclk multiplier = 10)

Bclk set to 100MHz

-----------------------------

10 x 100 = 1000

Fclk is 1000MHz

Fclk setting at 800MHz (Fclk multiplier = 8)

Bclk set to 110MHz

-----------------------------

8 x 110 = 880

Fclk is at 880MHz

If you didn't pick a Fclk setting and you left it at auto in the dedicated Fclk menu, then your motherboard will likely try to adjust the Fclk multiplier so that you will not crash.





Spoiler: Understanding Base Clock (Bclk)



*Fine tuning Core Clock with Bclk Changes:*

Base clock x Multiplier = frequency in MHz

Recall that multipliers can only be whole numbers. If we only tweak the multiplier, we can only do 4.5, 4.6, 4.7GHz etc. What if I can do 4.5GHz but I cannot do 4.6GHz? Maybe I can stabilize at a frequency above 4.5GHz but below 4.6GHz. To do that we change the Base Clock. The bclk can contain decimals (like 100.1MHz, etc).

Let's say we want to try 4.545GHz. Pick a number relatively close to 100 that when multiplied by something gives us 4545. 101 base clock with 45 core multiplier will do just that. Could I have done 181.8 * 25? Yes. But in general we want to keep bclk as close to 100 as possible to improve stability and decrease headaches.

Old OC:
100 x 45 = 4.5GHz Core clock
100 x 40 = 4.0GHz Cache clock
2133MHz Memory clock
100 x 10 = 1.0GHz Fclk

Base clock set to 101:
101 x 45 = 4.545GHz Core clock
101 x 40 = 4.04GHz Cache clock
2154MHz Memory clock
101 x 10 = 1.1GHz Fclk

If the above passes, we now have a stable 4.545GHz. Maybe we could aim for a higher frequency. Remember that core matters more than cache or ram which matters more than Fclk. This is why it's best to alter base clock to maximize core and simply raise the cache multiplier as far as it will go afterwards. Keep in mind that every time you adjust bclk you are also adjusting cache, Fclk, and ram. Adjust their multipliers accordingly. In my example the base clock change was so slight such adjustments were not necessary.

The higher you go from 100 base clock, the harder it is to stabilize. Generally the stability at 170 bclk and up will vary depending on the motherboard. You will sometimes fail to boot if the bclk is too high. There's usually no good reason to set the base clock above 170 though. With smart math, it should be possible to get very close to any frequency without exceeding 150 bclk. Don't forget that bclk can have decimals.





Spoiler: Ram Overclocking Basics



*Ram Overclocking*
Once both the core and cache ratio are set to stable and overclocked values you don't want to touch anymore, go ahead and overclock your ram. Don't forget that timings matter as well, and the "tighter" or the smaller the numbers are, the better. According to Asus, *S*ystem *A*gent and VCCIO voltages can help stabilize a ram overclock, although more isn't always better. The ram itself could use some extra voltage. The default is 1.3v, with 1.35v being safe and 1.4v probably/possibly safe.

Here are rough guidelines for figuring out how your ram is doing for those too lazy to benchmark:

Latency:
Ram can have lower latency or higher frequency. To figure out how good your latency is, simply divide your frequency by your CAS latency. This nets a number that Anandtech calls 'performance index'.

Frequency:
Obviously the higher your frequency, the better.

Generally you want lower latency while slightly favoring the higher frequency option when the performance index is similar. Run Memtest to see if your ram is stable. It's actually possible to simply tweak ram and see if the overclock holds up under use over time, but this requires over a week of computer usage doing a variety of tasks.



*Final Step:*
Go back and see if your overclocks still function perfectly with less voltage. How low can you go? This is just fine tuning of your voltages.

*Safe Voltages (Always TENTATIVE):*
Vcore: 1.45v/1.37v
VCCIO: 1.25v/1.2v
System Agent (SA): 1.3v/1.25v
Vdimm: 1.4v/1.35v

The first value shows voltages a pretty ballsy person can use. The voltage after the forward slash shows voltages for regular users who don't want to live on the edge. Refer to the disclaimer spoiler.



Spoiler: Voltage Modes



Before talking about voltage modes and power saving modes it's useful to think about what 'auto' voltage mode means. Auto means the CPU or the motherboard will try to assign what it thinks is the correct voltage for a given situation. It is down to multiple factors, and some of those factors are out of our control or are opaque to us. When a person only changes the core multiplier in a sloppy overclock they are letting the CPU decide with auto voltage mode. Offset and adaptive voltage modes seek to build on that behavior whereas manual voltage mode stops that behavior. The reason why it is not recommended to leave voltage up to auto mode is because auto mode is not perfect. In some cases it's very possible to achieve stability but the auto rules are too lax with the voltage, or vice versa.

*Offset Mode*
With this mode, you can add an offset to all of the voltages the CPU/motherboard would have used. If at a given frequency the auto mode would have used 1.3v, adding an offset of +0.01v would result in 1.31v used in that situation. You can set positive or negative offsets. This offset applies to all situations all the time.

*Adaptive Voltage*
Whereas offset mode simply shifts the entire voltage curve up or down, adaptive increases voltage to a set amount when core frequency goes above stock (meaning heavier load). Otherwise, the voltage curve will be default behavior unless the motherboard allows for an offset in adaptive mode.

*Manual Mode*
Manual mode means a fixed voltage is delivered to the CPU at all times regardless of load. If frequency and voltage are held constant then the best possible performance is possible (although the difference is not very big).



On a 7600k at 5.1/4.8ghz with 1.4v Vcore, idle power decreased from 72w to 54w. The more background tasks on idle, the less the CPU is able to downclock and downvolt, meaning less savings. My testing doesn't even include having Chrome open while testing. The core temperature also decreased 3C under 24C ambient temperature. It's also worth noting that downclocking/downvolting settings in UEFI should be paired with balanced power plan settings in Windows. Also, on Asus motherboards the minimum cache ratio must be set to a low number in order for voltage and cache frequency to downclock.







Spoiler: Other Power Saving Info



The following settings are only relevant for those not using manual override voltage modes to keep frequencies and voltages at maximum.

*CPU SVID Support*
This setting allows the CPU to talk to parts of the motherboard when it comes to voltages. This must be on for adaptive or offset voltage modes. Some software require SVID to be on for some readings, like CPU power draw in HWInfo. If neither points apply to you then set this off.

*C-States*
The CPU can enter various low power states. There are multiple C states, varying from C0 to C6. C0 is the default state and the higher the number, the lower power state in general. When parts of the processor powers down it will take time for it to ramp back up to full speed again. Note: I have been unable to detect an appreciable difference with or without C-states on Kaby Lake platform since adaptive voltage mode with balanced power setting seem to do the same thing.

*Speed Shift*

If the operating system and CPU supports it, the downclocking process can be handled by the CPU itself. This allows it to more rapidly downclock or upclock as situations change. This is more relevant for mobile, since burst workloads can be completely more smoothly from idle. Normally this should be on if the user is using adaptive or offset voltage modes.








Spoiler: Other Settings



*Spread Spectrum*
There are regulations about how much *E*lectro*M*agentic *I*nterfererence consumer electronics can cause. To pass these regulations 'spread spectrum' was introduced. Practically speaking this should be disabled when overclocking. It will cause the core frequency to be unstable at a micro level. The frequency changes are way smaller than a multiplier's worth of changes, so much less than 100hz. However, these small changes are not ideal in an overclocking environment. CPU Spread Spectrum affects the core clock while BCLK Spread Spectrum affects base clocks.

*Asus Multicore Enhancement, etc.*
These settings are on multiple motherboards and will have different names depending on the motherboard vendor. Multicore Enhancement is the turbo boost settings you see on processors. A CPU may clock at a base frequency (say, 3.5GHz) by default, but turbo up to 3.8GHz under load. How much the turbo is could depend on things like temperature or the amount of cores used. While Intel has guidelines for the behavior, motherboard vendors are free to put their own spin on it. Often what these company-specific settings do is enable a more aggressive form of multicore enhancement. This lets motherboards show up higher in motherboard benchmarks. But because we are overclocking in Overclock.net in my overclocking guide, this setting has no benefit. To my knowledge there are no positives or negatives associated with these types of settings for our purposes.

*AC/DC Load Line*
This setting seems to be related to LLC (discussed later). It only affects users with adaptive voltage mode, improving spikes and drops. Asus recommends setting these settings to 0.01.

*Load Line Calibration (LLC)*
By default voltage when the CPU is under load decreases, making it lower than what the user sets in the bios. On idle it would be the same on manual voltage mode. Voltage drops under load on purpose and is called Vdroop. The *V*oltage *R*egulator *M*odules (VRMs) cannot react instantly to a load starting or ending. This causes voltage under shoot (voltage falls too low) when a load begins and over shoot (voltage spikes too high) when a load ends. The purpose of Vdroop is to lower voltage under load to avoid this spike, since spikes in voltage can be harmful to the processor even if it is brief. The changes in voltage can occur way too quickly for software to measure, and instead would require an oscilloscope. All software can detect are the idle and load parts of the graph which I've labeled. Please refer to the picture below.



Say I want 1.25v under load. There are two ways of achieving that goal. I can raise Vcore such that Vcore under load is 1.25v, meaning idle voltage is higher than that. That simply shifts the curve upwards.

I can instead use LLC, which won't touch idle voltage and instead jacks up voltage under load. LLC improves under shoot (which can potentially render an overclock unstable) and worsens over shoot (which can harm a CPU). The improvements in under shoot and severity of the over shoot depend on the switching speed of the VRMs (which can be altered in bios on some motherboards). As the VRMs switch faster they will be less efficient (requiring more power and emitting more heat), although on the mainstream platform that is usually not a problem with normal case airflow.

Of course, it's possible to use a combination of both methods. LLC settings typically come in different 'levels', with minor LLC boosting Vcore under load only slightly, and extreme LLC drastically decreasing under shoot and increasing over shoot, with Vcore under load higher than at idle. My recommendation is to set LLC such that Vcore under load is a little bit under idle. I would not set LLC higher than what is needed for Vcore under load to equal Vcore at idle. Most people have a natural tendency to set Vcore under load as equal to idle, but there is nothing magically better about that setup.

Finally, it's worth noting that LLC levels are not a standard. "Level 2" can mean whatever the motherboard vendor wants it to mean. But on Asus z170 Hero, LLC level 4/5 is generally enough to set load voltage around equal to bios voltage (which, again, is not automatically the best setting).

*[Source]*

*CPU Current Capability*
This and the settings after this are generally not relevant, but let's discuss them anyways. This setting tells the motherboard to stop interfering even if the CPU is drawing far more current than normal. A notable case of this setting making a difference is with Der8auer and Tiny Tom Logan's testing with x299 Asus motherboards. Running Prime 95 would suck up so much power, it causes things to shut down. Setting it to 140% prevented that, although it then allowed the motherboard VRMs to get overwhelmed and throttle the CPU. This setting should simply remove limits, so any decreases in longevity of the CPU should be indirect instead of direct.

*CPU VRM Switching Frequency*
As explained in the LLC section, a faster VRM switching speed allows the motherboard to adjust voltage more quickly, preventing nasty dips or spikes in voltage. Faster switching speed with lots of Vcore and LLC is harder on the CPU VRMs, so monitor VRM temperatures in HWInfo via the T1/T2/Temp2/etc sensors. Passive airflow from a case beats an open test bench.

*CPU Power Phase Control*
By default it seems phases are put in a lower power state when idle. You can set it to be engaged all the time, or to cause the motherboard to spring back to life more quickly. Note that this setting has not been tested.

*PLL Bandwidth*

This is also known as CPU PLLs OC in HWinfo. Some Asus motherboards have weird auto rules that involve increasing this setting (found in Tweaker's Paradise) far too much. The UEFI description suggests setting this to level 6 to 8 when overclocking CPU or blck heavily. All that was observed was CPU temperatures went up, with instability creeping up. On z170 Asus Hero with 7600k this auto rule problem can be reliably encountered as soon as CPU frequency hits 5.3ghz or goes above it. Setting PLL Bandwidth to level 0 allowed the overclock to continue without crashing despite the UEFI description.





Spoiler: Stress Testing (Temperature Chart, Quick Download Links, etc)



*Quick Word About "24/7 Stability and Safety"*
24/7 stability is a request people often make without thinking about what it actually means. '24/7' refers to the amount of time a CPU is spent under load. It says nothing about the type of load. Playing video games a couple of hours a day or week is not the same as hammering your CPU at 100% load for hundreds of hours in a row. If you're really that concerned about CPU longevity you shouldn't be using Prime95 to stress.





As the settings chart notes, I detected temperature fluctuations in Linpack, IBT, and XTU stress even though the load on the CPU still read 100%.

Note how XTU stress is cooler than XTU bench, and AIDA64 varies in temperature wildly based on the settings checked. Without a way to loop the test, applications like XTU bench and Cinebench are not viable stress tests. As expected, custom x264 at 16 threads is hotter than the 4 thread setting, and using more memory for Linpack causes a hotter test. Tests that allow the usage of more ram tend to be more difficult to pass the more memory your let it use. I had 16GB of ram.

Please note that some stress tests hammer different parts of the CPU harder than others. Exactly which is toughest on what is not totally proven.

My temperatures are lower than what most people will observe because I am not running hyperthreading and my chip has been delidded. My case as good airflow.

Below is a hierarchy of stress tests, listed in order from hardest to pass to easiest to pass. Anything that is counted as easy to pass or even easier are not recommended and will not be enough to be entered into the main overclocking settings chart. More details in the charting form spoiler.

*Marathon-Man:*

OCCT

Linpack (Max) (From Intel's website, not from OCCT or any other place or XTU.)

P95 28.10

*Tough:*

P95 27.9

IBT (Max)

*Medium:*

x264 16T

ROG Realbench

*Easy:*

Stockfish (Chess, BMI2 version)

XTU

Aida64 (Full Suite)

*Walk in the Park:*

Cinebench

Firestrike

Booting into Windows

*x264 is the recommended and the default go-to stress test for this thread.* If you feel the need to use a hotter test that is your right, but know that your overclock may be hampered by that choice. You could forego delidding in many cases simply by switching to x264. The downside to this method is that the overclocking process will take longer because we are replacing a very stressful program and a short test duration with a less stressful one and a longer duration.

I recommend running x264 looped all night as you sleep, and if it passes, it's stable. Run it, sleep, wake to see the test still running, pass, smile. Angelotti and JackCY have tweaked the x264 Bench utility and turned it into a stress testing tool. You no longer need to download other programs to get it to work; just download, unzip and run. Simply put, our version of x264 test is better in every way to the original x264 benchmark. There is no reason to use the original utility. There is a readme inside to tell you what options to pick but I will also summarize it here: By default, try the 16 thread setting (yes, even if your CPU is an i5) with normal priority.

Regardless of which test you choose, you will probably crash multiple times when finding the right settings. Every time your computer shuts down unexpectedly there is a chance the operating system will be corrupted. The chance is relatively low. You may run /sfc scannow in run prompt in Windows to have the operating system try to repair itself, although it's not proven that it does much.



Spoiler: Prime95 Specifics



*Prime95/OCCT Specifics:*
When you are closer to stability, Prime95 may stop with an error. This is a rounding error, meaning the crash was minor enough so that your computer itself does not crash. There is some data to suggest that Prime95 gives out rounding errors very frequently, even in overclocks considered functionally stable. With Skylake, unlike Haswell, version 28.10 is not significantly hotter than version 27.9. Still, v28.10 has been shown to crash unstable overclocks much faster than 27.9, so consider it a harder test.

There isn't conclusive evidence so far about which setting in Prime is the most stressful and prone to crashing unstable overclocks. It is known that smaller FFT sizes tend to cause higher temperatures. (Small data set is a similar story for OCCT.) 8 is the smallest size (in K, but that's a technicality). Here is a picture showing how to set your own FFT size:



OCCT 4.5 is tougher to pass than previous versions according to its change log, so keep that in mind.





Spoiler: IBT/Linpack Specifics



*Linpack/IBT Specifics*
Linpack is a newer version of IBT. These tests have a "warm up period" where CPU load is relatively light, and an extremely thermally intensive period. When running these tests check termperature for a good 5 minutes because the temperatures in the first 10 seconds do not represent peak temperatures at all.

Below among the list of stress test download links there is a link for "Linpack Package". I have taken Linpack and added Linx GUI to it. You can now use Linpack as Intel originally intended or run the GUI to easily change the test settings.



*Stress Test Download Links*

*Custom x264 with Loop Functionality and Other Improvements v2.06*
*Custom x264 v2.07

Aida64 5.80.4000

IBT v2.54

Linpack Package v1

OCCT v4.5.0

Prime95 v27.9

Prime95 v28.10

ROG Realbench v2.43

XTU v6.2.0.19

y-Cruncher 0.7.1

Latest Version of HWinfo (Monitors temps, voltages, etc.)
*
*Memtest v6.2.0 (For testing ram overclocks.)*

*'I must pass all stress tests!'*
So if I made a program that crashes you at stock clocks, you would feel compelled to underclock your CPU, even if that application in no way represents real-world usage? Passing "all stress tests" really means passing "all stress tests that people happen to have made". If nobody decided to make ultra-mega-Prime95-on-steroids, you would think your overclock is stable. That seems like a random, haphazard way to figuring out if your overclock is stable or not. Computers are built for using, and what really matters is whether you crash often enough while using it normally. Forcing yourself to pass a stress test "just in case you use it to its limits" makes no sense either. No point in going down "what ifs" which have no signs of ever happening. And if it does, work it out when it does.

Run 2 different types of stressing programs, and then use your computer normally. If you crash, then it's not stable. What's stable for you might not be stable enough for me. Some people need 100% reliability because of their jobs.

Let's not get into a semantic debate about the word 'stability'. If you define stability as 'never crashes on anything, ever', then I don't care about your notion of stability. That criteria makes no sense either because the only way to be sure you are stable forever is to test your CPU forever. The world doesn't end if your CPU crashes on you. Run a stress test overnight, then go play video games to test things out. If you ever end up crashing in the heat of the moment, lower the multiplier by one and you should be perfectly stable.

You know your own use case and tolerance to problems better than anyone else.





Spoiler: Cache Frequency Doesn&#039;t Matter Much.



I have redone benchmarks to test the performance difference between a high and low cache frequency.



As you can see, a decrease of 100MHz in core clock has a larger impact on performance than a 1,000MHz decrease in cache frequency. Therefore, my position on cache frequency remains unchanged: It is a secondary setting that you should only overclock and worry about once everything else is done. Cache frequency seems to affect ram benchmarks as well.

If you'd like to see Haswell cache frequency testing, open this spoiler.



Spoiler: Haswell Cache Testing



Credits to Maxforces for the second part of the benchmarks. From my personal benchmarks, I found the drop of 0.7Ghz for the cache to be an equal performance hit of 0.05Ghz decrease in core clock and this difference shows in a very CPU reliant benchmark like chess.





And here are the most recent tests for cache frequency that I have done:



The 4.2 vs 3.4 is the cache setting. The core multiplier for this test was x45.

Testing methodoloy in this test is much more well documented by me.

Chess: Houdini 3, 9mb hash, starting position, 5 minutes.

BF3 Multiplayer: 64 player server in a closed map (Canals). Regular gameplay for entire round.

BF3 Campaign: Second misson, following scripted NPC movement.

Enemy Territory: 30 vs 30, Fueldump.

Runescape: GE, World 3. Capturing FPS while stationary. Max detail, non HTML5. x4 AA Bloom enabled. (It seems to use CPU to do AA)

Oblivion 1: Walk out in the wild, through Oblivion gate, to town gate.

Oblivion 2: NPC combat in Imperial City. Several guards/NPC vs Umbra. Spawn 50 player copies and begin combat once Umbra dies.

These were done on tests, as you can see, that vary from CPU benchmarks to CPU reliant games.

Maxforces Says:
Test setup


Results


















but if you play 3dmark you will gain some points











Spoiler: Troubleshooting



*Some of my cores are hotter than others. Is this normal?*
If the variance from hottest to coldest core is 10C or under, I would call that normal. If it's greater, consider doing a re-paste.

*Ram XMP profile doesn't work.*
Make sure the motherboard bios has been updated to the latest version. If that doesn't work, try adding a bit more ram voltage, SA voltage, and VCCIO.

*Monitoring software shows incorrect data.*
Make sure you are using HWinfo and make sure it is the latest beta version.

*Prime95 stopped and says there's an error.*
Most likely it is a rounding error. This means you've failed the test, but in a more minor way such that the computer doesn't crash. There is some data to suggest that Prime95 gives out rounding errors very frequently, even in overclocks considered functionally stable.

*My temperatures are through the roof!*

Stop using IBT or Linpack or Prime95. Use our custom x264 test or use something similar like ROG Realbench,
If your temperatures from core to core vary over 10C, consider a re-paste of your thermal paste.
What ambient temperatures are we talking about here? Are you sitting in an oven?
Hyperthreading makes your CPU hotter.
CPU delidding service is $50 in the United States from SiliconLottery.
I recommend using D14 or better in terms of cooling.
Ensure the cooling solution is mounted properly.

*My CPU is downclocking under load!*

Check your motherboard's power settings. Set them to max.

*The Vcore is far higher than what I've set in the BIOS under load!*

Your LLC is probably being overly aggressive. If possible, please set it to a lower amount manually.



*Click here to view the Kaby Lake Overclocking Chart in a new tab!*

*3 Kaby Lake Overclocking Chart*



���

Sample Size61Average OC5.03Median OC5.00Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.36




Spoiler: Extra Statistics (From the Bottom of the Chart)



None yet!





Spoiler: Charting Form to Submit Your Overclock to the Chart



*Username:
CPU Model:
Base Clock: *Bclk.
*Core Multiplier:
Core Frequency:
Cache Frequency:
Vcore in UEFI:* This is the CPU core voltage value you input into BIOS/UEFI.
*Vcore:* This is the _average_ CPU Vcore reading from Hwinfo or HWMonitor under load. "Load" depends on what you're stressing.
*FCLK: *Reminder: In HWinfo, it is "System Agent Clock".
*Cooling Solution:* If you are delidded, note it here. Please explicitly state if you are doing bare die.
*Stability Test:* Please list the version of Prime95 and what FFT preset/size it is if you are using Prime95. Please list the number of threads used if using custom x264 test. In other words, please provide as many details as you can. Acceptable stress tests will be listed at the bottom.

*Batch Number:* What country? Please list the entire batch number if you can. You can find it on the box.
*Ram Speed:* State the frequency and timings (3200 16-16-16-35, etc etc)
*Ram Voltage:
VCCIO: *If not tweaked by the user, this may be left blank.
*VCCSA: *If not tweaked by the user, this may be left blank.
*Motherboard: *If possible please list chipset first.
*LLC Setting:
Misc Comments: *If you are submitting with AXV offset note it here. 5.0 w/ 1 offset = charted as 4.9.

To be charted in the main chart, you must fulfill one of the following requirements:
Prime v28.7 1 hour
OCCT v4.5 1 hour
Linpack from the Linpack Package download run at max settings (not recommended) 2 hours
Prime v27.9 3 hours
IBT 3 hours
x264 16T 8 hours
Realbench 8 hours

Aida64 and XTU do not count no matter the length of the test. When running tests it is assumed you are using the most amount of ram you can when prompted to choose. It is also assumed that you did not touch AVX voltage settings in the BIOS.

You must submit a picture showing that the stress test has been completed as you claimed (both the test and the duration). You also must have HWinfo open, showing both the frequency and Vcore. (Many people forget to make sure the Vcore reading is showing.) Failure to comply with every step results in being charted into the secondary chart at the bottom of the spreadsheet and your data will not be counted in statistics.





Spoiler: Changelog & To-Do List



8/28/2017
Improved information on power saving settings.
Added info on PLL Bandwidth.

7/6/2017
A while back some extra motherboard settings were added to the guide and explained.
Added info on delidding kits.
Improved info on LLC.
Improved info on SVID.
Added info on AC/DC Load Line.
Made a note on thermal transfer of mainstream CPUs in general.
Specifying small data set for Prime and OCCT in stress test difficulty hierarchy has been removed.
Renamed cache frequency spoiler.
More motherboard settings have been added.
Some typos fixed.
Removed 'to do list' since it was always empty.

3/19/2017
Chart's bottom link got fixed.

2/8/2017
Added post reference to chart.

2/6/2017
Fixed references to an old Prime version. Fixed "10" bclk typo, meant 101.

1/26/2017
Edited charting form again...

1/25/2017
Fixed an error in chart.
Fixed charting form.

1/24/2017
Fixed errors in chart.
Charting requirements revised.
Added HardOCP power draw data.
Removed some data that was too Skylake-specific.

1/20/2017

Thread is created.



Thank you for checking out my guide!

Feel free to ask questions or provide suggestions!

Please read the guide before asking questions though!

Please do not PM me unless you think I've missed your post!
I love using exclamation marks!


----------



## GroinShooter

Nice to see this thread up, very interested in what people can achieve with the Kaby Lake chips


----------



## spddmn24

Guess I'll go first

Username: spddmn24
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 51
Core Frequency: 5100
Cache Frequency: 4600
Vcore in UEFI: 1.320
Vcore: 1.344
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delidded, H110i
Stability Test: 8 hours realbench

Batch Number: Malaysia L640F751 (Label is torn can't tell if F or E)
Ram Speed: (3866 18-19-19-39)
VCCIO: 1.208
VCCSA: 1.288
Ram Voltage: 1.376
Motherboard: Asus Strix Z270E Gaming
LLC Setting: 6
Misc Comments: Set both VCCSA and VCCIO to 1.25 after this to get memory stable in HCI memtest.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Guess I'll go first
> 
> Username: spddmn24
> CPU Model: 7700k
> Base Clock: 4200
> Core Multiplier: 51
> Core Frequency: 5100
> Cache Frequency: 4600
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.320
> Vcore: 1.344
> FCLK: Reminder: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Delidded, H110i
> Stability Test: 8 hours realbench
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L640F751 (Label is torn can't tell if F or E)
> Ram Speed: (3866 18-19-19-39)
> VCCIO: 1.208
> VCCSA: 1.288
> Ram Voltage: 1.376
> Motherboard: Asus Strix Z270E Gaming
> LLC Setting: 6
> Misc Comments: Set both VCCSA and VCCIO to 1.25 after this to get memory stable in HCI memtest.


Somebody's got to be first. 

Charted. As for my overclock, I'm still working on mine.


----------



## ParanoidZoid

Would it be possible to add another column in the GDoc to address the ability to set an AVX Multiplier offset for these Kaby Lake CPUs?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ParanoidZoid*
> 
> Would it be possible to add another column in the GDoc to address the ability to set an AVX Multiplier offset for these Kaby Lake CPUs?


It would be, yes. But I'm not sure if I want to do that. The requirements were set with no avx offset in mind. If somebody made an offset it would allow them to pass an overclock that I do not consider to be stable.


----------



## PatRaceTin

Nice thread.









I saw some users (another webboard) said,
their i7-7700K running at 5.0core/4.5cache passed quick stable test
(Cinebench R15) at 1.1XX - 1.2XX ish V Core.


----------



## MooMoo

Could you add some explanation what does some things mean, example: AVX, cache frequency etc. It would be nice to learn what they actually do/mean, like back in the sandy bridge days I learned a lot by reading these explanations.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MooMoo*
> 
> Could you add some explanation what does some things mean, example: AVX, cache frequency etc. It would be nice to learn what they actually do/mean, like back in the sandy bridge days I learned a lot by reading these explanations.


To my knowledge:

Avx is an extra part of the x86 instruction set. When you run avx/avx2, things get hotter but they get done faster. The uses are typically image processing (so like in the x264 test) and complex algorithms (like Prime95).

Cache frequency helps determine the speed in which the CPU accesses its own cache. Practically speaking the performance impact of faster cache is rather small, and that's what I care about the most.

Some reading material if you are interested:

*http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/white-papers/performance-xeon-e5-v3-advanced-vector-extensions-paper.pdf*

*http://www.anandtech.com/show/3922/intels-sandy-bridge-architecture-exposed/4*

I also recall reading that faster cache can have better results for ram latency performance.


----------



## MooMoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> To my knowledge:
> 
> Avx is an extra part of the x86 instruction set. When you run avx/avx2, things get hotter but they get done faster. The uses are typically image processing (so like in the x264 test) and complex algorithms (like Prime95).
> 
> Cache frequency helps determine the speed in which the CPU accesses its own cache. Practically speaking the performance impact of faster cache is rather small, and that's what I care about the most.
> 
> Some reading material if you are interested:
> http://www.intel.com/content/dam/ww...on-e5-v3-advanced-vector-extensions-paper.pdf
> Intel's Sandy Bridge Architecture Exposed
> 
> I also recall reading that faster cache can have better results for ram latency performance.


Nice, that cleared a lot for me  I'll take a look on those reading material


----------



## BoredErica

Something funny happened to me today. Running 7600k on z170 Asus Hero.

At 100.9 bclk x 52 core mult everything looked normal.

At 101.0 bclk x 52 core temps go up 40C. The same applies to 100 x 53, so it's not the bclk.

I've never seen anything like this before. In the picture below it was 100.8 bclk on the left, forgot to take picture of 100.9.


----------



## scracy

I didn't know kaby-lake has a quad channnel memory controller?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I didn't know kaby-lake has a quad channnel memory controller?


Did I say it did? I don't recall saying that. I believe it still dual channel.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Did I say it did? I don't recall saying that. I believe it still dual channel.


Maybe i read your opening post wrong...my bad


----------



## misoonigiri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Something funny happened to me today. Running 7600k on z170 Asus Hero.
> 
> At 100.9 bclk x 52 core mult everything looked normal.
> At 101.0 bclk x 52 core temps go up 40C. The same applies to 100 x 53, so it's not the bclk.
> 
> I've never seen anything like this before. In the picture below it was 100.8 bclk on the left, forgot to take picture of 100.9.


VTT, VCCPrim_1.0 and especially CPU PLLs OC seemed to have jumped up


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *misoonigiri*
> 
> VTT, VCCPrim_1.0 and especially CPU PLLs OC seemed to have jumped up


Right, I will look at that stuff tomorrow.

For now I just hope I didn't harm anything (I thought I ran it stressing at 5.25 today...) Although honestly, yesterday from waking up to check on stress testing, the entire day has been a blur. I have a hard time recalling what frequencies I even tested, thankfully I wrote most of it down in a txt file... Will have to get a grip.









Okay, can I pass 5.2ghz now pls.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Maybe i read your opening post wrong...my bad


I said the enthusiast platform has quad channel memory controller, meaning not Kaby Lake (which is mainstream). Maybe that was the line you were reading (2nd spoiler).


----------



## ParanoidZoid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> It would be, yes. But I'm not sure if I want to do that. The requirements were set with no avx offset in mind. If somebody made an offset it would allow them to pass an overclock that I do not consider to be stable.


What if it's like this: I currently own a chip that can do 5.1GHz on Realbench for 8 hrs (don't have a picture for this one since I was recently RAM overclocking and corrupted Windows and my last backup didn't have this screenshot) and *Prime 26.6 for 9 hours (voltages aren't showing I apologise)*. However, if I want to be fully rock solid stable with something like Prime95 28.10 Blend or IBT with 80% memory use, I have to downclock to 4.9GHz (achieved with AVX offset). Furthermore, even with AVX offset my average clock in HWiNFO64 with Realbench at load is still closer to my non-AVX offset frequency at 5,075MHz. It is still considered functionally stable under your guidelines to be charted, but if or when I need the extra 100% stability, I can use the offset to help me achieve that goal. So, is it still not stable then?


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ParanoidZoid*
> 
> Would it be possible to add another column in the GDoc to address the ability to set an AVX Multiplier offset for these Kaby Lake CPUs?
> 
> 
> 
> It would be, yes. But I'm not sure if I want to do that. The requirements were set with no avx offset in mind. If somebody made an offset it would allow them to pass an overclock that I do not consider to be stable.
Click to expand...

+R for your concise AVX/Cache clock explanations AND continuing your fine overclocking guides!







... BUT I have to disagree with NOT expanding the Benchmark to include the AVX bios downclock category! It is quite the improvement in the new Z270 bios' and makes complete sense, and Top-Overclockers agree! I know it's a Pi? But these offsets are even being included in top overclocker profiles like der8auer and popular Asus OC profiles, Raja is heavily promoting it in *THIS thread* etc etc ... just saying you will eventually want to do it, so might as well get started on it now as IMHO it will be a never ending request


----------



## happycat

I wanted a stable everyday OC. With [email protected] I was getting acceptable temps during stress testing, average high 70's with the occasional spike to the low 80's.

Username: happycat
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 49
Core Frequency: 4.9
Cache Frequency: 4.5
Vcore in UEFI: 1.3
Vcore: 1.284
FCLK: 1
Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-D15
Stability Test: Realbench 8hrs

Batch Number: Malaysia L641G188
Ram Speed: 3200 16-18-18-38
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: Auto
Ram Voltage: 1.35
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170XP-SLI
LLC Setting: High
Misc Comments: Speed Step and all C States enabled


----------



## done12many2

Out of general curiosity, why do the stability requirements differ between the Skylake thread and the Kaby Lake thread?

It seems that stability requirements have doubled for Kaby Lake in some test with all test requiring longer runs across the board. Would this not skew statistics and more importantly average clock speeds reported when comparing the two families?

Skylake stability requirements


Kaby Lake stability requirements


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> It would be, yes. But I'm not sure if I want to do that. The requirements were set with no avx offset in mind. If somebody made an offset it would allow them to pass an overclock that I do not consider to be stable.


yes they would. all the requirement tests you have use AVX to a varying degree. So, if one had a 52 multi set with an AVX offset of 4, most stresstests in the list will actually run at 4.8. CPu freq would appear to be 5.2, but with AVX in the stack, it would run at 4.8.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Something funny happened to me today. Running 7600k on z170 Asus Hero.
> 
> At 100.9 bclk x 52 core mult everything looked normal.
> At 101.0 bclk x 52 core temps go up 40C. The same applies to 100 x 53, so it's not the bclk.
> 
> I've never seen anything like this before. In the picture below it was 100.8 bclk on the left, forgot to take picture of 100.9.


disable bclk linked voltage in bios. the Hero would have this with the most recent bios.


----------



## BoredErica

This is a double post. This post shouldn't exist.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Out of general curiosity, why do the stability requirements differ between the Skylake thread and the Kaby Lake thread?
> 
> It seems that stability requirements have doubled for Kaby Lake in some test with all test requiring longer runs across the board. Would this not skew statistics and more importantly average clock speeds reported when comparing the two families?
> 
> Skylake stability requirements
> 
> 
> Kaby Lake stability requirements


The variation has nothing to do with the differences between the chips. I just decided to increase the requirements. (Of course, raising it on everyone over a year after Skylake came out would cause problems.) I haven't considered the effect that will have on comparing the average clocks of both chips. That is a thing, but at the same time my main problem is whether the requirements are stringent enough. I'm still thinking about it. Probably Prime and OCCT can drop back down, and x264/realbench can stay 8hr?

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *happycat*
> 
> I wanted a stable everyday OC. With [email protected] I was getting acceptable temps during stress testing, average high 70's with the occasional spike to the low 80's.


You have been charted, thanks!


Sample Size2  Average OC5Median OC5Average Vcore1.314Median Vcore1.314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> disable bclk linked voltage in bios. the Hero would have this with the most recent bios.


But I'm not using adaptive voltage, I'm using manual. With it on I didn't see any change.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> +R for your concise AVX/Cache clock explanations AND continuing your fine overclocking guides!


The sentiment is appreciated!

Quote:


> ... BUT I have to disagree with NOT expanding the Benchmark to include the AVX bios downclock category! It is quite the improvement in the new Z270 bios' and makes complete sense, and Top-Overclockers agree! I know it's a Pi? But these offsets are even being included in top overclocker profiles like der8auer and popular Asus OC profiles, Raja is heavily promoting it in *THIS thread* etc etc ... just saying you will eventually want to do it, so might as well get started on it now as IMHO it will be a never ending request


But what you're essentially doing is bypassing the stress test while still using stress testing to consider something stable. Even with x264 there were people complaining that it's not a tough enough test. If I even drop those kinds of stuff then what is left to even use as a test?

With the current pace the thread will not gain enough traction for me to get any requests at all.









Although I have to say, nowadays that just means less work for me. Last time I was doing a 4 hour charting shift. FOUR HOURS.


----------



## Silicon Lottery

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Something funny happened to me today. Running 7600k on z170 Asus Hero.
> 
> At 100.9 bclk x 52 core mult everything looked normal.
> At 101.0 bclk x 52 core temps go up 40C. The same applies to 100 x 53, so it's not the bclk.
> 
> I've never seen anything like this before. In the picture below it was 100.8 bclk on the left, forgot to take picture of 100.9.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Sort of a bug with Asus boards. When moving past 5.25GHz auto values for PLL Termination, PCH Core, and CPU Standby voltages are set to 1.6V which is way too high. Set all of these manually to 1V.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> Sort of a bug with Asus boards. When moving past 5.25GHz auto values for PLL Termination, PCH Core, and CPU Standby voltages are set to 1.6V which is way too high. Set all of these manually to 1V.


I guess thankfully, my chip can't pass 5.25ghz at <1.42v so it's not really a problem I run into.

Is Raja aware of this issue? I mean... that is a HUGE error.

Oh, and which boards are affected, if you know?


----------



## kongasdf

CPU Model: 7700k
Core Frequency: 4800
Cache Frequency: 4500
Vcore in UEFI: 1.280
Vcore: 1.248~1.264
LLC Setting: Level 2
FCLK: 1k
Cooling Solution: H80V2 EK Vardar 2200/3000
Stability Test: 1 hours Prime 95 28.10 Large FFTs

Ram Speed: 3600 15-16-16-32
VCCIO: 1.120
VCCSA: 1.144
Ram Voltage: 1.440
Motherboard: Asrock Z170 OC Formula
Ambient Temperature: 13℃


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> Sort of a bug with Asus boards. When moving past 5.25GHz auto values for PLL Termination, PCH Core, and CPU Standby voltages are set to 1.6V which is way too high. Set all of these manually to 1V.


Thanks for sharing as this was occurring on my board as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Oh, and which boards are affected, if you know?


Per his website, SL uses a Asus Maximus VIII Hero for RealBench testing with 1151.

I use an Asus ROG Maximus IX Formula and it exhibits the same behavior.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> The variation has nothing to do with the differences between the chips. I just decided to increase the requirements. (Of course, raising it on everyone over a year after Skylake came out would cause problems.) I haven't considered the effect that will have on comparing the average clocks of both chips. That is a thing, but at the same time my main problem is whether the requirements are stringent enough. I'm still thinking about it. Probably Prime and OCCT can drop back down, and x264/realbench can stay 8hr?


Glad to hear that you're still mulling this over. Since you're still open to suggestions, I say leave them as they were for Skylake. Let the end users determine their own requirements for day-to-day stability, but maintain the same standard for submission.

There will always be some who feel the standard is too hard with others feeling it's too easy. Either is irrelevant as you're collecting the data for its comparative value.

Thanks for your time and for the work you've put into these threads.


----------



## Jpmboy

Odd - I didn't notice this bios issue on my Impact.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Odd - I didn't notice this bios issue on my Impact.


It only happens on my Formula with adaptive voltage set. Or at least that's the only time I've noticed it.

Disregard my last. It's happening in manual and adaptive. I just wasn't looking.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> It only happens on my Formula with adaptive voltage set. Or at least that's the only time I've noticed it.


yeah, I gotta look into this a bit more... see if he M8I does the same. I was using adaptive, but hadn't noticed a 1.6 standby by voltage, which is waaay too high.


----------



## spddmn24

Just checked my screenshots and my strix Z270e set VTT to 1.3 at 5.2 ghz vs 1.00 at 5.1.

5.2



5.1


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Just checked my screenshots and my strix Z270e set VTT to 1.3 at 5.2 ghz vs 1.00 at 5.1.


Nice chip.

RealBench 2.44 is available. I only noticed because your CPU and RAM information wasn't showing up in RealBench.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Nice chip.
> 
> RealBench 2.44 is available. I only noticed because your CPU and RAM information wasn't showing up in RealBench.


I just checked the MOCF and it is not running those voltage rails high even at 5.4, manual or offset. Tho it has it's own issues - runs VSA very high if you do not pay attention.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Nice chip.
> 
> RealBench 2.44 is available. I only noticed because your CPU and RAM information wasn't showing up in RealBench.


I'll make sure to download the updated version if I decide to make 5.2 stable.







Not sure it's worth the huge power increase and higher temps though.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> It only happens on my Formula with adaptive voltage set. Or at least that's the only time I've noticed it.
> 
> Disregard my last. It's happening in manual and adaptive. I just wasn't looking.


*I can verify that the overvoltage also occurs on the Max 8 Impact Bios 3101. POST results in CPU Over Temperature !*


----------



## willtron3000

The benchmarks at the top make me think I have a potato 7700k









My Rockit 88 came this morning, so I'll delid tonight and see how much that actually helps. But in terms of numbers - 1.34v and 4.8GHz. 5GHz at 1.37 failed. Tried pumping through 1.42v but hit 100c.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Tho it has it's own issues - runs VSA very high if you do not pay attention.


When have you noticed that it runs Vccsa very high?

Under what circumstances - Auto or manual vccsa setting for example ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> When have you noticed that it runs Vccsa very high?
> 
> Under what circumstances - Auto or manual vccsa setting for example ?


both -VSA auto ramps with ram frequency if left on auto as it should (if it is not, the Auto rules are failing somehow). Measured with a DMM on my sample. the rumor is that the DMM read point show 80 or so mV higher than actual, but I have not verified that with reading direct from cap solder points on the back of the MB.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> When have you noticed that it runs Vccsa very high?
> 
> Under what circumstances - Auto or manual vccsa setting for example ?


My ram didn't work with XMP settings. My Vccsa went to ~1.38 on auto, IO ~1.18, and ram 1.30. I passed 1000% hci memtest at these voltages. I could probably run 17 cas at around 1.29 io voltage, but I'm not sure how safe that would be long term.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> My ram didn't work with XMP settings. My Vccsa went to ~1.38 on auto, IO ~1.18, and ram 1.30. I passed 1000% hci memtest at these voltages. I could probably run 17 cas at around 1.29 io voltage, but I'm not sure how safe that would be long term.
> 
> **


what MB? fill out rigbuilder and add it to your sig block.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what MB? fill out rigbuilder and add it to your sig block.


ASUS ROG STRIX Z270E GAMING, F4-3866C18D-16GTZKW ram.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> ASUS ROG STRIX Z270E GAMING, F4-3866C18D-16GTZKW ram.


rather than increase vccio and vsa higher, try running the ram at a higher voltage, such as 1.4-1.425V, vccsa at 1.2375V, vccio at 1.22-1.23V.


----------



## audiotest

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *willtron3000*
> 
> The benchmarks at the top make me think I have a potato 7700k
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My Rockit 88 came this morning, so I'll delid tonight and see how much that actually helps. But in terms of numbers - 1.34v and 4.8GHz. 5GHz at 1.37 failed. Tried pumping through 1.42v but hit 100c.


Needing more than 1.4V to reach 4.8? So that's my incentive not to upgrade my potato Skylake right there.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *audiotest*
> 
> Needing more than 1.4V to reach 4.8? So that's my incentive not to upgrade my potato Skylake right there.


Uhhh what?

Quote:


> 1.34v and 4.8GHZ


Also, making decisions off of a sample size of one (one which you cherry picked) is not a good idea.


----------



## ParanoidZoid

Username: ParanoidZoid
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 49
Core Frequency: 4.9GHz
Cache Frequency: 4.6GHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.37v
Vcore: 1.376
FCLK: Reminder: 1GHz
Cooling Solution: Delidded. be quiet! Silent Loop 240mm
Stability Test: 8Hrs Realbench

Batch Number: OEM Malaysia L640F777
Ram Speed: 3200 14-14-14-34-2T
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: 1.2v
Ram Voltage: 1.35v
Motherboard: Maximus VIII Impact
LLC Setting: LLC Level 6
Misc Comments: Can run 5.1GHz without AVX. The results listed are with AVX instructions offset of 2 to get it Prime95 28.10 or IBT Stable.

http://valid.x86.fr/iagyig


----------



## audiotest

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Uhhh what?
> 
> Also, making decisions off of a sample size of one (one which you cherry picked) is not a good idea.


Trouble is, my current chip is already a cherry picked one in terms of rubbishness







and I don't want to spin the roulette wheel once again and invest into something that'll bring me the exact same performance as I do now (I think there is a clear concensus that KL performs more or less the same as SL at same clocks since they ARE the same transistors with a bit more optimised parasitics). Because I somehow got the impression that absolutely ALL 7700Ks were able to clinch a 5GHz clock at reasonable clocks until reading about people struggling to get past even 4.7 with it in the other thread.


----------



## audiotest

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Uhhh what?


Oops, my bad. Haven't seen the 5GHz there. Nevertheless, my thoughts were based on what I've just read in the "5 GHz milestone: Kaby Lake" thread.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *audiotest*
> 
> Trouble is, my current chip is already a cherry picked one in terms of rubbishness
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and I don't want to spin the roulette wheel once again and invest into something that'll bring me the exact same performance as I do now (I think there is a clear concensus that KL performs more or less the same as SL at same clocks since they ARE the same transistors with a bit more optimised parasitics). Because I somehow got the impression that absolutely ALL 7700Ks were able to clinch a 5GHz clock at reasonable clocks until reading about people struggling to get past even 4.7 with it in the other thread.


That's why I buy binned chips. If I'm upgrading and chasing 10% or less improvement, a dud overclocker can ruin the entire point. Some say they want to play the lottery game, but I don't like it.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *audiotest*
> 
> Because I somehow got the impression that absolutely ALL 7700Ks were able to clinch a 5GHz clock at reasonable clocks until reading about people struggling to get past even 4.7 with it in the other thread.


Understandable, but most people who say they are struggling aren't sharing many details. Possibly because they aren't as informed as they could be. My chip is almost the same as ParinoidZoids. Im toying around with different LLC so I won't report yet, but I can do 51 and 49 with the AVX ratio. I can not do 50 with no AVX ratio. H115i isn't enough coolong, 280mm. My chip however is not delided.


----------



## audiotest

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Understandable, but most people who say they are struggling aren't sharing many details. Possibly because they aren't as informed as they could be. My chip is almost the same as ParinoidZoids. Im toying around with different LLC so I won't report yet, but I can do 51 and 49 with the AVX ratio. I can not do 50 with no AVX ratio. H115i isn't enough coolong, 280mm. My chip however is not delided.


May as well be but I highly doubt those who are stuck with lower speeds were up to any crazy stuff which would lead to memory related instability etc. but simply tried to crank up manual Vcore and increased the multiplier. I'll monitor the thread and take a look at the statistics in the following months anyway, this will be interesting. As a side note though, I definitely need the AVX instructions running for my simulation software.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> That's why I buy binned chips. If I'm upgrading and chasing 10% or less improvement, a dud overclocker can ruin the entire point. Some say they want to play the lottery game, but I don't like it.


+1 to that. But you could also argue that when you buy a binned chip at a higher price the extra performance from overclocking is no longer "free"


----------



## audiotest

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> +1 to that. But you could also argue that when you buy a binned chip at a higher price the extra performance from overclocking is no longer "free"


That actually depends on whether you're getting "some" performance boost or unrivalled performance. I think binning makes still a lot of sense if you go for the highest end models. For instance there is no other processor on earth right now which can do a single threaded operation faster than a 5.4GHz 7700K so kinda this kinda renders it priceless imo.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> +1 to that. But you could also argue that when you buy a binned chip at a higher price the extra performance from overclocking is no longer "free"


Yes. But I'd rather pay than leave it up to chance (as long as the price is not stupid). Arguably if I fail and get a dud clocker and upgrading to Kaby nets almost no benefit, that has a cost associated with it too. I have to sell the old stuff and that takes time and effort and it always costs to upgrade in the end.

But some random person just upgrading after a long time or building a new PC I can see a good argument to not buy a binned chip. But I am not in the majority and whenever everybody says 'don't upgrade your CPU, it doesn't matter' I'm always thinking in my head, 'BUT WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE LIKE ME THO'.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *audiotest*
> 
> That actually depends on whether you're getting "some" performance boost or unrivalled performance. I think binning makes still a lot of sense if you go for the highest end models. For instance there is no other processor on earth right now which can do a single threaded operation faster than a 5.4GHz 7700K so kinda this kinda renders it priceless imo.


I didn't go for 7700k even though I could get a little extra off the price because even then it's still a huge premium for 7700k, when all I want from 7700k is probably just the extra cache. HT's not gonna make Oblivion run faster, for example.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kongasdf*


You have been charted!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ParanoidZoid*
> 
> Username: ParanoidZoid
> CPU Model: i7 7700k
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 49
> Core Frequency: 4.9GHz
> Cache Frequency: 4.6GHz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.37v
> Vcore: 1.376
> FCLK: Reminder: 1GHz
> Cooling Solution: Delidded. be quiet! Silent Loop 240mm
> Stability Test: 8Hrs Realbench
> 
> Batch Number: OEM Malaysia L640F777
> Ram Speed: 3200 14-14-14-34-2T
> VCCIO: Auto
> VCCSA: 1.2v
> Ram Voltage: 1.35v
> Motherboard: Maximus VIII Impact
> LLC Setting: LLC Level 6
> Misc Comments: Can run 5.1GHz without AVX. The results listed are with AVX instructions offset of 2.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/iagyig
> 
> *EDIT: Attached the wrong image as this was with AVX offset from the Averages, can't be bothered to run 8 hours Realbench again. I'm okay with it as 4.9GHz.*


So Realbench 8hr was done with the listed values right?


     Sample Size4  Average OC4.98Median OC5.00 Average Vcore1.32Median Vcore1.31 


----------



## ParanoidZoid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> So Realbench 8hr was done with the listed values right?


Well this Realbench run was done with 51x on the multi and 5.1GHz but with a -2 AVX Offset (looking from the messed up HWiNFO64 Averages). However, I do understand if you completely remove me from the statistics as to not cause any confusion. I just wanted to be fill in and help get the average overclocking statistic for the 7700k.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Yes. But I'd rather pay than leave it up to chance (as long as the price is not stupid). Arguably if I fail and get a dud clocker and upgrading to Kaby nets almost no benefit, that has a cost associated with it too. I have to sell the old stuff and that takes time and effort and it always costs to upgrade in the end.
> 
> But some random person just upgrading after a long time or building a new PC I can see a good argument to not buy a binned chip. But I am not in the majority and whenever everybody says 'don't upgrade your CPU, it doesn't matter' I'm always thinking in my head, 'BUT WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE LIKE ME THO'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't go for 7700k even though I could get a little extra off the price because even then it's still a huge premium for 7700k, when all I want from 7700k is probably just the extra cache. HT's not gonna make Oblivion run faster, for example.
> You have been charted!
> 
> So Realbench 8hr was done with the listed values right?
> 
> 
> Sample Size4  Average OC4.98Median OC5.00 Average Vcore1.32Median Vcore1.31 


No arguement from me I'm one of those people like you







my last 4 CPU's have come from Silicon Lottery including the 5.2 coming today


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *audiotest*
> 
> That actually depends on whether you're getting "some" performance boost or unrivalled performance. I think binning makes still a lot of sense if you go for the highest end models. *For instance there is no other processor on earth right now which can do a single threaded operation faster than a 5.4GHz 7700K* so kinda this kinda renders it priceless imo.


erm.. a 5.5GHz 6700K?


----------



## ParanoidZoid

I also noticed you put in Z270 Maximus VIII Impact for my statistic! That doesn't even exist yet









It's a *Z170* Asus Maximus VIII Impact.


----------



## OutlawII

Another fine looking overclock guide Darkwizzie! Ordered mine today Asus Hero i7 7700k hopefully be here by end of the week!


----------



## audiotest

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> erm.. a 5.5GHz 6700K?


Only if it existed which you can full time. I'd expect to see my chip let me down any second once applied something like 2V to it


----------



## lawlbringer

Oh man, I was going to be the 2nd to post their overclocking results but I think I have a dud once again.

I bought a 4770k 3 years ago and it would only do 4.2GHz stable no matter what I did. Now I upgrade to a 7700k mainly to reach 5GHz, and this thing won't even do it at 1.375v with LLC at level 6 and XMP off. I've kept everything else stock while testing how high I could go too, but Cinebench crashes every single time I try to run it go gauge the stability of the overclock before I go any further into testing. Heck, I couldn't even boot into Windows until I set the vcore to 1.36v. If anyone has any last suggestions on what else could be causing instability, please let me know. My board is an ASUS Strix Z270G which was disappointing also, as this board isn't cheap.

Part of me is tempted to exchange my processor since I'm within the 15-day return period at Micro Center. Obviously that would be a scumbag move since I would have to lie and say the chip isn't stable at stock or something like that, but losing the silicon lottery twice in a row is pretty frustrating.









Also, even with an H100i V2 and an ambient of 18-20c, this chip runs insanely hot. I'm hitting over 70 degrees while gaming which I'm a little worried about.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Another fine looking overclock guide Darkwizzie! Ordered mine today Asus Hero i7 7700k hopefully be here by end of the week!


Thanks! Good luck on your overclock!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ParanoidZoid*
> 
> I also noticed you put in Z270 Maximus VIII Impact for my statistic! That doesn't even exist yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a *Z170* Asus Maximus VIII Impact.


I've gone back and rechecked your entry.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lawlbringer*
> 
> Now I upgrade to a 7700k mainly to reach 5GHz, and this thing won't even do it at 1.375v with LLC at level 6 and XMP off. I've kept everything else stock while testing how high I could go too, but Cinebench crashes every single time I try to run it go gauge the stability of the overclock before I go any further into testing. Heck, I couldn't even boot into Windows until I set the vcore to 1.36v. If anyone has any last suggestions on what else could be causing instability, please let me know. My board is an ASUS Strix Z270G which was disappointing also, as this board isn't cheap.
> 
> Part of me is tempted to exchange my processor since I'm within the 15-day return period at Micro Center. Obviously that would be a scumbag move since I would have to lie and say the chip isn't stable at stock or something like that, but losing the silicon lottery twice in a row is pretty frustrating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, even with an H100i V2 and an ambient of 18-20c, this chip runs insanely hot. I'm hitting over 70 degrees while gaming which I'm a little worried about.


My temps on Kaby Lake seem similar to my temps on Skylake. Maybe I got it a little hotter, but it is a different chip, different application (I ran out of Noctua thermal paste and used the rando paste from CM 212's kit), and different ambients. You can reference my temp chart in the thread, but bear in mind I am delidded, so chop off 15C? And I'm on i5.

Have you tried to see how high you can go, stable, at 1.375v? You mentioned you have LLC, if it was off I guess it would have been something noteworthy. And for bclk to be unstable you'd have to charge into it obliviously which you probably aren't doing. Sucks that you have this problem, and I feel you on the moral dilemma thing about returns. That's the nature of gambling, you can get screwed.

---

I've posted my own overclock. It may be subjected to change later. Right now it's basically 5.2/4.8. I was thinking about going to 5.2 via 51 * 102 bclk or just 52 * 100. With bclk changes I get a decent bump to my ram speeds, whereas at 100 base clock the jump between 3733 and the next frequency was too big for me to be fully stable (iirc). The small overclock to fclk probably does absolutely nothing. But the drawback is that it leaves me in an awkward place with my cache, because I can't quite nail down the next cache multiplier with this base clock. Voltage is 1.392v under load, so it's decently low. Not quite 1.42v. Maybe I can get like 5.225 or something if I really was willing to gun up the voltage. Performance increase in my benchmark saves in Bethesda games show about a little less than half of the frequency increase converted into FPS increase (a bit less than I anticipated).


Sample Size5  Average OC4.98Median OC4.90Average Vcore1.33Median Vcore1.34

On the subject of LLC: Okay, so vdroop is a thing to prevent overshoot. But if I want 1.4v on my chip for stability under load, I either have to raise LLC to meet it or raise vcore in the bios. I understand if a guy is totally oblivious as to what LLC actually does and cranks it to max it can be bad. But, back to the age old question: What about increasing LLC vs increasing Vcore to hit a target voltage under load?

edit:

1/24/2017
Fixed errors in chart.
Charting requirements revised.
Added HardOCP power draw data.
Removed some data that was too Skylake-specific.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *audiotest*
> 
> Only if it existed which you can full time. I'd expect to see my chip let me down any second once applied something like 2V to it


may be a bit more rare than a 24/7 5.4GHz 7700K


----------



## audiotest

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> may be a bit more rare than a 24/7 5.4GHz 7700K


Not so rare if your residence is Intel HQ


----------



## done12many2

Username: done12many2
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: 4200 MHz
Core Multiplier: 53
Core Frequency: 5300 MHz
Cache Frequency: 5000 MHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.44v
Vcore: 1.449v
FCLK: Reminder: 1000 MHz
Cooling Solution: Delidded, full loop, ambient
Stability Test: RealBench 2.44 with memory set to maximum physical memory (32 GB)

Batch Number: Malaysia, L639G023
Ram Speed: 3200 XMP 14-14-14-34-2T
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: Auto
Ram Voltage: 1.35v in BIOS as set per XMP
Motherboard: Asus ROG Maximus IX Formula
LLC Setting: Auto
Misc Comments: No AVX offset


----------



## Lake75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lawlbringer*
> 
> Oh man, I was going to be the 2nd to post their overclocking results but I think I have a dud once again.
> 
> I bought a 4770k 3 years ago and it would only do 4.2GHz stable no matter what I did. Now I upgrade to a 7700k mainly to reach 5GHz, and this thing won't even do it at 1.375v with LLC at level 6 and XMP off. I've kept everything else stock while testing how high I could go too, but Cinebench crashes every single time I try to run it go gauge the stability of the overclock before I go any further into testing. Heck, I couldn't even boot into Windows until I set the vcore to 1.36v. If anyone has any last suggestions on what else could be causing instability, please let me know. My board is an ASUS Strix Z270G which was disappointing also, as this board isn't cheap.
> 
> Part of me is tempted to exchange my processor since I'm within the 15-day return period at Micro Center. Obviously that would be a scumbag move since I would have to lie and say the chip isn't stable at stock or something like that, but losing the silicon lottery twice in a row is pretty frustrating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, even with an H100i V2 and an ambient of 18-20c, this chip runs insanely hot. I'm hitting over 70 degrees while gaming which I'm a little worried about.


I've got a similar setup (7700K and H100i V2, but with MSI Z270 Gaming M5 mobo) and also bought my processor at a Micro Center. I'm doing 5GHz now at 1.365 BIOS (1.375V in HWMonitor due to level 4 LLC). So I don't think you being unable to reach 5G at 1.375 and LLC 6 is that unusual.

My processor also run really hot even with the H100i water cooling: I couldn't even do IBT. And running x264 at 4.9GHz 1.330V would bring my max temp to 99C. Hitting over 70C when I was processing 24MB images was a given. I couldn't even try 5GHz because I was already hitting the thermal wall. --So again, yours isn't that unusual.

I finally decided to delid that thing and put CLU on both the silicon and the Cosair cooler. The results is amazing: While I was at 99C running 4.9G 1.330V under load, I'm now sitting at 68C (my room temp is 18-20C). A 31+ degrees C decrease just like some people reported on the net! That allowed me to up the vCore to test 5GHz now.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lake75*
> 
> I finally decided to delid that thing and put CLU on both the silicon and the Cosair cooler. The results is amazing: While I was at 99C running 4.9G 1.330V under load, I'm now sitting at 68C (my room temp is 18-20C). A 31+ degrees C decrease just like some people reported on the net! That allowed me to up the vCore to test 5GHz now.


Outstanding drop in temps and nice first post!


----------



## francisw19

Thanks for the guide @Darkwizzie! Great work and very helpful.


----------



## Rampage24

Is it normal for 3200mhz ram to cause the CPU to run 10 degrees hotter than 2133?

Also core #2 goes from the coldest at 2133 to the hottest at 3200. It runs 3 degrees cooler than the hottest core on average at 2133, to 3 degrees hotter on average at 3200.


----------



## Telstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rampage24*
> 
> Is it normal for 3200mhz ram to cause the CPU to run 10 degrees hotter than 2133?


No, it's a bug of asus motherboards I read about it in another thread. You have to set some voltages manually because Auto overvolts (someone will chime in with details).


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Username: done12many2
> CPU Model: i7 7700k
> Base Clock: 4200 MHz
> Core Multiplier: 53
> Core Frequency: 5300 MHz
> Cache Frequency: 5000 MHz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.44v
> Vcore: 1.449v
> FCLK: Reminder: 1000 MHz
> Cooling Solution: Delidded, full loop, ambient
> Stability Test: RealBench 2.44 with memory set to maximum physical memory (32 GB)
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia, L639G023
> Ram Speed: 3200 XMP 14-14-14-34-2T
> VCCIO: Auto
> VCCSA: Auto
> Ram Voltage: 1.35v in BIOS as set per XMP
> Motherboard: Asus ROG Maximus IX Formula
> LLC Setting: Auto
> Misc Comments: No AVX offset
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Very Nice!







.... makes me think about playing the Kaby lottery









I do have a question, I would be 100% happy 24/7 with those settings ... Except I would want my ram running @ 1T. What do you think it is going to take for just that one change? VCCIO is 1.232v / VCCSA is 1.216v, set them manually and then ram voltage up to 1.375v or maybe 1.4v would do the trick? Here is a noob question, could you make those changes without disabling XMP or it all has to be redone manually?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Telstar*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Rampage24*
> 
> Is it normal for 3200mhz ram to cause the CPU to run 10 degrees hotter than 2133?
> 
> 
> 
> No, it's a bug of asus motherboards I read about it in another thread. You have to set some voltages manually because Auto overvolts (someone will chime in with details).
Click to expand...

You might be referring to *THIS POST* but that only applies above a 5.25GHz overclock


----------



## Telstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> You might be referring to *THIS POST* but that only applies above a 5.25GHz overclock


Thanks, yes.
But i think also in this case is the auto voltages, although not out of specs. I've read of other people having similar experience.


----------



## ducegt

You can load XMP and make changes. My TridentZ 3600 cl15 kit does not like 1T. I can boot it into Windows and bench, but it quickly throws many errors with Googles memory stress app. I didn't carefully see if I could get this stable with increased voltage, but doubt it's possible. My kit is unsupported by my motherboard for now and I havent had any success overclocking while maintaining maximum stability. I haven't reformatted my OS in a good 6+ years. Went windows 7 to 10 in there I guess. I always can fix the small issues before the whole thing gets out of control.


----------



## happycat

I currently have a stable overclock on my 7700K, 4.9Ghz @ 1.3V using manual vcore. I'm wanting to switch it to adaptive/dynamic vcore. I have a Gigabyte Z170 board and it only supports dynamic offsets.

The problem is it seems that the base voltage that the motherboard applies the offset to seems to change whenever I restart my computer. It never stays constant. If I apply a -0.100V offset, sometimes it will be perfect and I will be hitting the exact same vcore voltages at load as I did with manual 1.3v vcore. But sometimes my vcore at load will be over 0.05V lower than it should be, causing instability.

Any advice what I should do? Where do I find my base voltage? CPUz just shows current vcore.


----------



## Rampage24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Telstar*
> 
> Thanks, yes.
> But i think also in this case is the auto voltages, although not out of specs. I've read of other people having similar experience.


Yea I tried messing with those, but it made no difference. Is this just normal?

With 2133 memory I had an average temp of 65, 67, 64, and 65 across the cores for a 15 minute realbench run. With 3200 I had 69, 70, 73, and 71 across the cores in the same order. All I did was change from auto to XMP. I've tried to also just change the memory speed and memory voltage and it has the same temperature increase. I also tried to lower the memory speed after setting XMP and it has the same increase in temps.

2133 memory



3200 memory


----------



## BoredErica

I tried some benching at 5.353ghz @ 1.5v.





Chess benchmarks. This one contains a long list of benches from many different CPU setups, including 36 core setups. My 7600k has yet to be charted... It's sitting at 14102. My Skylake bench was above average, so it makes the gain looks smaller than it really is. (I got lucky that time.)

https://sites.google.com/site/computerschess/stockfish-chess-benchmarks



Due to the way chess engines work, for benching purposes HT was turned off for all submissions. Can't wait to see some Zen benches up on that thing!









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*


You have been charted. Congrats on the overclock.


Sample Size6  Average OC5.03Median OC5.00Average Vcore1.35Median Vcore1.36


----------



## scracy

Hope this qualifies
User name: scracy
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100Mhz
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency: 5200Mhz
Cache Frequency: 4800Mhz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.39V
Vcore: 1.403V
FCLK: 1000Mhz
Cooling Solution: Custom Loop, Silicon Lottery Reseal
Stability Test: OCCT 4.4.2 1Hour Large Data Set

Batch Number: Malaysia L639F977
Ram Speed: 4x4GB XMP 3200Mhz 16-18-18-36-2T
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: Auto
Ram Voltage: 1.35V
Motherboard: Asus Maximus VIII Formula
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: Ambient temp 27 degrees C. Silicon Lottery 5.2Ghz Bin


----------



## Rampage24

Here's mine. I have the same batch # as spddmn24.

Username: Rampage24
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 51
Core Frequency: 5100
Cache Frequency: 4600
Vcore in UEFI: 1.330
Vcore: 1.376
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delidded, H100i V2
Stability Test: 8 hours realbench

Batch Number: Malaysia L640F751
Ram Speed: (3200 16-18-18-36)
VCCIO: 1.080
VCCSA: 1.160
Ram Voltage: 1.328
Motherboard: Asus Strix Z270E Gaming
LLC Setting: 7
Misc Comments: Ambient 20c.


----------



## unkletom

I can do OCCT and Realbench for hours but the newest Prime95 fails within 1 minute. Also I'd get a BSOD when idling for hours which is why I think OCCT and Realbench arent good software to stresstest.

I guess thats why nobody likes Prime95







Pretty sure those 5.2 and 5.3 ghz overclocks wouldnt last in the newest prime 95.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unkletom*
> 
> I can do OCCT and Realbench for hours but the newest Prime95 fails within 1 minute. Also I'd get a BSOD when idling for hours which is why I think OCCT and Realbench arent good software to stresstest.
> 
> I guess thats why nobody likes Prime95
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty sure those 5.2 and 5.3 ghz overclocks wouldnt last in the newest prime 95.


The AVX offset can help if you like running Prime95.


----------



## unkletom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> The AVX offset can help if you like running Prime95.


AVX offset just drops the multiplier by 1 when you put load on all cores. So if you got "1 AVX offset" and multiplier on "50x" When I run Prime95 the speed will be on 4900 mhz.

When I remove load it's back on 5000 mhz. So kinda defeats the purpose might aswell run 49x multiplier with no avx offset.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unkletom*
> 
> AVX offset just drops the multiplier by 1 when you put load on all cores. So if you got "1 AVX offset" and multiplier on "50x" When I run Prime95 the speed will be on 4900 mhz.
> 
> When I remove load it's back on 5000 mhz. So kinda defeats the purpose might aswell run 49x multiplier with no avx offset.


No, the AVX offset only drops the multiplier when AVX instruction sets are being used. The % workload of the cores has no influence.

Most applications and games don't use AVX, so most things would run at 5GHz in your example with Prime95 and things like video encoding running at 4.9GHz.


----------



## unkletom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> No, the AVX offset only drops the multiplier when AVX instruction sets are being used. The % workload of the cores has no influence.
> 
> Most applications and games don't use AVX, so most things would run at 5GHz in your example with Prime95 and things like video encoding running at 4.9GHz.


Be that as it may if all stress software bring down your multiplier by 1 how do I know I'd be stable at 5 ghz with an avx offset?


----------



## BrainSplatter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unkletom*
> 
> Be that as it may if all stress software bring down your multiplier by 1 how do I know I'd be stable at 5 ghz with an avx offset?


Use prime version 26.6 to test stability without AVX offset if u like prime.

Also if u have stability problems in idle, bringing load line calibration down a bit and raising voltage to compensate might help.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unkletom*
> 
> I can do OCCT and Realbench for hours but the newest Prime95 fails within 1 minute. Also I'd get a BSOD when idling for hours which is why I think OCCT and Realbench arent good software to stresstest.
> 
> I guess thats why nobody likes Prime95
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty sure those 5.2 and 5.3 ghz overclocks wouldnt last in the newest prime 95.


If you can run OCCT (large data set) and RealBench for hours and "BSOD while idling" you have other issues at hand. Try to avoid blaming great stressing software for those shortcomings. If you don't understand the difference in Vcore requirements for different loads, you may want to spend more time researching before jumping into overclocking. It is very common knowledge that voltages required for RealBench differ from those of OCCT and Prime95. You're obviously running enough to pass RealBench, but really short when it comes to Prime95. If you don't have anymore thermal headroom from your required RealBench voltage in order to allow for an increase for Prime95, you're simply running your CPU faster than it's capable of under the conditions you have provided it.

You also need to determine what it is that you do that requires a Prime95 type voltage? Plenty of people like Prime95 *IF* they have a need for testing that type of load. Why would any of those "5.2 and 5.3 ghz overclocks" care if they can or can't run Prime95 at those speeds if they don't have a need for that type of load?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unkletom*
> 
> AVX offset just drops the multiplier by 1 when you put load on all cores. So if you got "1 AVX offset" and multiplier on "50x" When I run Prime95 the speed will be on 4900 mhz.
> 
> When I remove load it's back on 5000 mhz. So kinda defeats the purpose might aswell run 49x multiplier with no avx offset.


While I don't use it myself, there is a definite advantage to the AVX offset feature. Some people use AVX, but the fact of the matter is the great majority of folks don't at this point in time. Why limit your overclock to 4.9 when you can run 5 GHz for the majority of the time and have AVX offset kick in those very few times you actually use it?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unkletom*
> 
> Be that as it may if all stress software bring down your multiplier by 1 how do I know I'd be stable at 5 ghz with an avx offset?


This ties in with my first response. If you can't figure out how to test the AVX offset you need to spend more time researching the feature instead of standing on the sidelines criticizing it. Testing it really is simple.


----------



## unkletom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> If you can run OCCT (large data set) and RealBench for hours and "BSOD while idling" you have other issues at hand. Try to avoid blaming great stressing software for those shortcomings. If you don't understand the difference in Vcore requirements for different loads, you may want to spend more time researching before jumping into overclocking. It is very common knowledge that voltages required for RealBench differ from those of OCCT and Prime95. You're obviously running enough to pass RealBench, but really short when it comes to Prime95. If you don't have anymore thermal headroom from your required RealBench voltage in order to allow for an increase for Prime95, you're simply running your CPU faster than it's capable of under the conditions you have provided it.
> 
> You also need to determine what it is that you do that requires a Prime95 type voltage? Plenty of people like Prime95 *IF* they have a need for testing that type of load. Why would any of those "5.2 and 5.3 ghz overclocks" care if they can or can't run Prime95 at those speeds if they don't have a need for that type of load?
> While I don't use it myself, there is a definite advantage to the AVX offset feature. Some people use AVX, but the fact of the matter is the great majority of folks don't at this point in time. Why limit your overclock to 4.9 when you can run 5 GHz for the majority of the time and have AVX offset kick in those very few times you actually use it?
> This ties in with my first response. If you can't figure out how to test the AVX offset you need to spend more time researching the feature instead of standing on the sidelines criticizing it. Testing it really is simple.


It's not a matter of running enough voltage for realbench vs prime 95. I know for a fact the 4th core of my 7700k doesn't want to play ball at 5 ghz no matter what voltage I throw at it.

Yet Realbench and OCCT will pass for an hour and Prime95 will fail @ 5.0 ghz but not at 4.9 ghz. Prime95 is failing at 5 ghz no matter how high up the voltage vs Realbench\OCCT. The CPU is delidded and there is plenty of thermal headroom.

So the conclusion I can make of this is that RealBench and OCCT don't stress the last few cores as much as Prime95 and maybe thats why a few people are getting away with 5.3 ghz overclocks running OCCT\Realbench for an hour at such low voltages and passing as "stable"


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unkletom*
> 
> It's not a matter of running enough voltage for realbench vs prime 95. *I know for a fact the 4th core of my 7700k doesn't want to play ball at 5 ghz no matter what voltage I throw at it.*


You might lead with that fact next time.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unkletom*
> 
> Yet Realbench and OCCT will pass for an hour and Prime95 will fail @ 5.0 ghz but not at 4.9 ghz. Prime95 is failing at 5 ghz no matter how high up the voltage vs Realbench\OCCT. The CPU is delidded and there is plenty of thermal headroom.
> 
> So the conclusion I can make of this is that RealBench and OCCT don't stress the last few cores as much as Prime95 and maybe thats why a few people are getting away with 5.3 ghz overclocks running OCCT\Realbench for an hour at such low voltages and passing as "stable"


Actually, RealBench and OCCT test all cores equally just as Prime95 does. The reason you pass RealBench and OCCT at 5 GHz, but can't pass Prime95 is outlined in your statement above. RealBench and OCCT are a lesser AVX load than the latest Prime95. If you have a weaker core, RealBench and OCCT may still pass while Prime95 fails. It has nothing to do with RealBench and OCCT testing the "last few cores" any less. It's everything to do with the fact that RealBench and OCCT don't place as much load on the CPU as a whole, therefore less load on your weaker core as well.

Just because you delid a chip doesn't mean that it's cooled enough under all conditions. It's those transient temp spikes that occur so fast that they don't show up in monitoring software that ruins everything.









Why don't you post some screen shots of your different stress runs so that the community can try to help you figure it out? Nobody here has all the answers, but collectively, we're pretty awesome.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unkletom*
> 
> Be that as it may if all stress software bring down your multiplier by 1 how do I know I'd be stable at 5 ghz with an avx offset?


things like photo editing, content creation and games do not use AVX, FMA3 etc instruction sets. So lowering an OC because it cannot survive a, IMO meaningless, test like p95 is foolish. Use Realbench, HWBOT x265 (4K 2-4x overkill), HCi Memtest, and a few loops of IBT if you need a high current load. With this I've never had a rig crash in any use.
If you use your machine to hunt prime numbers... yeah, then the stress test built into p95 is useful if for nothing else than to test the cooling.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *unkletom*
> 
> It's not a matter of running enough voltage for realbench vs prime 95. I know for a fact *the 4th core of my 7700k doesn't want to play ball at 5 ghz no matter what voltage I throw at it.*
> 
> Yet Realbench and OCCT will pass for an hour and Prime95 will fail @ 5.0 ghz but not at 4.9 ghz. Prime95 is failing at 5 ghz no matter how high up the voltage vs Realbench\OCCT. The CPU is delidded and there is plenty of thermal headroom.
> 
> So the conclusion I can make of this is that RealBench and OCCT don't stress the last few cores as much as Prime95 and maybe thats why a few people are getting away with 5.3 ghz overclocks running OCCT\Realbench for an hour at such low voltages and passing as "stable"


well then run a per core OC and spin up the 3 other cores... and drop p95. Hammering the FPU with repetitive instructions from the same IS (AVX etc) is not what trips up the logic in these chips. Rapidly changing instruction sets at 100% load do, and is an extreme reflection of a real world scenario. p95 is simply a power virus, and this is why Intel has brought AVX offset to the desktop line up. It's been a feature of high end server-class CPUs for years.


----------



## ducegt

I hope we can get AVX offset voltage control. So I'm stable at 50 with 1 AVX and I require a vcore bump to do 51 with realbench but then even with AVX 2 or 3, during intelburntest the voltage has my temps going too high as to freeze the system. Over 95+. This is still at vcore around 1.35. I don't normally run any AVX as I mostly game, but I don't fancy instability for a small gain in performance. I'd probably feel differently if my chip was able to do 5.4 though! I'm going to wait for the delided die matte to come to the US and see if they or rockit 88 will do a promo to compete with each other. I probably would have already gone with the 88 if they weren't out of the liquid metal.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> *I hope we can get AVX offset voltage control.* So I'm stable at 50 with 1 AVX and I require a vcore bump to do 51 with realbench but then even with AVX 2 or 3, during intelburntest the voltage has my temps going too high as to freeze the system. Over 95+. This is still at vcore around 1.35. I don't normally run any AVX as I mostly game, but I don't fancy instability for a small gain in performance. I'd probably feel differently if my chip was able to do 5.4 though! I'm going to wait for the delided die matte to come to the US and see if they or rockit 88 will do a promo to compete with each other. I probably would have already gone with the 88 if they weren't out of the liquid metal.


me too, tho, if you have an ASUS 270 MB there is a feature in the UEFI that functions the same as the *ASUS Thermal Control Tool for x99 boards*, it allows for temp-dependent freq and voltage control... 2 OCs essentially in one setting.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> me too, tho, if you have an ASUS 270 MB there is a feature in the UEFI that functions the same as the *ASUS Thermal Control Tool for x99 boards*, it allows for temp-dependent freq and voltage control... 2 OCs essentially in one setting.


I can't help but think that the feature you've pointed out would be even better than Asus TCT as it is firmware based as opposed to software. I like TCT on my x99 a lot. My only gripe was the fact that during the onset of certain loads, the TCT would fail to respond fast enough to the condition change simply because it was waiting for some processing time like everything else. Since I'm proabably not articulating what I'm talking about clear enough, I'll give an example.

Cinebench set to a priority of Realtime. If run at a normal priority, TCT can still function as works perfectly. If set to a realtime priority, TCT ends up waiting for a shot to figure out what's going on. By that time it's too late. If this function is moved to the UEFI, I bet it works a lot better?

Thanks for mentioning this as it's damn sure something I'm interested in.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I can't help but think that the feature you've pointed out would be even better than Asus TCT as it is firmware based as opposed to software. I like TCT on my x99 a lot. My only gripe was the fact that during the onset of certain loads, the TCT would fail to respond fast enough to the condition change simply because it was waiting for some processing time like everything else. Since I'm proabably not articulating what I'm talking about clear enough, I'll give an example.
> 
> Cinebench set to a priority of Realtime. If run at a normal priority, TCT can still function as works perfectly. If set to a realtime priority, TCT ends up waiting for a shot to figure out what's going on. By that time it's too late. If this function is moved to the UEFI, I bet it works a lot better?
> 
> Thanks for mentioning this as it's damn sure something I'm interested in.


yeah, the trigger time is "needing", I basically set a few degree lower Hi temp and live withh it. Let's me do a set-it-and-forget-it of 4.5 on the 6950x. It should be quicker via UEFI, and hopefully someday Intel Speedshift couples to dynamic voltage.


----------



## Lake75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Outstanding drop in temps and nice first post!


Thank you.









You've got a really nice sample there. Actually I noticed that my 7700K has the same batch lot as yours L639G023. I haven't tried >5GHz, but even at 5GHz I needed 1.370V just to pass 1h of IBT maximum. I'll probably just stop at 5G. Do you still remember what vCore you needed to run 5.0? It looks like even within the same lot there are quite some differences in overclockability...


----------



## Lays

Probably will have to re-do this but figured I'd post it anyways, let me know if it's not applicable or not and I'll re-do it when I order more CLU. I've been constantly trying to re-do my CLU to get lower temps because they seem really off compared to what I was getting on my 6700k, but I've ran out and my CLU was really old so I'm gonna order a new tube.

Username: Lays
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency: 5200 mhz
Cache Frequency: 4500 mhz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.425v
Vcore: 1.424v
FCLK: 800 mhz
Cooling Solution: Custom loop, 1080mm radiator, Delid + CLU

Stability Test: 7 hour 45 min Prime v28.10 with these settings:
custom blend
768K - 2688K
75% ram
not in place
15min / FFT

Ram was at 3600 mhz 16-16-16-36 2T 1.35v (xmp)


----------



## Lake75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I hope we can get AVX offset voltage control. So I'm stable at 50 with 1 AVX and I require a vcore bump to do 51 with realbench but then even with AVX 2 or 3, during intelburntest the voltage has my temps going too high as to freeze the system. Over 95+. This is still at vcore around 1.35. I don't normally run any AVX as I mostly game, but I don't fancy instability for a small gain in performance. I'd probably feel differently if my chip was able to do 5.4 though! I'm going to wait for the delided die matte to come to the US and see if they or rockit 88 will do a promo to compete with each other. I probably would have already gone with the 88 if they weren't out of the liquid metal.


I made this myself in the basement using 1/4" acrylic sheets. Took about 2 hours of fun. Use a vise to push the block at the bottom to knock off the lid.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lake75*
> 
> I made this myself in the basement using 1/4" acrylic sheets. Took about 2 hours of fun. Use a vise to push the block at the bottom to knock off the lid.


Great job! Nice to see folks making their own tools.

Have you though about creating a small notch/lip so the the PCB could slide under it to prevent any chance of the CPU slipping out of place while putting the crunch on it with the vice?


----------



## Lake75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Great job! Nice to see folks making their own tools.
> 
> Have you though about creating a small notch/lip so the the PCB could slide under it to prevent any chance of the CPU slipping out of place while putting the crunch on it with the vice?


Yeah, I know it's difficult to see it in the picture, but I do have notches on both the left and right holding pieces so that the PCB slides under them; and also a notch on the pushing block so that it presses against the IHS instead of PCB. I made this after having read comments about Skylake/Kaby Lake having much thinner PCBs.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lake75*
> 
> Yeah, I know it's difficult to see it in the picture, but I do have notches on both the left and right holding pieces so that the PCB slides under them; and also a notch on the pushing block so that it presses against the IHS instead of PCB. I made this after having read comments about Skylake/Kaby Lake having much thinner PCBs.


Again, great job. I'm assuming that you've already scalped that 7700k? Good luck with the overclock.


----------



## Lake75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Again, great job. I'm assuming that you've already scalped that 7700k? Good luck with the overclock.


Yes, the tool popped off the lid with ease and I've got a 31C drop in full load temperature as I mentioned in my post yesterday.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lake75*
> 
> Yes, the tool popped off the lid with ease and I've got a 31C drop in full load temperature as I mentioned in my post yesterday.


Nice! a 31c drop is amazing... and disappointing that Intel using such a crappy tim.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*


Charted. I'm going to assume it's z270?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rampage24*


Charted.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lays*


Hi Lays. Any reason you didn't go for 100% of ram used? Also, it would be nice to include the motherboard. You have been charted.


Sample Size9  Average OC5.08Median OC5.10Average Vcore1.37Median Vcore1.38

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Nice! a 31c drop is amazing... and disappointing that Intel using such a crappy tim.


30c is next level terrible lol.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Charted. I'm going to assume it's z270?
> 
> Charted.
> 
> Hi Lays. Any reason you didn't go for 100% of ram used? Also, it would be nice to include the motherboard. You have been charted.
> 
> 
> Sample Size9  Average OC5.08Median OC5.10Average Vcore1.37Median Vcore1.38
> 
> 30c is next level terrible lol.


Actually its Z170, I think keeping the requirements the same as Skylake is a good thing for consistency since the architecture is the same, on that basis alone AVX offset shouldn't be eligible.


----------



## EDORAM

Hi,

I bought this binned

CB R15 5300/5000 1.44V 3600 XMP
http://imgur.com/LMHNcTJ

PRIME 95 5200/4200 1.44V RAM STOCK
http://imgur.com/uMPihBU

What do you think?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EDORAM*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I bought this binned
> 
> CB R15 5300/5000 1.44V 3600 XMP
> http://imgur.com/LMHNcTJ
> 
> PRIME 95 5200/4200 1.44V RAM STOCK
> http://imgur.com/uMPihBU
> 
> What do you think?


Binned from Silicon Lottery? Looks to be a really good chip


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> Sort of a bug with Asus boards. When moving past 5.25GHz auto values for PLL Termination, PCH Core, and CPU Standby voltages are set to 1.6V which is way too high. Set all of these manually to 1V.


Are these them? Can't find them anywhere in my bios to set to 1.0.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Are these them? Can't find them anywhere in my bios to set to 1.0.


I have z170 Hero and I found the three. There's at least one of them in the main page in the same page as vcore. There's one or more in some of the misc voltage menus from that menu... Try external power or something.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I have z170 Hero and I found the three. There's at least one of them in the main page in the same page as vcore. There's one or more in some of the misc voltage menus from that menu... Try external power or something.


I got vccmp down to .95. PLL is set to .9 in the bios, but I think the oc setting is boosting it up to 1.2. Can't find any other pll settings, so thinking about returning my board for the ASUS ROG Maximus IX Hero since I'm still within my return window.


----------



## willtron3000

So, managed to delid. Haven't got proof to make it all official, but my potato chip is running at 5GHz @1.38v at 73c max. Stable in Prime, Aida and BF1. Temps have dropped around 20-25c for me, even more stoked on that. I did bend a socket pin in the process though, and managed to fix that too, stoked^2.


----------



## Lays

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Charted. I'm going to assume it's z270?
> 
> Charted.
> 
> Hi Lays. Any reason you didn't go for 100% of ram used? Also, it would be nice to include the motherboard. You have been charted.
> 
> 
> Sample Size9  Average OC5.08Median OC5.10Average Vcore1.37Median Vcore1.38
> 
> 30c is next level terrible lol.


Z170M OC Formula from Asrock. My friends are some sort of crazy stability lunatics, they told me to try those settings so I did lol.

I was doing some stuff on my PC at the same time I was running prime so they said go for 75% ram instead of 100%.


----------



## Jpmboy

You mean 100% of available ram
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lays*
> 
> Z170M OC Formula from Asrock. My friends are some sort of crazy stability lunatics, they told me to try those settings so I did lol.
> 
> I was doing some stuff on my PC at the same time I was running prime so they said go for 75% ram instead of 100%.


if you use 100% of installed ram, the page file will get worked pretty hard with both OS and stresstest reads/writes. Maybe 95% or 100% of available ram is what Wizzie means?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> things like photo editing, content creation and games do not use AVX, FMA3 etc instruction sets. So lowering an OC because it cannot survive a, IMO meaningless, test like p95 is foolish. Use Realbench, HWBOT x265 (4K 2-4x overkill), HCi Memtest, and a few loops of IBT if you need a high current load. With this I've never had a rig crash in any use.
> If you use your machine to hunt prime numbers... yeah, then the stress test built into p95 is useful if for nothing else than to test the cooling.
> well then run a per core OC and spin up the 3 other cores... and drop p95. Hammering the FPU with repetitive instructions from the same IS (AVX etc) is not what trips up the logic in these chips. Rapidly changing instruction sets at 100% load do, and is an extreme reflection of a real world scenario. p95 is simply a power virus, and this is why Intel has brought AVX offset to the desktop line up. It's been a feature of high end server-class CPUs for years.


What about distributed computing, folding, scientific physics calculations. Isn't prime95 good for number crunching.

SSE4 and Intel® 64 instruction set architecture (ISA), the Intel AVX provides the ... financial analysis, media content creation, natural resource industry, and HPC ... https://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/m/8/1/c/a/0/1371-Intel___AVX_New_Frontiers_in_Performance_Improvements_and_Energy_Efficiency_WP.pdf


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What about distributed computing, folding, scientific physics calculations. Isn't prime95 good for number crunching.
> 
> SSE4 and Intel® 64 instruction set architecture (ISA), the Intel AVX provides the ... financial analysis, media content creation, natural resource industry, and HPC ... https://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/m/8/1/c/a/0/1371-Intel___AVX_New_Frontiers_in_Performance_Improvements_and_Energy_Efficiency_WP.pdf


only way to know if p95 is relevant to any workload is to run the actual workload and monitor temps, current, vcore droop etc. Very few are, even sci calc (I run QM calcs all the time)? on a 4-core? erm, what's this 1960?








folding does not use AVX., you can answer all these questions yourself.
besides, 4 core cpu folding is pretty useless.. maybe 40K PPD... compare to any modern GPU it's nominal in PPD.
doing this while on this thread:


----------



## MaKeN

Hi all !
First, im not really pro in Oc-ing ...but im trying to







i even went ahead and deliddet my new i7 7700k , i have used a shaving blade method ....
but with kaby lake as never before i have some things that i cant understand...

i guess this is the best forum where i can ask people for help.

settings i use:

CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 49
xpm: yes
Bclk: 102.0
Ram:3400
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore in UEFI: 1.4200
Vcore: 1.334/1.440

Something strange i see with this Cpu, the voltage is set to 1.420 in bios, But i get 1.440 in Cpus Z and i get 1.334 In HWmonitor, and 1.308 in Intell Extreme Tuning.

i have posted some print screens :
in first there is a cpu votage, second motherboard voltage for CPu




as i told, im kinda noob in Oc-ing , but before i had no problems as that and was getting good resoults on Skylake I5 core,Bios Vcore V was all time matching the ones that diff programs report

now, i kinda cant understand what is the REAL voltage my cpu is running







,Vcore in Bios or Vcore Hwmonitor/IntelExtreme shows or cpu z? how come there is like 0.1 V drop in windows compaired to Bios...

Question ????

what voltage should i trust ?

PS: after delidding:

1.temps dropped down from 100+ C to like max of 80 under full load.i do see a big improvement in temps.

2.also after delliding , (i guess i messed it up (its my first time) just 2 of Ram slots would work.

any input , i highly appreciate !


----------



## Lake75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Something strange i see with this Cpu, the voltage is set to 1.420 in bios, But i get 1.440 in Cpus Z and i get 1.334 In HWmonitor, and 1.308 in Intell Extreme Tuning.


Your BIOS vCore is of course 1.420, but that's what you asked. Your real vCore is 1.440: That's "Core Voltage" in CPU-Z and "Vcore" in HWmonitor. What confused you are VID values.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Hi all !
> First, im not really pro in Oc-ing ...but im trying to
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i even went ahead and deliddet my new i7 7700k , i have used a shaving blade method ....
> but with kaby lake as never before i have some things that i cant understand...
> 
> i guess this is the best forum where i can ask people for help.
> 
> settings i use:
> 
> CPU Model: 7700k
> Base Clock: 4200
> Core Multiplier: 49
> xpm: yes
> Bclk: 102.0
> Ram:3400
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4200
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.4200
> Vcore: 1.334/1.440
> 
> Something strange i see with this Cpu, the voltage is set to 1.420 in bios, But i get 1.440 in Cpus Z and i get 1.334 In HWmonitor, and 1.308 in Intell Extreme Tuning.
> 
> i have posted some print screens :
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> as i told, im kinda noob in Oc-ing , but before i had no problems as that and was getting good resoults on Skylake I5 core.
> 
> now, i kinda cant understand what is the REAL voltage my cpu is running
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ,Vcore in Bios or Vcore Hwmonitor/IntelExtreme shows or cpu z? how come there is like 0.1 V drop in windows compaired to Bios... cant understand.
> 
> PS: after delidding:
> 1.temps dropped down from 100+ C to like max of 80 under fool load.i do see a big improvement in temps.
> 2.also after delliding , (i guess i messed it up (its my first time) just 2 of Ram slots would work.
> any input , i highly appreciate !


that's not vcore in HWM, that's VID. Use CPUZ or aid64, or HWinfo for vcore. erm.. hitting 100 is bad... for any length of time, and frankly 80c after delid is not great either. What cooling are you using?


----------



## Lake75

Here is my OC results

Username: Lake75
CPU Model: i7-7700K
Base Clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5,000
Cache Frequency: 4,600
Vcore in UEFI: 1.365
Vcore: 1.376
FCLK: 1,000
Cooling Solution: Corsair H100i v2, delidded and with IHS
Stability Test: IBT v2.54, 3.25 hrs at maximum setting

Batch Number: Malaysia L639G023
Ram Speed: 3200 16-18-18-38
VCCIO: 1.220
VCCSA: 1.270
Ram Voltage: 1.350
Motherboard: MSI Z270 Gaming M5
LLC Setting: Mode 4 (flat; mode 1 being the highest)


----------



## MaKeN

this? :



kinda hight voltage as i see


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> this? :
> 
> 
> 
> kinda hight voltage as i see


down load a copy of CPUZ and compare to find the vcore value. obviously HWM better be wrong about what it labeled vcore. Also what MB is that??


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> this? :
> 
> 
> 
> kinda hight voltage as i see


Are you running the latest beta version of hw Info?


----------



## Jpmboy

Username:jpmboy
CPU Model:7700k
Base Clock:4200
Core Multiplier:52
Core Frequency:5200
Cache Frequency:4800
Vcore in UEFI: +170mV
Vcore: 1.296
FCLK:800
Cooling Solution: delid, koolance 380i. custom water
Stability Test: x264. 8+ hours, 16 threads (log file attached)

Batch Number: L639F977
Ram Speed: 3600, 15-15-15-35-1T
Ram Voltage: 1.375
VCCIO: 1.190
VCCSA: 1.220
Motherboard: z170 MOCF
LLC Setting: 2
Misc Comments: no avx offset

x264-log_8h.rtf 7k .rtf file

while running


----------



## ducegt

Username: ducegt
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4700
Vcore in UEFI: 1.335 LLC2
Vcore: 1.312 under load
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Not delidded, H115i 280mm; Fan pump: high, fans: low (whatever case temp switch is)
Stability Test: 8 Hours RealBench. Also passes IBT and Prime95 26.6 8k to 4096k for 21 hours.

Batch Number: L639F977
Ram Speed: 3600 15-15-15-35 2T
Ram Voltage: 1.35
VCCIO: 1.15v
VCCSA: 1.15v
Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty Gaming Z270 K6. BIOS: 1.22A
LLC Setting: 2 (Second most tight)

Misc Comments: AVX Offset Ratio 1; I can pass RealBench just the same with 0 Ratio and @ 1.29 LLC1 UEFI (1.28 actual), but at the above settings I'm stable in other workloads like IBT and AIDA64. I can even do RealBench at 5100 for 1 hour with Offset 0, but IBT will instantly lock.

Also, since I updated to latest beta BIOS, HWiNFO crashes while loading.


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *Lake75*





> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*





> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Username: ducegt
> CPU Model: 7700K
> Base Clock: 4200
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4700
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.335 LLC2
> Vcore: 1.312 under load
> FCLK: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Not delidded, H115i 280mm; Fan pump: high, fans: low (whatever case temp switch is)
> Stability Test: 8 Hours RealBench. Also passes IBT and Prime95 26.6 8k to 4096k for 21 hours.
> 
> Batch Number: L639F977
> Ram Speed: 3600 15-15-15-35 2T
> Ram Voltage: 1.35
> VCCIO: 1.15v
> VCCSA: 1.15v
> Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty Gaming Z270 K6. BIOS: 1.22A
> LLC Setting: 2 (Second most tight)
> 
> Misc Comments: AVX Offset Ratio 1; I can pass RealBench just the same with 0 Ratio and @ 1.29 LLC1 UEFI (1.28 actual), but at the above settings I'm stable in other workloads like IBT and AIDA64. I can even do RealBench at 5100 for 1 hour with Offset 0, but IBT will instantly lock.
> 
> Also, since I updated to latest beta BIOS, HWiNFO crashes while loading.


You have all been charted. Please note that base clock is bclk, not stock frequency for your CPU model.

ducegt, there's no way to confirm how long IBT was wrong based on your picture. I'm assuming you're claiming to pass both IBT and P95 26.6 for 21hr.


Sample Size12  Average OC5.07Median OC5.10Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.38


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> You have all been charted. Please note that base clock is bclk, not stock frequency for your CPU model.


thx wizzie. If you want you have a UEFI vcore the idle vcore for that run is 1.328V


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> ducegt, there's no way to confirm how long IBT was wrong based on your picture. I'm assuming you're claiming to pass both IBT and P95 26.6 for 21hr.


Sorry for the confusion, but that wouldn't be truthful about IBT. U was only trying to add to the conversation about AVX ratio. I also understood p95 26.6 to not be part of the rules. I only did RB as part of the rules so you can use 1.29 UEFI and 1.28 actual for me to be accurate. Ive got a screenshot somewhere proving thus, but am mobile now and out of time.


----------



## alpsie

Just got done with the delid of my CPU, really happy with the result, at 4.9ghz i hit 81-87celcius befor, now they hit between 65-67.
I´ve set vcore to 1.400 and LLC to 4 in bios since I can´t get it stable otherwise, but would this be a safe voltage to have running 24/7 ?

HWinfo report vcore between 1.360-1.392

4.8ghz is stable at vcore 1.3100, so I think I might drop down to that one just for safety.


----------



## Lays

Wizzie if possible can you put in my notes that I didn't have an AVX offset?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alpsie*
> 
> so I think I might drop down to that one just for safety.


Safe IMO. Reap the benefits for the work you did to delid


----------



## smrdelj

Hello, nice guide!! I want to get an estable 5Ghz core clock (if possible). No especial interest in ram overclocking. Just cpu. I don't know much about overclocking, just basics. I followed this guide, starting with 4.8ghz. But i have many doubts that i need to ask. So Thanks for reading and helping me!

My pc:

-i7 7700k
-h100i v2 (stock paste, stock fans, nothing added)
-asus strix z270F
-16gb (2x8) vengeance lpx 2400mhz

Here are the screenshots of my BIOS, showing the way I configured it following this guide:










So i booted into Win10 and run the x264 modified stress test (16T normal, as recomended). I run it for about 15 mins, no problems so far i seem. Air flowing out of my pc exhaust fans was cold. Here is a screenshot of HWinfo, when idle:



As i understand, my idle temp is 51° and my max during stress was 91° (what I really find unlikely given the cold temperature of the air coming out of my pc). During stress temp was arround 85° (if that sensor is actually right, which i still find hard to believe).

So, my questions are:

1) Do you notice anything wrong in my bios settings? or something missing? I guess something must be wrong because:
a) i cant manually set my cache clock, im forced to auto
b) i cant or havent seen anywhere to choose voltage mode as guide indicates. As a matter of fact i also need a suggestion about this once i can do it.
c) my ram is 2400 but its running stock at 2133, should i set it 2400?

2) Assuming that the measurements of my temperatures are actually correct: they seem quite high, arent they? I guess that could be caused by something bad configured, perhaps voltages?

Thanks for helping! I will stand by for any suggestions about how should i move now


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lays*
> 
> Wizzie if possible can you put in my notes that I didn't have an AVX offset?


Done.

But as you know, the default assumption is that no avx offset was used unless told otherwise.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alpsie*
> 
> Just got done with the delid of my CPU, really happy with the result, at 4.9ghz i hit 81-87celcius befor, now they hit between 65-67.
> I´ve set vcore to 1.400 and LLC to 4 in bios since I can´t get it stable otherwise, but would this be a safe voltage to have running 24/7 ?
> 
> HWinfo report vcore between 1.360-1.392
> 
> 4.8ghz is stable at vcore 1.3100, so I think I might drop down to that one just for safety.


I think 1.4v is safeish, especially if you don't do something that puts 100% load on your CPU a lot. Some people just game, some people run folding or something like that at night. If you think about it, over the period of an entire year the amount of hours the CPUs have been running hard are vastly different.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> Hello, nice guide!! I want to get an estable 5Ghz core clock (if possible). No especial interest in ram overclocking. Just cpu. I don't know much about overclocking, just basics. I followed this guide, starting with 4.8ghz. But i have many doubts that i need to ask. So Thanks for reading and helping me!
> 
> My pc:
> 
> -i7 7700k
> -h100i v2 (stock paste, stock fans, nothing added)
> -asus strix z270F
> -16gb (2x8) vengeance lpx 2400mhz
> 
> Here are the screenshots of my BIOS, showing the way I configured it following this guide:
> 
> So i booted into Win10 and run the x264 modified stress test (16T normal, as recomended). I run it for about 15 mins, no problems so far i seem. Air flowing out of my pc exhaust fans was cold. Here is a screenshot of HWinfo, when idle:
> 
> 
> 
> As i understand, my idle temp is 51° and my max during stress was 91° (what I really find unlikely given the cold temperature of the air coming out of my pc). During stress temp was arround 85° (if that sensor is actually right, which i still find hard to believe).
> 
> So, my questions are:
> 
> 1) Do you notice anything wrong in my bios settings? or something missing? I guess something must be wrong because:
> a) i cant manually set my cache clock, im forced to auto
> b) i cant or havent seen anywhere to choose voltage mode as guide indicates. As a matter of fact i also need a suggestion about this once i can do it.
> c) my ram is 2400 but its running stock at 2133, should i set it 2400?
> 
> 2) Assuming that the measurements of my temperatures are actually correct: they seem quite high, arent they? I guess that could be caused by something bad configured, perhaps voltages?
> 
> Thanks for helping! I will stand by for any suggestions about how should i move now


Hi,

How exactly are you forced to auto cache ratio? When you enter it in the field it won't let you, or the settings won't stick? I've never heard of a board that unlocks core OC but not cache.

Regarding voltage mode:



The circled area is where you change voltage mode. Override, auto, offset, adaptive. You can try setting it to adaptive, the max speed voltage to whatever you need, and enabling C states so that when the CPU is idle the voltage will decrease. I'm running manual because...well... I'm stubborn.

You can set your ram to its overclock after the CPU overclock is done.

As for your temps, see if disabling TPU helps. That's a feature for people who want a more automatic overclocking experience IIRC and I don't think there's a good reason for it to be on right now. It might fix some weirdness you experience as a side effect.


----------



## Lays

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Done.
> q


BTW I'm not sure if you asked me what board I was using, I think you did but I'm not sure if I answered. Asrock Z170M OC Formula (M version, not the normal one)


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lays*
> 
> BTW I'm not sure if you asked me what board I was using, I think you did but I'm not sure if I answered. Asrock Z170M OC Formula (M version, not the normal one)


It was in the charting form. I'm updated your entry already.


----------



## Lays

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> It was in the charting form. I'm updated your entry already.


o my bad, I've been trying to keep track of a zillion conversations on like 6 different programs, I am getting confused lol


----------



## smrdelj

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> How exactly are you forced to auto cache ratio? When you enter it in the field it won't let you, or the settings won't stick? I've never heard of a board that unlocks core OC but not cache


i suppouse that cache ratio es change here, right?  Well i can input numbers in there, but no more than three digits, and supports decimals (i mean like this ###.##). So i dont understand how to set it. Perhaps 400.40?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Regarding voltage mode:
> 
> 
> The circled area is where you change voltage mode. Override, auto, offset, adaptive. You can try setting it to adaptive, the max speed voltage to whatever you need, and enabling C states so that when the CPU is idle the voltage will decrease.


Yes, but i cant pick "adaptitve" there. In fact Is very rare because "adaptative" appears and disappears randomly when I display the selection menu. Sometimes its there, sometimes not. But when its there i cant pick it. And then vanishes. I dont understand.
On the other hand, i dont know where to enable "C states". I even dont know what you mean, so perhaps its tagged or named differently in my bios and i would never find it. Do you see it on my screenshots?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> As for your temps, see if disabling TPU helps.


There isnt any disable option, only "keep current", "TPU I" and "TPU II". I set it in keep curent guessing thats the more similar to disable. Dont know.

Thank you very much! I will keep tunned for further instructions


----------



## Lake75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> So i booted into Win10 and run the x264 modified stress test (16T normal, as recomended). I run it for about 15 mins, no problems so far i seem. Air flowing out of my pc exhaust fans was cold. Here is a screenshot of HWinfo, when idle:
> 
> 
> 
> As i understand, my idle temp is 51° and my max during stress was 91° (what I really find unlikely given the cold temperature of the air coming out of my pc). During stress temp was arround 85° (if that sensor is actually right, which i still find hard to believe).
> 
> So, my questions are:
> 
> 1) Do you notice anything wrong in my bios settings? or something missing? I guess something must be wrong because:
> a) i cant manually set my cache clock, im forced to auto
> b) i cant or havent seen anywhere to choose voltage mode as guide indicates. As a matter of fact i also need a suggestion about this once i can do it.
> c) my ram is 2400 but its running stock at 2133, should i set it 2400?
> 
> 2) Assuming that the measurements of my temperatures are actually correct: they seem quite high, arent they? I guess that could be caused by something bad configured, perhaps voltages?


As far as I can tell based on the HWinfo screenshot, your temperatures are correct. Your minimum CPU frequency is 4800MHz, instead of 800, so the cores never really dropped to idle state, hence your relatively high idle temp (they're 36-51C from your screenshot). And even if your 7700K is running at 100C, you won't be able to feel it in the airflow. Remember how small that chip is. It won't produce much heat to heat up the much volume of air even at 100C. Before delidding, my 7700K at 4.8G was ~28C idle and ~95C under AIDA64 stress test (IBT would max it out to 100C).


----------



## Lake75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> i suppouse that cache ratio es change here, right?  Well i can input numbers in there, but no more than three digits, and supports decimals (i mean like this ###.##). So i dont understand how to set it. Perhaps 400.40?


The cache is a "ratio". So type in "42" for 4200MHz and so on.


----------



## smrdelj

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lake75*
> 
> As far as I can tell based on the HWinfo screenshot, your temperatures are correct. Your minimum CPU frequency is 4800MHz, instead of 800, so the cores never really dropped to idle state, hence your relatively high idle temp (they're 36-51C from your screenshot). And even if your 7700K is running at 100C, you won't be able to feel it in the airflow. Remember how small that chip is. It won't produce much heat to heat up the much volume of air even at 100C. Before delidding, my 7700K at 4.8G was ~28C idle and ~95C under AIDA64 stress test (IBT would max it out to 100C).


Thanks for helping! So what do i have to do in order to get 800Mhz (or other low freq) when idle? Would you mind taking a look to my doubts and posting an opinion? Thanks!

EDIT:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lake75*
> 
> The cache is a "ratio". So type in "42" for 4200MHz and so on.


In the 3 spaces? or just in the top one and the other to leave in auto?


----------



## BoredErica

Recall that base clock * multiplier = actual clockspeed. A base clock of 100 (default) with 45 cache multiplier = 4500mhz or 4.5ghz. It's the same deal with your core multiplier setting.

As for the 3 settings for your cache, I do this:

255 (Not limited by current)

45

45

As for downclock I'm actually not sure. I've gotten clockspeed decrease in idle only on Haswell with EIST and balanced power setting in Windows. Methinks the gains from that is very minimal. But if you really wanted to do it, it's possible that to downclock cache you need to set minimum cache ratio to something lower and it would ramp up the cache under load from the minimum to the maximum cache ratio.

As for TPU, yea, I would leave it at 'keep current'.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> Yes, but i cant pick "adaptitve" there. In fact Is very rare because "adaptative" appears and disappears randomly when I display the selection menu. Sometimes its there, sometimes not. But when its there i cant pick it. And then vanishes. I dont understand.
> On the other hand, i dont know where to enable "C states". I even dont know what you mean, so perhaps its tagged or named differently in my bios and i would never find it. Do you see it on my screenshots?


For C states the way I get to it is in the advanced tab (up top, the bar with other tabs like 'exit bios', etc). Then there should be a CPU option, and that will show you grey text about the CPU's frequency and other specs. Below that are options like enable or disable virtualization, there should be one for power. That option will show something for enabling C states.

I'm not sure what's going on with the adaptive option missing. I've never heard of that before.

We have a different BIOS because we have different chipsets and such, but from the user's perspective it should be relatively similar since we are using Asus ROG mobos.


----------



## smrdelj

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Recall that base clock * multiplier = actual clockspeed. A base clock of 100 (default) with 45 cache multiplier = 4500mhz or 4.5ghz. It's the same deal with your core multiplier setting.
> 
> As for the 3 settings for your cache, I do this:
> 255 (Not limited by current)
> 45
> 45
> 
> (...)
> 
> As for TPU, yea, I would leave it at 'keep current'.


Both Done!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> As for downclock I'm actually not sure. I've gotten clockspeed decrease in idle only on Haswell with EIST and balanced power setting in Windows. Methinks the gains from that is very minimal. But if you really wanted to do it, it's possible that to downclock cache you need to set minimum cache ratio to something lower and it would ramp up the cache under load from the minimum to the maximum cache ratio.


Are you talking about not having an idle low freq, right? Leaving the cpu always at max freq would not be a problem since temperatures will keep low as long as there is no load. Right?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> For C states the way I get to it is in the advanced tab (up top, the bar with other tabs like 'exit bios', etc). Then there should be a CPU option, and that will show you grey text about the CPU's frequency and other specs. Below that are options like enable or disable virtualization, there should be one for power. That option will show something for enabling C states.


Yeah, was exactly there. I enable it (was auto). It has eneabled me a lot more of related settings that i leaved default. Ok?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> I'm not sure what's going on with the adaptive option missing. I've never heard of that before.


So would you suggest to leave it in Manual? Or back to auto?

On the other hand, what should i do with CPU LLC and Current Capability? Leave them auto? or set something high in both cases?

Finally, about temperatures, when should i worry? What are idle and load max reasonable temps? I priorize always safety and long life of mi chipset hehe

Thank you very much!!


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> Both Done!
> Are you talking about not having an idle low freq, right? Leaving the cpu always at max freq would not be a problem since temperatures will keep low as long as there is no load. Right?
> Yeah, was exactly there. I enable it (was auto). It has eneabled me a lot more of related settings that i leaved default. Ok?


Yes

Quote:


> So would you suggest to leave it in Manual? Or back to auto?


If you simply leave it to auto then you're praying that your motherboard/CPU will figure out what voltage is best, and they won't. With the choice of auto or manual, go manual.

Quote:


> On the other hand, what should i do with CPU LLC and Current Capability? Leave them auto? or set something high in both cases?


LLC has been covered in the guide. You will probably be fine setting it to level 4 or so, there your voltage at load will be similar to voltage at idle. It'll be fine. But be careful of setting that to a very high level (6+). Voltage going way up on load can be dangerous left unchecked.

On current capability, I don't think it will make any difference and it is fine to set it to whatever.

Quote:


> Finally, about temperatures, when should i worry? What are idle and load max reasonable temps? I priorize always safety and long life of mi chipset hehe


That's pretty subjective. Anecdotal evidence is tough here because people's temps don't go up in a vacuum. Their voltage goes up as well. Then, what people do on their computer can vary a lot. My opinions are just my opinions.

Generally I don't want temps to exceed 75C in load. Idle temps is related to load temps, so if load doesn't exceed 75C naturally idle temps will be okay, whatever it happens to be. By "load" I'm talking x264 or Realbench, not Linpack.

Running delidded with a decent cooler, there isn't much of a reason for my temps to exceed 75C in the first place, anyways.

Quote:


> Thank you very much!!


No problem.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lays*
> 
> o my bad, I've been trying to keep track of a zillion conversations on like 6 different programs, I am getting confused lol


----------



## ducegt

I've got some better results from using offset voltage instead of fixed, along with 8 hours RealBench with no AVX offset Sorry for the









Username: ducegt
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4700
Vcore in UEFI: +110 LLC1
Vcore: 1.264v
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Not delidded, H115i 280mm; Pump: high, fans: low (whatever case fan switch is)
Stability Test: 8 Hours RealBench.
Batch Number: L639F977
Ram Speed: 3600 15-15-15-35 2T
Ram Voltage: 1.35
VCCIO: 1.15v
VCCSA: 1.15v
Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty Gaming Z270 K6. BIOS: 1.22A
LLC Setting: 1 (Most tight)

Misc Comments: This was with 0 AVX Ratio. With 0 Ratio I can not complete 10 loops of IBT on maximum. WIth 1, I can.


----------



## smrdelj

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> With the choice of auto or manual, go manual


Ok, done. And also took the chance to lower the voltage a bit, given that my temperatures were quite high.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> LLC has been covered in the guide. You will probably be fine setting it to level 4 or so, there your voltage at load will be similar to voltage at idle


Done, i set it in 4. I know that LLC was covered in the guide, but even thou i couldnt understand what to do. Sorry.

In short, I am now running at 4.8ghz with 1.3 vcore. It passed an entire night of stress test at x264 16T normal, average temperature around 75°, so i guess its very stable.

So what would be convenient now? Go up to 49 and try if it resist? Raising the voltage will surely cause my temperature rise up 75, which I would not like.

I guess I could also try lowering the voltage to run even colder the 48.

Because OC ram should wait until I decide on a cpu configuration, right?

Thank you very much for your help!


----------



## alpsie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> I think 1.4v is safeish, especially if you don't do something that puts 100% load on your CPU a lot. Some people just game, some people run folding or something like that at night. If you think about it, over the period of an entire year the amount of hours the CPUs have been running hard are vastly different.


Thank you, I´ve dropped down to 4.8 and a vcore I feel much happier with, I doubt I´ll see any real change between 4.8 and 4.9.
I tend to have my hardware pass down to the rest of the familie, when I upgrade, so I wont have to worry when they get this one.


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> I'm not sure what's going on with the adaptive option missing. I've never heard of that before.
> 
> 
> 
> So would you suggest to leave it in Manual? Or back to auto?
> 
> On the other hand, what should i do with CPU LLC and Current Capability? Leave them auto? or set something high in both cases?
> 
> Finally, about temperatures, when should i worry? What are idle and load max reasonable temps? I priorize always safety and long life of mi chipset hehe
> 
> Thank you very much!!
Click to expand...

Unless they have recently corrected with a new bios, to properly use Adaptive Voltage you need to set "CPU SVID Support" to "AUTO" (see pic) ... NOT "Disabled" as the bios tips suggest for overclocking, Raja is aware of this but it may not be edited yet.



Also note if you plug in a USB thumb drive then enter the bios you can just hit F12 and capture much better pictures of your bios settings!









When you move on to your ram, enable XMP and start with your basic XMP settings.

AND please fill in your system specs (see my sig) many guys like me, won't respond till they can get a look at your overall system including your Bios version ... Hope that helps, your on the right track


----------



## lawlbringer

So I was going crazy thinking I had a bad chip and it turns out I did. I went to a different Micro Center and purchased another from a different batch and I'm currently running 5GHz at 1.35v and everything seems fairly stable. Just did a few runs of Cinebench and 5 loops of the RealBench with no problems thus far. Time to run RealBench overnight to be a little more sure, but this chip seems to be a lot better than the first.

To compare, my first 7700k wouldn't even boot @5GHz until I upped the voltage to 1.360. This one boots with 1.3v and possibly lower (I jumped to 1.3v to start.) Heck, I couldn't even run 5 loops of RealBench benchmark at 4.9GHz with 1.380v on the first one! This new chip seems like a winner to me. Maybe not a golden chip, but at least it's closer to the average than the last.

My only concern is temperatures, but I did switch from the H100i V2 stock fans to Noctua NF-F12s (SO much quieter than those jet engines at full RPM) and hit around 90c on my hottest core. The others are 6-8 degrees lower though, so I might try to re-do my thermal paste before going nuts with stress testing.

Hopefully I can get charted tomorrow. I'll keep you posted.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lawlbringer*
> 
> So I was going crazy thinking I had a bad chip and it turns out I did. I went to a different Micro Center and purchased another from a different batch and I'm currently running 5GHz at 1.35v and everything seems fairly stable. Just did a few runs of Cinebench and 5 loops of the RealBench with no problems thus far. Time to run RealBench overnight to be a little more sure, but this chip seems to be a lot better than the first.
> 
> To compare, my first 7700k wouldn't even boot @5GHz until I upped the voltage to 1.360. This one boots with 1.3v and possibly lower (I jumped to 1.3v to start.) Heck, I couldn't even run 5 loops of RealBench benchmark at 4.9GHz with 1.380v on the first one! This new chip seems like a winner to me. Maybe not a golden chip, but at least it's closer to the average than the last.
> 
> My only concern is temperatures, but I did switch from the H100i V2 stock fans to Noctua NF-F12s (SO much quieter than those jet engines at full RPM) and hit around 90c on my hottest core. The others are 6-8 degrees lower though, so I might try to re-do my thermal paste before going nuts with stress testing.
> 
> Hopefully I can get charted tomorrow. I'll keep you posted.


Are you going to sell the other i7 7700k?


----------



## damstr

Looking to add my results to this thread once I do some more testing. I am curious how much lower I can go with the voltage.

7700k
4.9GHz
1.264v
83C peak temp after 3 hours 25 mins of RealBench
75C peak temp after 2 hours of BF1
not delidded

Memory @ 3000MHz 1.35v

Everything else is auto.

4+ hours with mostly BF1 and some Overwatch with no problems also.

5GHz @ 1.26v fails after roughly 45 mins in RealBench stress test. No BSOD it just stops the stress test. I think I can get it stable without going over 1.3v but I am going to have to delid if I want to tackle that. I want to stay under 85C in RealBench.

May be worth noting that I haven't touched my overclocked 1080 Hybrid. Running 2113MHz core and +100 on the mem.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> Unless they have recently corrected with a new bios, to properly use Adaptive Voltage you need to set "CPU SVID Support" to "AUTO" (see pic) ... NOT "Disabled" as the bios tips suggest for overclocking, Raja is aware of this but it may not be edited yet.
> 
> 
> 
> Also note if you plug in a USB thumb drive then enter the bios you can just hit F12 and capture much better pictures of your bios settings!


Right. That was noted in the OP but I forgot to mention that. I don't think that's a bug. SVID is something that needs to be on for functions like these.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Right. That was noted in the OP but I forgot to mention that. I don't think that's a bug. SVID is something that needs to be on for functions like these.


on ASUS boards you _can_ leave this on AUTO whether using adaptive or manual override.


----------



## smrdelj

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> Unless they have recently corrected with a new bios, to properly use Adaptive Voltage you need to set "CPU SVID Support" to "AUTO" (see pic) ... NOT "Disabled" as the bios tips suggest for overclocking, Raja is aware of this but it may not be edited yet.
> 
> Also note if you plug in a USB thumb drive then enter the bios you can just hit F12 and capture much better pictures of your bios settings!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you move on to your ram, enable XMP and start with your basic XMP settings.
> 
> AND please fill in your system specs (see my sig) many guys like me, won't respond till they can get a look at your overall system including your Bios version ... Hope that helps, your on the right track


Thanks! I dindt know about rig signature. Now its done









I dont know anything about adaptative voltage, is it recomendable? I read that its not good when overclocking or doing sress test, thats bull****?

So, if adaptative is conveniente, How should i set it, what values? There are several blanks to complete, look:



Sorry for the bad picture, i saw what you said but when i took my bios screenshot it wont save it in ntfs mode, and i dont have another pendrive

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Right. That was noted in the OP but I forgot to mention that. I don't think that's a bug. SVID is something that needs to be on for functions like these.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> on ASUS boards you _can_ leave this on AUTO whether using adaptive or manual override.


What do you think guys?

Thank you all!!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> Thanks! I dindt know about rig signature. Now its done
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont know anything about adaptative voltage, is it recomendable? I read that its not good when overclocking or doing sress test, thats bull****?
> 
> So, if adaptative is conveniente, How should i set it, what values? There are several blanks to complete, look:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for the bad picture, i saw what you said but when i took my bios screenshot it wont save it in ntfs mode, and i dont have another pendrive
> 
> What do you think guys?
> 
> Thank you all!!


offset and adaptive needs to have this enabled since the applied voltage is based off the VID, manual override does just that.... overrides the VID so therefore SVID can be disabled if you like. The Auto rules do the same thing.


----------



## r0l4n

The Ripjaws 3600C16 arrived yesterday, so far managed to get them stable at 3733C16 at 1.4v and at 3866C16 at 1.45v, but I cannot get them to even boot at 4000, no matter what timings or voltage (tried CAS up to 21 and voltage up to 1.5v). VCCIO and VCCSA are in the 1.2-1.25v range.

Is my motherboard limiting me here you think?

What vdimm is safe to keep for 24/7 with these?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r0l4n*
> 
> The Ripjaws 3600C16 arrived yesterday, so far managed to get them stable at 3733C16 at 1.4v and at 3866C16 at 1.45v, but I cannot get them to even boot at 4000, no matter what timings or voltage (tried CAS up to 21 and voltage up to 1.5v). VCCIO and VCCSA are in the 1.2-1.25v range.
> 
> Is my motherboard limiting me here you think?
> 
> What vdimm is safe to keep for 24/7 with these?


stay under 1.5V for sure, and ideally no higher than 1.45V for 24/7. I have several kits running at 1.45V for months (one 64GB kit on a R5E-10 at 1.45V since launch) with no issues... but, you really should check the stability of that kit running 3866c16 at 1.45V. HCi Memtest can be very humbling.


----------



## Lays

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r0l4n*
> 
> The Ripjaws 3600C16 arrived yesterday, so far managed to get them stable at 3733C16 at 1.4v and at 3866C16 at 1.45v, but I cannot get them to even boot at 4000, no matter what timings or voltage (tried CAS up to 21 and voltage up to 1.5v). VCCIO and VCCSA are in the 1.2-1.25v range.
> 
> Is my motherboard limiting me here you think?
> 
> What vdimm is safe to keep for 24/7 with these?


You're most likely not going to get past ~3733 without the big boy mem OC boards. 1.45-1.5v no problem 24/7 just have a fan near them blowing fresh air on em.


----------



## smrdelj

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> offset and adaptive needs to have this enabled since the applied voltage is based off the VID, manual override does just that.... overrides the VID so therefore SVID can be disabled if you like. The Auto rules do the same thing.


I'm sorry man, but i did not get if you would recommend going adaptative or staying manual. If adaptative, i did not get how should i set each of the adaptative options i screeshoted in my last post. Thanks!


----------



## r0l4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> stay under 1.5V for sure, and ideally no higher than 1.45V for 24/7. I have several kits running at 1.45V for months (one 64GB kit on a R5E-10 at 1.45V since launch) with no issues... but, you really should check the stability of that kit running 3866c16 at 1.45V. HCi Memtest can be very humbling.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lays*
> 
> You're most likely not going to get past ~3733 without the big boy mem OC boards. 1.45-1.5v no problem 24/7 just have a fan near them blowing fresh air on em.


Thanks for your answers, 3866C16 sounds like it's all I'm going to get out of them, then.

I just ran a ~200% coverage HCI memtest, 43 degrees max temp on the dimms:


----------



## Lays

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r0l4n*
> 
> Thanks for your answers, 3866C16 sounds like it's all I'm going to get out of them, then.
> 
> I just ran a ~200% coverage HCI memtest, 43 degrees max temp on the dimms:


Keep in mind if everything except your primaries is on AUTO, you're not gaining much at all. Tertaries, RTL, secondaries are what makes all that speed usable, otherwise your latency and efficiency will go out the window.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> I'm sorry man, but i did not get if you would recommend going adaptative or staying manual. If adaptative, i did not get how should i set each of the adaptative options i screeshoted in my last post. Thanks!


set adaptive mode vcore to the value you want the cpu to run at., leave CPU SVID on auto, set LLC to 5 (under a submenu above that pic - also note that with a USB stick in any port, hit F12 and the bios will drop a screenshot to the stick, no need for photos).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r0l4n*
> 
> Thanks for your answers, 3866C16 sounds like it's all I'm going to get out of them, then.
> 
> I just ran a ~200% coverage HCI memtest, 43 degrees max temp on the dimms:


looks promising... errors under 200% means critically unstable, clean thru 500 to 1000% is much better. also, by running 2000 in each instance you force very heavy use of the page file by windows (use ~90% is available ram, not installed ram). set 1538 for 8 instances. if you have the pro version, we have bat files which spawn instances - easy.


----------



## r0l4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lays*
> 
> Keep in mind if everything except your primaries is on AUTO, you're not gaining much at all. Tertaries, RTL, secondaries are what makes all that speed usable, otherwise your latency and efficiency will go out the window.


Yes, everything else is on AUTO, only primaries set manually.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> looks promising... errors under 200% means critically unstable, clean thru 500 to 1000% is much better. also, by running 2000 in each instance you force very heavy use of the page file by windows (use ~90% is available ram, not installed ram). set 1538 for 8 instances. if you have the pro version, we have bat files which spawn instances - easy.


Copy that. Regarding pagefile, I monitor the Task Manager to make sure there's no swapping going on. The last instance is only set to 1000, for that reason, no activity in pagefile drive.


----------



## smrdelj

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> set adaptive mode vcore to the value you want the cpu to run at., leave CPU SVID on auto, set LLC to 5


Do you mean like this?:



Offset sign in "+"? Offset voltage "auto"?

On the other hand, i changed LLC from 4 to 5, what does it mean? more voltage release if neccesary? something like that i guess

I'm going to run tests now and see whats happen

EDIT: done x264 tests, temperature is quite higher this way than with manual voltage. It incresed from 75 to 80. Voltage goes up to 1.3##, it doesnt stick at 1.280 as max. I tried LLC 5 and also 4. Same thing. Seems that adaptative voltage will raise vcore always above the 1.280 i setted..

Did i configure it wrong?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> Do you mean like this?:
> 
> 
> 
> Offset sign in "+"? Offset voltage "auto"?
> 
> On the other hand, i changed LLC from 4 to 5, what does it mean? more voltage release if neccesary? something like that i guess
> 
> I'm going to run tests now and see whats happen
> 
> EDIT: done x264 tests, temperature is quite higher this way than with manual voltage. It incresed from 75 to 80. Voltage goes up to 1.3##, it doesnt stick at 1.280 as max. I tried LLC 5 and also 4. Same thing. Seems that adaptative voltage will raise vcore always above the 1.280 i setted..
> 
> Did i configure it wrong?


yes, just like that. LLC affects vdroop of vcore on this platform. if it is running high, put 20mV in offset and substract 20mV from turbo... some boards behave odd like that,


----------



## smrdelj

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes, just like that. LLC affects vdroop of vcore on this platform. if it is running high, put 20mV in offset and substract 20mV from turbo... some boards behave odd like that,


This was you suggested, right?:



It didnt work, my temps still hiting 80 quite quick, and also vcore continues going up to 1.296, asi if 1.280 wasnt limiting

I'm thinking on going back manual


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r0l4n*
> 
> The Ripjaws 3600C16 arrived yesterday, so far managed to get them stable at 3733C16 at 1.4v and at 3866C16 at 1.45v, but I cannot get them to even boot at 4000, no matter what timings or voltage (tried CAS up to 21 and voltage up to 1.5v). VCCIO and VCCSA are in the 1.2-1.25v range.
> 
> Is my motherboard limiting me here you think?
> 
> What vdimm is safe to keep for 24/7 with these?


Motherboards don't limit mild overclocking, the luck of the CPU does.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> I'm sorry man, but i did not get if you would recommend going adaptative or staying manual. If adaptative, i did not get how should i set each of the adaptative options i screeshoted in my last post. Thanks!


If you want to use adaptive offset just leave everything else on auto and just set the Vcore voltage to what you want in the end. That is how I have my setup done, I only changed two settings to overclock, I'm very efficient because I have been doing this for a long time.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> This was you suggested, right?:
> 
> 
> 
> It didnt work, my temps still hiting 80 quite quick, and also vcore continues going up to 1.296, asi if 1.280 wasnt limiting
> 
> I'm thinking on going back manual


manual is fine, adaptive works (for most) That overshoot is LLC related. try running 4. Remember, any vcore report to th eOS is in 16mV increments (bins) so 1.280 and 1.296V readings may be from a 1.285-1.291 actual.


----------



## TK421

Hey guys, is there a major disadvantage to using a 7700K OC on a Z170 motherboard? Should we buy Z270 motherboard to get better OC benefits?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> on ASUS boards you can leave this on AUTO whether using adaptive or manual override.


To be clear, that is just the motherboard deciding to have it on or off.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> Hey guys, is there a major disadvantage to using a 7700K OC on a Z170 motherboard? Should we buy Z270 motherboard to get better OC benefits?


No, I don't think so.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> This was you suggested, right?:
> 
> 
> 
> It didnt work, my temps still hiting 80 quite quick, and also vcore continues going up to 1.296, asi if 1.280 wasnt limiting
> 
> I'm thinking on going back manual


Adaptive or manual mode's not really going to change temps under load.

On unrelated note, so we talked about stress tests and the ram it uses. From my experience running Linpack and Realbench when you set it to use all ram it doesn't literally use every last bit of ram and cause your HDD to thrash. It uses close to it. I haven't set it up on Prime so it might behave differently.


----------



## peter2k

Username: Peter2k

CPU Model: i5 7600K

Base Clock: 100 Bclk

Core Multiplier:52

Core Frequency: 5200

Cache Frequency: 4800

Vcore in UEFI: 1.375
Vcore: 1.376

FCLK: 1000

Cooling Solution: delidded, Kraken x62

Stability Test: ASUS RealBench, 8 hours, all RAM (8GB)

Batch Number: Germany; Box is gone, sorry








sold my "old" Skylake in it
L642G169 ; or so it says on my IHS

Ram Speed: 3200 17-17-17-28 (is actually OC'ed from 2133, looking at new RAM, was a placeholder)

Ram Voltage: 1.28

VCCIO:
VCCSA:
Motherboard: Z170, ASUS Maximus VIII Formula
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: no AVX offset



after testing 5.2 is what I "settled" for, cache at 50 crashes at post, but didn't want to pour more voltage into it for next to no gain in performance

and I'm eyeing Trident RGB RAM with a rating of 3866, so I might need some headroom in voltage to make those work at full speed

5.3 I can get stable but requires 1.44v (though I let RealBench only run 4 hours with those settings, so might be just a tad higher)
5.4 I crash at windows desktop even with 1.488v and i don't really think increasing to 1.5 is something I'm going for (since CPU's seem to hold one over for years these days







)

edit:
also bump
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Charted.


----------



## Szinyak

Hi All,

If I want to test the OC system to be completely stable 24/7
Which stability test should I use Prime95 26.6 ; 28.7; 28.10 ? which better Small or Large FFT's ? 1h-2h enough.

Spec : 7700k 4,8ghz 1.280-1.296v

avx offset adjustment should be used or stability test should be switched off


----------



## smrdelj

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Adaptive or manual mode's not really going to change temps under load


I know, but i dont understand whats the advantage of adaptive over manual in my case. When idle my temps are identical in both modes. Remember that my freq is fixed at 4.8, it doesn't go down when idle.
Iguess that adaptive will only make sense (or any difference) if you have different speed clocks idle/load. Am i right?

On the other side, seeing that all of you are on highers vcores like 1.4 or so, i guess that my cooling solution is not efficient, right? I run 1.270 at 75°C on load. Could it be because im not delided?
I think it would be interesting at least as reference if people also provide their core temps to the stats, don't you think?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> I know, but i dont understand whats the advantage of adaptive over manual in my case. When idle my temps are identical in both modes. Remember that *my freq is fixed at 4.8*, it doesn't go down when idle.
> Iguess that adaptive will only make sense (or any difference) if you have different speed clocks idle/load. Am i right?
> 
> On the other side, seeing that all of you are on highers vcores like 1.4 or so, i guess that my cooling solution is not efficient, right? I run 1.270 at 75°C on load. Could it be because im not delided?
> I think it would be interesting at least as reference if people also provide their core temps to the stats, don't you think?


enable Speed Step (EIST) in bios and verify that windows power plan has min proc state = 0%. Otherwise you will not have different clocks at idle vs load.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> To be clear, that is just the motherboard deciding to have it on or off.


that's correct. disconnecting the link to SVID is based on manual override selected.


----------



## kongasdf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *r0l4n*
> 
> Thanks for your answers, 3866C16 sounds like it's all I'm going to get out of them, then.
> 
> I just ran a ~200% coverage HCI memtest, 43 degrees max temp on the dimms:


Pls give me your timings with Asrock Timing Configurator.
Check Qcode when sys start, and tell me the wrong train code
Sorry for my poor English

Motherboard also limitied overclocking!


----------



## r0l4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kongasdf*
> 
> Pls give me your timings with Asrock Timing Configurator.
> Check Qcode when sys start, and tell me the wrong train code
> Sorry for my poor English
> 
> Motherboard also limitied overclocking!


Sure, there you go:


There's unfortunately no qcode display in the Strix z270 boards...


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> I know, but i dont understand whats the advantage of adaptive over manual in my case. When idle my temps are identical in both modes. Remember that my freq is fixed at 4.8, it doesn't go down when idle.
> Iguess that adaptive will only make sense (or any difference) if you have different speed clocks idle/load. Am i right?
> 
> On the other side, seeing that all of you are on highers vcores like 1.4 or so, i guess that my cooling solution is not efficient, right? I run 1.270 at 75°C on load. Could it be because im not delided?
> I think it would be interesting at least as reference if people also provide their core temps to the stats, don't you think?


It's actually very simple

if you want max performance at all times

you set the power plan in windows to max performance

and to you're CPU will never down clock, even when idle

now if you want to be a bit easy on the CPU and let less voltage go through when it when it's not doing anything or just a light load then you could use the offset option, enable all other energy saving features in the UEFI, and use the balanced power option in windows

the end result would be this

if you're idle the CPU would clock down to 800Mhz

if it has something to do it "wakes up" and goes for a short amount of time either to max or some step in between

think of browser or email here

considerations are:
you want to safe some electricity?
or
you want you're chip to use less voltages when it's doing nothing, thus maybe, maybe increasing its life time

or you don't care actually and want max performance all the time

the energy saving is not that huge as a whole

there could be unsatbilty using offset

the CPU can increase its frequency faster then the voltage might rise for a stable OC
I'm talking about milliseconds here

it's just something nice maybe to have, but if you want max performance at all times, fixed would be better or same really


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *smrdelj*
> 
> I know, but i dont understand whats the advantage of adaptive over manual in my case. When idle my temps are identical in both modes. Remember that my freq is fixed at 4.8, it doesn't go down when idle.
> Iguess that adaptive will only make sense (or any difference) if you have different speed clocks idle/load. Am i right?
> 
> On the other side, seeing that all of you are on highers vcores like 1.4 or so, i guess that my cooling solution is not efficient, right? I run 1.270 at 75°C on load. Could it be because im not delided?
> I think it would be interesting at least as reference if people also provide their core temps to the stats, don't you think?


Adaptive offset will control the Vcore using VID with CPU load, clock speed, and temperature. The plus to adaptive offset is it can be more stable since it adjusts to CPU load.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Adaptive offset will control the Vcore using VID with CPU load, clock speed, and temperature. The plus to adaptive offset is it can be more stable since it adjusts to CPU load.


Just for clarity, Offset voltage is applied to the entire VID line, Adaptive voltage is only applied when turbo multipliers are issued in response to load, non-Turbo multipliers run at the VID requested. If you select the high power windows plan, the system will essentially run as though EIST has been disabled in bios.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Just for clarity, Offset voltage is applied to the entire VID line, Adaptive voltage is only applied when turbo multipliers are issued in response to load, non-Turbo multipliers run at the VID requested. If you select the high power windows plan, the system will essentially run as though EIST has been disabled in bios.


What owners manual are you reading from. All i do is set Adaptive offset and multiplier and leave everything else on auto including the OS. You make things sound so complicated and they are very simple in truth. Do you use Adaptive offset or have you used a OEM PC?

Adaptive =VID

Offset = VID + or -.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What owners manual are you reading from. All i do is set Adaptive offset and multiplier and leave everything else on auto including the OS. You make things sound so complicated and they are very simple in truth. Do you use Adaptive offset or have you used a OEM PC?
> 
> Adaptive =VID
> 
> Offset = VID + or -.


Manual? lol
You are using the wrong term.. there is no such thing as "Adaptive offset". Adaptive is an applied voltage, not an offset to the VID. That is what I was trying to clarify.
one can use an offset with adaptive turbo, but that's not the immediate subject.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Manual? lol
> You are using the wrong term.. there is no such thing as "Adaptive offset". Adaptive is an applied voltage, not an offset to the VID. That is what I was trying to clarify.
> one can use an offset with adaptive turbo, but that's not the immediate subject.


Well I help people with all different brands of motherboards and Gigabyte calls Adaptive/ DVID (Dynamic VID),if folks set the Dynamic VID to 0, then Vcore follows stock VID up to max stock turbo speed.

Adaptive offset is in the ASUS manual. Folks can use Adaptive by it self on ASUS, however it is the same as running optimized default, then it runs Automatically like 99% of the PCs in the world that have VID.

Folks can use DVID on Gigabyte by it self and set it to 0 or +0.075v or -0.075v

Here is a screenshot of Adaptive offset on Auto. That would just use VID for controlling the voltage 0 offset.



What motherboard do you have I can help you give it a try to see what is going on.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well I help people with all different brands of motherboards and Gigabyte calls Adaptive/ DVID (Dynamic VID),if folks set the Dynamic VID to 0, then Vcore follows stock VID up to max stock turbo speed.
> 
> Adaptive offset is in the ASUS manual. Folks can use Adaptive by it self on ASUS, however it is the same as running optimized default, then it runs Automatically like 99% of the PCs in the world that have VID.
> 
> Folks can use DVID on Gigabyte by it self and set it to 0 or +0.075v or -0.075v
> 
> Here is a screenshot of Adaptive offset on Auto. That would just use VID for controlling the voltage 0 offset.
> 
> 
> 
> *What motherboard do you have I can help you give it a try to see what is going on*.


4 ASUS boards, 2 AsRock running right now. THank you for offering to help, but I'll pass.


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well I help people with all different brands of motherboards and Gigabyte calls Adaptive/ DVID (Dynamic VID),if folks set the Dynamic VID to 0, then Vcore follows stock VID up to max stock turbo speed.
> 
> Adaptive offset is in the ASUS manual. Folks can use Adaptive by it self on ASUS, however it is the same as running optimized default, then it runs Automatically like 99% of the PCs in the world that have VID.
> 
> Folks can use DVID on Gigabyte by it self and set it to 0 or +0.075v or -0.075v
> 
> Here is a screenshot of Adaptive offset on Auto. That would just use VID for controlling the voltage 0 offset.
> 
> 
> 
> What motherboard do you have I can help you give it a try to see what is going on.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 4 ASUS boards, 2 AsRock running right now. THank you for offering to help, but I'll pass.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> *Adaptive offset will control the Vcore using VID with CPU load, clock speed, and temperature.* The plus to adaptive offset is it can be more stable since it adjusts to CPU load.


Got to admit, that is the very first time I've ever heard this version of how Adaptive works.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well I help people with all different brands of motherboards and Gigabyte calls Adaptive/ DVID (Dynamic VID),if folks set the Dynamic VID to 0, then Vcore follows stock VID up to max stock turbo speed.
> 
> Adaptive offset is in the ASUS manual. Folks can use Adaptive by it self on ASUS, however it is the same as running optimized default, then it runs Automatically like 99% of the PCs in the world that have VID.
> 
> Folks can use DVID on Gigabyte by it self and set it to 0 or +0.075v or -0.075v
> 
> Here is a screenshot of Adaptive offset on Auto. That would just use VID for controlling the voltage 0 offset.
> 
> What motherboard do you have I can help you give it a try to see what is going on.


Here's adaptive in a nutshell directly from Asus.

Quote:


> Adaptive Mode: Adaptive Mode was developed to account for the inadequacies of Offset Mode for overclocking. We use it to specify the voltage used when the CPU is faced with a heavy application load. The voltage we set is the maximum voltage the PCU is allowed to apply, which takes all the load-related guesswork hampering Offset mode out of the equation. *The other boon of Adaptive Mode is that it does not alter voltages for non-Turbo CPU ratios*, allowing us to enjoy the benefits of power saving without the voltage adjustment range issues presented by the Offset Mode function. We recommend Adaptive Mode for all normal overclocking.
> 
> To use Adaptive Mode, simply enter the full load voltage you wish to use in the Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage box. So, if you wish to set 1.20V for full load, just type 1.20 into the box. The target full-load voltage is shown in the Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage area.
> 
> *Note that the Adaptive voltage target works on the Turbo ratios only.* So, if you change the CPU strap and use a non-Turbo CPU ratio, the value in the Adaptive voltage setting box will not be applied. That's why there is the option to apply an offset when in Adaptive mode. The offset value is added or subtracted from the Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage box, and the total is displayed in the Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage pane. The side effect of applying an offset is that it affects the entire voltage stack - from idle to Turbo ratios, which can limit the usable offset voltage range.


----------



## hasukka

Amateur i7 overclocker here. Should I disable HyperThreading when I stress test my OC? My temps hit 85-88 even with 47x & 1.25V. No delid & HR02 Macho.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hasukka*
> 
> Amateur i7 overclocker here. Should I disable HyperThreading when I stress test my OC? My temps hit 85-88 even with 47x & 1.25V. No delid & HR02 Macho.


Leave hyperthreading enabled







with those temps maybe consider better cooling or a delid or both.


----------



## Gorhell

Is it me or my temps are really good? No Delid just stock i7 7700k with CM212X in push pull config. I feel like I don't need those AIO coolers anyway


----------



## MooMoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> Is it me or my temps are really good? No Delid just stock i7 7700k with CM212X in push pull config. I feel like I don't need those AIO coolers anyway


Really good? No.


----------



## Gorhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MooMoo*
> 
> Really good? No.


If I go with Kraken X52, what temps should I expect?


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> Is it me or my temps are really good? No Delid just stock i7 7700k with CM212X in push pull config. I feel like I don't need those AIO coolers anyway
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


What voltage is it at? I can't read it lol.


----------



## Gorhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> What voltage is it at? I can't read it lol.


I'm getting 1.25-1.3 Volt. I'm currently thinking if I should go AIO and be getting X52 later or I should stay with my CM212X not overclocking at the moment as I don't need it but would like to try and get 5.0ghz. Is it worth spending X52 and get lower temps or should I stick with my 212X as it can perform same as X52


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> I'm getting 1.25-1.3 Volt. I'm currently thinking if I should go AIO and be getting X52 later or I should stay with my CM212X not overclocking at the moment as I don't need it but would like to try and get 5.0ghz. Is it worth spending X52 and get lower temps or should I stick with my 212X as it can perform same as X52


Well, it will be better from the CM 212x to X52 but don't expect too much. Mine is clocked at 5GHz with 1.37v I get a max temp of 71-75c(30c ambient) on full load this is using a custom loop with 2x 280mm rads and a DDC-1T 10w pump + delidded. I'd imagine the x52 will reach around 80c at this voltage. We live in the same country too lol. Weather isn't really good for maximum oc lol.


----------



## Gorhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> Well, it will be better from the CM 212x to X52 but don't expect too much. Mine is clocked at 5GHz with 1.37v I get a max temp of 71-75c(30c ambient) on full load this is using a custom loop with 2x 280mm rads and a DDC-1T 10w pump + delidded. I'd imagine the x52 will reach around 80c at this voltage. We live in the same country too lol. Weather isn't really good for maximum oc lol.


Lol yeah. And you know Kraken X52 cost a lot here that's why I'm doubting to change my CM212X. How did you delidded yours? I don't see anyone selling locally the delidd tool here in our country.


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> Lol yeah. And you know Kraken X52 cost a lot here that's why I'm doubting to change my CM212X. How did you delidded yours? I don't see anyone selling locally the delidd tool here in our country.


Got myself a vice from a hardware store (you won't find one in mall hardware stores, it has to be those construction/powertools stores around the streets, well thats where I found mine







). I just used the vice only method carefully. Yes, the x52 costs a lot, you could instead opt for a swiftech H220x or h220 x2. (I cant believe the H220-x2 is just the same price as the x52 what?! LOL ditch the x52 and get the h220-x2 lol)


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> What voltage is it at? I can't read it lol.


Open pictures in a new tab to view in full size.


----------



## Gorhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> Got myself a vice from a hardware store (you won't find one in mall hardware stores, it has to be those construction/powertools stores around the streets, well thats where I found mine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). I just used the vice only method carefully. Yes, the x52 costs a lot, you could instead opt for a swiftech H220x or h220 x2. (I cant believe the H220-x2 is just the same price as the x52 what?! LOL ditch the x52 and get the h220-x2 lol)


My friend recommends me swiftech too but the kraken is sexy this is a hard choice lol. Nice that you did it by yourself, I won't risk mine though.


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> My friend recommends me swiftech too but the kraken is sexy this is a hard choice lol. Nice that you did it by yourself, I won't risk mine though.


Well, it wasn't my first delid thats why I got confident enough with doing it. Can't say much which performs better but I think both AIOs wouldn't be far from each other. I just like the expandability of the h220-x2.


----------



## 6u4rdi4n

Username: 6u4rdi4n
CPU Model: i7 7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore in UEFI: 1.280 manual mode
Vcore: 1.264
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Custom water cooling
Stability Test: x264 16T
Batch Number: Malaysia, L643G219
Ram Speed: 3200 16-18-18-36
Ram Voltage: 1.3530 (in bios)
VCCIO: auto
VCCSA: auto
Motherboard: Z270 (Asus Rog Strix Z270F)
LLC Setting: didn't touch.



Hope I got this right


----------



## OutlawII

Username: outlawii
CPU Model:i7 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 46
Vcore in UEFI: 1.35
Vcore: 1.344
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Ek blocks cutom loop
Stability Test: x264 normal priority 16 threads 8 hours

Batch Number: L642GO93 Malaysia
Ram Speed: G-Skill DDR-4 3200 CL15-15-15-35
Ram Voltage:1.35
VCCIO:
VCCSA:
Motherboard: Z270 Asus Hero ix
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments:


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Well I help people with all different brands of motherboards and Gigabyte calls Adaptive/ DVID (Dynamic VID),if folks set the Dynamic VID to 0, then Vcore follows stock VID up to max stock turbo speed.
> 
> Adaptive offset is in the ASUS manual. Folks can use Adaptive by it self on ASUS, however it is the same as running optimized default, then it runs Automatically like 99% of the PCs in the world that have VID.
> 
> Folks can use DVID on Gigabyte by it self and set it to 0 or +0.075v or -0.075v
> 
> Here is a screenshot of Adaptive offset on Auto. That would just use VID for controlling the voltage 0 offset.
> 
> 
> 
> *What motherboard do you have I can help you give it a try to see what is going on*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4 ASUS boards, 2 AsRock running right now. THank you for offering to help, *but I'll pass*.
Click to expand...

Per my rule gotta +R you for the entertainment ...








You have a job at the "State Department" just waiting if your so inclined









@Wingman ... JP is a very accomplished "overclocker" and yet finds the time to help people out whenever he can. I don't know where he finds the time! BUT Who knew ... right? Doesn't mean your help and contributions aren't ALSO appreciated, keep up the good work


----------



## Jbillz666

ok so i need some advice. Pretty sure I got a really crappy chip. Got her stable at 4.8 Ghz, but required 1.34 Vcore in bios with Turbo LLC. Vcore in HWmonitor shows 1.334 with max spikes of 1.37~1.38
Using the kraken x62 AIO cooler & temps are around 79 at peak with spikes of 83c.
Motherboard is gigabyte z270x gaming 7 with bios updated. Curious if im doing something wrong or this is just a **** chip. with stock bios settings, HW monitor reading 1.26 vcore during peak with spikes of 1.284 and a vid of 1.325

Really think i got a horrible chip. should I relid & try to go higher? spoke with intel and their max voltage per data sheet is 1.52 also contemplating just returning to retailer & getting a new one. not happy what so ever theres not much room to reach 5.0. this is for an editing machine where clock speed is the most important aspect of my build.

Advise appreciated.


----------



## Gorhell

This is worse. I"m on Kraken X52 and doing X264 test and I'm getting 80C and up temps while in my CM 212X I never get to 80C up it just spikes to 80C but never stays there.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbillz666*
> 
> ok so i need some advice. Pretty sure I got a really crappy chip. Got her stable at 4.8 Ghz, but required 1.34 Vcore in bios with Turbo LLC. Vcore in HWmonitor shows 1.334 with max spikes of 1.37~1.38
> Using the kraken x62 AIO cooler & temps are around 79 at peak with spikes of 83c.
> Motherboard is gigabyte z270x gaming 7 with bios updated. Curious if im doing something wrong or this is just a **** chip. with stock bios settings, HW monitor reading 1.26 vcore during peak with spikes of 1.284 and a vid of 1.325
> 
> Really think i got a horrible chip. should I relid & try to go higher? spoke with intel and their max voltage per data sheet is 1.52 also contemplating just returning to retailer & getting a new one. not happy what so ever theres not much room to reach 5.0. this is for an editing machine where clock speed is the most important aspect of my build.
> 
> Advise appreciated.


You want to return the Chip because it dose not overclock well for you, is that a ethical practices that should be done with all Intel chips for everyone?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You want to return the Chip because it dose not overclock well for you, is that a ethical practices that should be done with all Intel chips for everyone?


Well Intel isn't an underdog I need to feel sorry for
and many people seem to run cpu's at stock and feel fine with it

so playing the lottery a bit is not the end of the world ethically


----------



## Hulio225

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Well Intel isn't an underdog I need to feel sorry for
> and many people seem to run cpu's at stock and feel fine with it
> 
> so playing the lottery a bit is not the end of the world ethically


But you are not playing the lottery, you are cheating the lottery by giving your lottery ticket back after you havent wont anything xD


----------



## Jbillz666

I'm more concerned about it running at overly high voltages at stock &a not lasting.. I clearly asked for advice, not to be taken on a soapbox about my morals. If I return it un harmed they lose $0. If i were to brick it then return that would be a different story. Thanks for answering my question with a question tho. Totally helped.


----------



## ducegt

Sell it used for $200. You have to pay to play.


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbillz666*
> 
> I'm more concerned about it running at overly high voltages at stock &a not lasting.. I clearly asked for advice, not to be taken on a soapbox about my morals. If I return it un harmed they lose $0. If i were to brick it then return that would be a different story. Thanks for answering my question with a question tho. Totally helped.


That's up to you in regard to if you can take it in and get an exchange. The issue with trying to give a technical answer to your situation is... someone would have to have your board and a kaby lake. If you're wondering why... Well I don't have a Gigabyte Z270 board but I do have a Z170 (the Gaming G1). With the "updated" bios when I played around with my 7700K on the G1 I was seeing some odd voltage issues. The way that LLC worked compared to my 6700K and voltage set is quite different.

In comparison my ASRock, Asus and MSI Z170 boards all work consistently with my 7700K as expected.

The only Z270 board I have is an Asus IX Hero and my personal observation is I get odd core temp variance on my 7700K. What I mean here is that one core is 10-13 degrees warmer than my two coolest cores and the third is in between. I don't observe this on any of my Z170 boards. I've reapplied TIM etc ... I just always see the temp difference and using the same CPU block on my Z170 boards I don't see it.

Now going back to my Gigabyte board even using my 6700K which has a delid.. I'm seeing much different settings needed when using a "Kaby Lake" bios. The LLC options are not working the same and Dvid requires a much lower setting.

So... to be honest from my perspective... you could get another chip and still see in your settings higher voltage and temps. *Note* I'm not blaming your motherboard which my long winded response may seem to imply. I think some of what I see board to board... would be fixed by bios updates. Or maybe it's just me...


----------



## Jbillz666

@digitalwolf I'm very curious to this as well. It very well may be a bios / board issue, but I have no way of testing as no other board & no other chips. Just didn't expect kaby lake to require this much voltage at stock and haven't seen many of anyone with similar draw out the box.


----------



## Telstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You want to return the Chip because it dose not overclock well for you, is that a ethical practices that should be done with all Intel chips for everyone?


Is it ethical to sell unlocked cpu at a steep price premium with poor thermal characteristics and huge variation between samples?
Intel deserves that and more.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Digitalwolf*
> 
> That's up to you in regard to if you can take it in and get an exchange. The issue with trying to give a technical answer to your situation is... someone would have to have your board and a kaby lake. If you're wondering why... Well I don't have a Gigabyte Z270 board but I do have a Z170 (the Gaming G1). With the "updated" bios when I played around with my 7700K on the G1 I was seeing some odd voltage issues. The way that LLC worked compared to my 6700K and voltage set is quite different.
> 
> In comparison my ASRock, Asus and MSI Z170 boards all work consistently with my 7700K as expected.
> 
> The only Z270 board I have is an Asus IX Hero and my personal observation is *I get odd core temp variance on my 7700K. What I mean here is that one core is 10-13 degrees warmer than my two coolest cores and the third is in between.* I don't observe this on any of my Z170 boards. I've reapplied TIM etc ... I just always see the temp difference and using the same CPU block on my Z170 boards I don't see it.
> 
> Now going back to my Gigabyte board even using my 6700K which has a delid.. I'm seeing much different settings needed when using a "Kaby Lake" bios. The LLC options are not working the same and Dvid requires a much lower setting.
> 
> So... to be honest from my perspective... you could get another chip and still see in your settings higher voltage and temps. *Note* I'm not blaming your motherboard which my long winded response may seem to imply. I think some of what I see board to board... would be fixed by bios updates. Or maybe it's just me...


try setting CPU PLL and VCCU PLL manually and up one notch from "standard". It may simply be an undervolted DTS channel.


----------



## Gorhell

I doubt I can overclock with these temps and I'm not reaching 4.5 yet. It's just 4.4


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> I doubt I can overclock with these temps and I'm not reaching 4.5 yet. It's just 4.4


gotta be something wrong with the cooler mount. re mount the cooler and use a quality TIM.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Telstar*
> 
> Is it ethical to sell unlocked cpu at a steep price premium with poor thermal characteristics and huge variation between samples?
> Intel deserves that and more.


There is no guarantee for overclocking. You do get more for what you pay for with the K series without overclocking. What they do is practical for their business and ethical. Pretty sure their are organizitions who enforce those values through mandates and whom will gladly hear your complaint.


----------



## spddmn24

Seems like I always lose the cache lotto. My chip will do 5.2 no problem but I can't get the cache to be stable past 4.6.


----------



## misoonigiri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *6u4rdi4n*
> 
> Username: 6u4rdi4n
> CPU Model: i7 7700K
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4200
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.280 manual mode
> Vcore: 1.264
> FCLK: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Custom water cooling
> Stability Test: x264 16T
> Batch Number: Malaysia, L643G219
> Ram Speed: 3200 16-18-18-36
> Ram Voltage: 1.3530 (in bios)
> VCCIO: auto
> VCCSA: auto
> Motherboard: Z270 (Asus Rog Strix Z270F)
> LLC Setting: didn't touch.
> 
> 
> 
> Hope I got this right


Just wondering is 4.22 fps abt low for 7700k @5.0GHz?
I'm thinking it should be about 5+ fps, since my 6700k @4.725GHz gets abt 4.75fps


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Telstar*
> 
> Is it ethical to sell unlocked cpu at a steep price premium with poor thermal characteristics and huge variation between samples?
> Intel deserves that and more.


+1 and then more or less force us to void our warranty by deliding to fix what should have been done in the first place!


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah.. Intel should have just soldered a chip of this capability instead of this Fischer-Price TIM nonsense.


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> I doubt I can overclock with these temps and I'm not reaching 4.5 yet. It's just 4.4
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


The X52 has a 240mm rad right? Hmmm, I expected it would be at most around ~75c. Can turn the pump to max RPM or is that it? I see the fans are just running at 52% though. I'm wondering if the temps would be better at full speed.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbillz666*
> 
> I'm more concerned about it running at overly high voltages at stock &a not lasting.. I clearly asked for advice, not to be taken on a soapbox about my morals. If I return it un harmed they lose $0. If i were to brick it then return that would be a different story. Thanks for answering my question with a question tho. Totally helped.


Just return it if you can

or sell it used otherwise

I don't see the Mainboard making such big differences

it's not a lowly priced entry board, is it? ;-)

my delidd didn't do anything for max clocks
only temps
though in turn I could pour down a lot more voltage down its throat, but this only got me another 100Mhz more
not worth it, also temps shot back again


----------



## Gorhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> The X52 has a 240mm rad right? Hmmm, I expected it would be at most around ~75c. Can turn the pump to max RPM or is that it? I see the fans are just running at 52% though. I'm wondering if the temps would be better at full speed.


Not much difference I'm still getting 80C with all 100% fan and pump


----------



## 6u4rdi4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *misoonigiri*
> 
> Just wondering is 4.22 fps abt low for 7700k @5.0GHz?
> I'm thinking it should be about 5+ fps, since my 6700k @4.725GHz gets abt 4.75fps


I have no idea. I used the custom one linked in the first post ( https://mega.nz/#!ywAFDQQQ!hEQCeRXDKpHoeRYEaspux3ZA9Smx6tp8h0leb7ZHdJo )


----------



## Jbillz666

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Just return it if you can
> 
> or sell it used otherwise
> 
> I don't see the Mainboard making such big differences
> 
> it's not a lowly priced entry board, is it? ;-)
> 
> my delidd didn't do anything for max clocks
> only temps
> though in turn I could pour down a lot more voltage down its throat, but this only got me another 100Mhz more
> not worth it, also temps shot back again


Definitely not a cheap board has dual bios and very in depth overclocking capabillities, im also getting a Status code of C0 on my debug led which is reserved for future CPU related code so it seems there very well may be something wrong with this chip.

Filed an RMA and will be exchanging the CPU. lets hope I get one of better quality.

Ordering Relid kit in the mean time because no matter how this ends I need lower thermals than 80c at peak.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Well Intel isn't an underdog I need to feel sorry for
> and many people seem to run cpu's at stock and feel fine with it
> 
> so playing the lottery a bit is not the end of the world ethically


There is a way to get guaranteed overclocks, just buy a binned chip. If it's that important to you, you should have bought one. It's also the shop's problem when they have to accept returns.



> Originally Posted by *6u4rdi4n*





> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*


Charted


Sample Size14  Average OC5.06Median OC5.05Average Vcore1.35Median Vcore1.36


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> There is a way to get guaranteed overclocks, just buy a binned chip. If it's that important to you, you should have bought one. It's also the shop's problem when they have to accept returns.
> Charted
> 
> 
> Sample Size14  Average OC5.06Median OC5.05Average Vcore1.35Median Vcore1.36


actually it's not to me

but then had a stroke of luck hitting 5.2 with my 7600K


----------



## OutlawII

Thanks Wizzie!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbillz666*
> 
> I'm more concerned about it running at overly high voltages at stock &a not lasting.. I clearly asked for advice, not to be taken on a soapbox about my morals. If I return it un harmed they lose $0. If i were to brick it then return that would be a different story. Thanks for answering my question with a question tho. Totally helped.


You don't know what you are saying Intel sets the stock VID at the factory it will last 10+ years running stock. When you return the Processor to the store they have to send it back to intel for a warranty we all loos when people do that for no honest reason. The Intel Processor comes with a 3 year warranty for stock use.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Telstar*
> 
> Is it ethical to sell unlocked cpu at a steep price premium with poor thermal characteristics and huge variation between samples?
> Intel deserves that and more.


Performance Tuning Protection Plan Link: https://click.intel.com/tuningplan/

What is the Performance Tuning Protection Plan? ?
The Performance Tuning Protection Plan is an additional plan that a customer can purchase to cover processor failures caused by operating the eligible processor outside of Intel's published specifications.

Does this mean that Intel is supporting or encouraging overclocking?
No. While we will, under the Plan, replace an eligible processor that fails while running outside of Intel's specifications, we will not provide any assistance with configuration, data recovery, failure of associated parts, or any other activities or issues associated with the processor or system resulting from overclocking or otherwise running outside of Intel's published specifications.

Does this mean that the Intel processors have problems and need this Plan?
No. Intel is not offering this Plan as a result of issues with the reliability of the processor. The Plan is offered solely to replace a processor in the event the processor fails due to overclocking. .
http://click.intel.com/tuningplan/faq


----------



## Gorhell

Fixed my temps finally. I blame the NZXT Kraken X52 bracket and standoff is loose before attaching the pump that's why I make it tighten first and that's the reason there's a gap between pump and the CPU I remount the kraken x52 ignoring the loose and attach the pump right away and it works.


----------



## ducegt

Its the same with corsair. I had to use the bracket backwards for a 1156 board and now the slots for the mount often snap out of the frame. Very frustrating.


----------



## Gorhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Its the same with corsair. I had to use the bracket backwards for a 1156 board and now the slots for the mount often snap out of the frame. Very frustrating.


It's my first AIO so I don't have any idea that the standoff and bracket supposed to be loose until you install the pump itself, Now I can overclock


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> It's my first AIO so I don't have any idea that the standoff and bracket supposed to be loose until you install the pump itself, Now I can overclock


it's designed like that, but it just didn't get tight enough on a previous board of mine.


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> Fixed my temps finally. I blame the NZXT Kraken X52 bracket and standoff is loose before attaching the pump that's why I make it tighten first and that's the reason there's a gap between pump and the CPU I remount the kraken x52 ignoring the loose and attach the pump right away and it works.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


There we go, lol I knew I should be around 75C. I wonder what temps it will give you if vcore is at 1.35~1.4v. With my custom loop, I don't want to reach 1.4v just yet until I get a proper water block and new CLU/Conductonaut. I'm already around the low 70c at 1.37v. (I really hate our weather LOL)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> Fixed my temps finally. I blame the NZXT Kraken X52 bracket and standoff is loose before attaching the pump that's why I make it tighten first and that's the reason there's a gap between pump and the CPU I remount the kraken x52 ignoring the loose and attach the pump right away and it works.


well done.


----------



## misoonigiri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *6u4rdi4n*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *misoonigiri*
> 
> Just wondering is 4.22 fps abt low for 7700k @5.0GHz?
> I'm thinking it should be about 5+ fps, since my 6700k @4.725GHz gets abt 4.75fps
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea. I used the custom one linked in the first post ( https://mega.nz/#!ywAFDQQQ!hEQCeRXDKpHoeRYEaspux3ZA9Smx6tp8h0leb7ZHdJo )
Click to expand...

My mistake - apologies! I just noticed your x264 window is showing progress & not completed loop results like others - probably your saved log file will show true results at 5+ fps


----------



## Gorhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> There we go, lol I knew I should be around 75C. I wonder what temps it will give you if vcore is at 1.35~1.4v. With my custom loop, I don't want to reach 1.4v just yet until I get a proper water block and new CLU/Conductonaut. I'm already around the low 70c at 1.37v. (I really hate our weather LOL)


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> well done.


Thanks guys! I'll try to overclock and see how far I can get, I just need to setup my Raspberry Pi Server for now.


----------



## Telstar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> http://click.intel.com/tuningplan/faq


Yeah, pay 25-30$ on top of the cpu price that doesnt protect you from a dud overclocker. Useful only for deep freeze kind of damages.
As other said, if one *needs* a good cpu, should buy a binned one.


----------



## DiesIrae

Quick question - does disabling cores on Kaby Lake also reduce cache? For example, if you were to disable 2 cores on an i7, would that make it the same as an i3 (4MB L3) or does the L3 cache still stay at 8MB? Just curious.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DiesIrae*
> 
> Quick question - does disabling cores on Kaby Lake also reduce cache? For example, if you were to disable 2 cores on an i7, would that make it the same as an i3 (4MB L3) or does the L3 cache still stay at 8MB? Just curious.


cache is unaffected.


----------



## EniGma1987

Nice to see anyone one of your great threads here @Darkwizzie. I have had my 7700K for a while but havent played with it much. Ill be sure and get around to it over these next couple weekends and contribute my results to the thread.


----------



## outofmyheadyo

Would u guys say its worth it to go from a potato 6700k that cant do 4.7 so using it at 4.6 @ 1.360v to a 7700k thinking it would atleast manage 5ghz, would cost me 30eur for the upgrade.


----------



## ducegt

For 30 euro go for it.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *outofmyheadyo*
> 
> Would u guys say its worth it to go from a potato 6700k that cant do 4.7 so using it at 4.6 @ 1.360v to a 7700k thinking it would atleast manage 5ghz, would cost me 30eur for the upgrade.


For that kind of money absolutely, there is no guarantee you will achieve 5 Ghz but your odds are pretty good.


----------



## outofmyheadyo

Well that was a quick deal just finished installing this puppy got a new closed box 7700k for 305eur and have a buyer for my 6700k for 300eur so not to shabby for a 5eur upgrade whatever the oc on the kaby its worth 5 eur for the newer cpu anyway, ill let ya know how it clocks








I also got some CLU and the 3D printed delid tool here I'll see how it does normally and if it's promising ill scalp that puppy tomorrow.


----------



## Sand3853

Hey guys, I have a temperature related question...I have my 7600K in an NZXT Manta with a custom loop (XSPC Raystorm block, 2 HWLabs thin 240mm Radiators and gpu block on RX480)... The chip hits 5 ghz easily with 1.38v, but the tempts seem really high. I am peaking into the 70's and under continued use it sometimes starts to climb. Would this be normal for this chip? I know that my cooling is limited due to space and such, but I want to make sure that I am at least in the ballpark on temps before start tinkering with the loop.

*assuming that it is my loop that is the problem... there is more than enough flow, so the pump isnt an issue, and I know heat is being transfered, as the loop heats (marginally) up as the cpu gets warmer.*

I hope this all makes sense...been tearing my hair out trying to figure this out.


----------



## outofmyheadyo

The problem is the subpar thermalpaste intel decided to use combine that with the hefty oc and not the most potent wc setup, and thats what u get, but personally I wouldn't worry about 80s. You can try to delid aswell people get 20c or sometimes more from it. But it will void your warranty.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *outofmyheadyo*
> 
> The problem is the subpar thermalpaste intel decided to use combine that with the hefty oc and not the most potent wc setup, and thats what u get, but personally I wouldn't worry about 80s. You can try to delid aswell people get 20c or sometimes more from it. But it will void your warranty.


It's more of a gapping issue than a paste issue.


----------



## scracy

Based on my personal experience both my 6700K and 7700K are delidded yet on the same loop same board with same ambient temperature with 1.39V on the 7700K and 1.45V on the 7600K running the same benchmarks with same settings the 7700K runs about 8 degrees hotter under load than the 6700K does with more volts. Kaby definitely runs hotter than skylake.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Telstar*
> 
> Yeah, pay 25-30$ on top of the cpu price that doesnt protect you from a dud overclocker. Useful only for deep freeze kind of damages.
> As other said, if one *needs* a good cpu, should buy a binned one.


Well if they would all overclock the same Intel would just sell them like they do know at 4.2-4.5Ghz.


----------



## Man from Poland

I have a little problem after my 1st cpu delid. Core of 0 and 2 heats up more than 1 and 3, Where I made a mistake. Bad imposed liquid metal? Average temperature dropped 30 degrees, but a look at the temperature on cores. Difference between the core 0,2 and 1,3 is 4-6 degrees why ?!


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Man from Poland*
> 
> I have a little problem after my 1st cpu delid. Core of 0 and 2 heats up more than 1 and 3, Where I made a mistake. Bad imposed liquid metal? Average temperature dropped 30 degrees, but a look at the temperature.


Mine is the same. sometimes the difference is 20c. Both before and after delid. I don't think you did anything wrong. I'm not going to redo my CLU but please let me know if you do and what results you see.


----------



## OutlawII

Anyone try any of the mobo auto overclocks? Now that i did mine manually i think i will try it see what it comes up with.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Man from Poland*
> 
> I have a little problem after my 1st cpu delid. Core of 0 and 2 heats up more than 1 and 3, Where I made a mistake. Bad imposed liquid metal? Average temperature dropped 30 degrees, but a look at the temperature on cores. Difference between the core 0,2 and 1,3 is 4-6 degrees why ?!


if you are referring to the lower picture - this is normal variance between cores. A delta of 4C is normal.


----------



## oparr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Based on my personal experience both my 6700K and 7700K are delidded yet on the same loop same board with same ambient temperature with 1.39V on the 7700K and 1.45V on the 7600K running the same benchmarks with same settings the 7700K runs about 8 degrees hotter under load than the 6700K does with more volts. Kaby definitely runs hotter than skylake.


Asus seems to disagree;

http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/
Quote:


> Immediately apparent from this data is the fact that Kaby Lake is very power efficient. Sub-150-Watt power consumption when dealing with the nasty loads of Prime95 at 5GHz is incredible. Even if you were to find a gem Skylake CPU capable of operating at the same frequency, power levels would be up around the 200 Watt mark to obtain stability.


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oparr*
> 
> Asus seems to disagree;
> 
> http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


Power consumption and heat output are slightly different in this instance.


----------



## oparr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> Power consumption and heat output are slightly different in this instance.


Efficiency defines the relationship between the two. I suspect what we're seeing are comparisons skewed by sample variances....Example, a poorly efficient SKYL vs a very efficient KBYL and vice versa.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> Power consumption and heat output are slightly different in this instance.


... and it's VERY hard to achieve the same block mount quality, unless you go at it like SkineeLabs use to.


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oparr*
> 
> Efficiency defines the relationship between the two. I suspect what we're seeing are comparisons skewed by sample variances....Example, a poorly efficient SKYL vs a very efficient KBYL and vise versa.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ... and it's VERY hard to achieve the same block mount quality, unless you go at it like SkineeLabs use to.


Lots of different variables......between what is going and ultimately what is coming out, not to mention how it is measured.


----------



## oparr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ... and it's VERY hard to achieve the same block mount quality, unless you go at it like SkineeLabs use to.


Disagreeing with Asus? That's a first.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oparr*
> 
> Disagreeing with Asus? That's a first.


The thing is, Raja never said that it ran cooler in the quote that you provided, nor in the entire article for that matter.

He spoke of efficiency which doesn't directly translate into cooler.


----------



## spddmn24

Is 120 watts @ 1.408v with the occasional spike to 1.424v in realbench anything to be concerned about for chip degradation? Gaming peaks to about 105 watts max in bf1 with it obviously running below that the majority of the time.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> Is 120 watts @ 1.408v with the occasional spike to 1.424v in realbench anything to be concerned about for chip degradation? Gaming peaks to about 105 watts max in bf1 with it obviously running below that the majority of the time.


According to Intel's study into the 14nm process node, Skylake and Kaby have the same degradation at 1.5v as Haswell did at 1.35v, and many people ran Haswell at those kinds of volts and never had issues so I really dont think you should be worried about degradation on 14nm till pushing past that 1.5v area.


----------



## oparr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The thing is, Raja never said that it ran cooler in the quote that you provided, nor in the entire article for that matter.
> 
> He spoke of efficiency which doesn't directly translate into cooler.


Waste of time. And the last thing I want to appear as is an Asus fan boy....Bigger fish to fry.


----------



## AlExAlExAlEx

Hey guys.

I have a i7 7700k cooled by a corsair h110 in a haf x with plently of extra fans. (radiator is setup in push/pull)

When running the custom x264 benchmark from the op w/ the cpu at 5.0, cache at 4.6 and manual vcore at 1.350 (up to 1.376 in windows) I get very high temps of 95*C

I tried reseating the cpu cooler thimking I applied paste wromg, I checked if the fans and pump were working, everything is in order.

It sits in 35*C in idle so it's just the load it doesn't like.

My ambient temp is also mildly high at 25*C

Is it time to consider delidding? Any other suggestions?


----------



## Man from Poland

is normal temp. i cant get on your voltage 5ghz but 4.9 1.37 whos this 92C 5ghz 1.42 whos hit 100c. After delid i can get 80. max temp is 70-75


----------



## outofmyheadyo

Well that turned out to be interesting evening, I had the 3D printed delid tool for skylake, wich I blindly hoped to work for kabylake, but as it turns out their IHS are shaped differently and it did not work.
So instead of putting the delid plan on a hold for a week and spending 30€ needlessly I grabbed a razorblade wrapped some tape around it and delidded it this way, took like a whole minute!
I used CLU on the core and not on the inside of the IHS, between the cpu and the cooler i applied some CLU aswell, worked like a charm.
Now onto the temperatures ( I run a Noctua C14S cooler with the fan set @ 50% power, that means 6v and just under 700rpm, just because I dont want to hear it or any part of my PC so its SILENT only fans are the CPU and the ones on my GPU the fan on my PSU has never moved as far as i know ), my ambient is ~22c measured by my aquaero.
All tests were ran on a 7700K @ 50x core @ manual voltage @ 1.35v + LLC5 = 1.360v under load, memory was set to XMP ( tridentZ 3200 14-14-14-34-2T ) and did not change any other settings.
Before the delid I ran one loop of the custom X264 on the same settings and stopped because the hottest cores hit 90c








But now after the delid I ran 3 loops of the custom x264 and the hottest cores were 68c 68c 66c 62c I am really happy with the result and can truly reccomend delidding your kabylake if temperatures are ridiculous. I also used clear nailpolish to cover the doodads in danger of being shortcircuited on the pcb just incase, I havent really tried going past 5ghz yet, but I`m sure to try and let you know how it went, but I am happy with where it is currently 5ghz on a good aircooler with fan set on 6v an inaudible setup








I am sure I could lover the temps more when cranking up the fan, but I`ll take silence over few degrees anyday!





Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!















I posted it in the delidding thread, but I quess it might be here aswell, conclusion to the wall of text, DELID your KABYLAKE and enjoy!









I got a 22c+ tempdrop from delidding, what`s like 30 minutes of work?


----------



## ducegt

I must be a slow poke because it took me a good 3 hours!


----------



## JoeUbi

Moving my 6700k to my girlfriend's rig and throwing a 7700k in mine.... Hopefully the silicon lottery does me right.


----------



## damstr

Something I noticed after updating to the latest CPU Z. I have my voltage set to 1.26v in the BIOS manual. In Windows in CPU Z and HWInfo my VID averages around 1.23 @ 4.9GHz.

Max HWInfo reported after 2 hours of handbrake was 1.25v.

Also my VID drops to .8 when idle. Not that I am complaining but is this new to the Z270 chipset?

Hottest I'm seeing in HWInfo is 79C. My delid kit is on the way. I am thinking 1.26/1.27 will be stable @ 5GHz with the temp drop.

This seems like a great chip for sure.

EDIT: I am not using LLC btw.


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *damstr*
> 
> Something I noticed after updating to the latest CPU Z. I have my voltage set to 1.26v in the BIOS manual. In Windows in CPU Z and HWInfo my VID averages around 1.23 @ 4.9GHz.
> 
> Max HWInfo reported after 2 hours of handbrake was 1.25v.
> 
> Also my VID drops to .8 when idle. Not that I am complaining but is this new to the Z270 chipset?
> 
> Hottest I'm seeing in HWInfo is 79C. My delid kit is on the way. I am thinking 1.26/1.27 will be stable @ 5GHz with the temp drop.
> 
> This seems like a great chip for sure.
> 
> EDIT: I am not using LLC btw.


Not new, vdroop, this is why most use LLC. VID will fluctuate and result of vcore.


----------



## Gorhell

why the hell I'm setting 5ghz in bios but HWINFO and CPU-Z reports its only 4.4Ghz? Why I can't get it to 5ghz? is it because my temps are high and the PC won't let me go higher than 4.4ghz?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> why the hell I'm setting 5ghz in bios but HWINFO and CPU-Z reports its only 4.4Ghz? Why I can't get it to 5ghz? is it because my temps are high and the PC won't let me go higher than 4.4ghz?


Based on the overwhelming amount of information you've provided, maybe we can take a few guesses.

-your OC is crashing and defaulting before you actually make it to Windows.

-your not saving the overclock before reboot

Take a little time and explain in detail what you are doing or provide some screen captures from BIOS (f12).


----------



## Gorhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Based on the overwhelming amount of information you've provided, maybe we can take a few guesses.
> 
> -your OC is crashing and defaulting before you actually make it to Windows.
> 
> -your not saving the overclock before reboot
> 
> Take a little time and explain in detail what you are doing or provide some screen captures from BIOS (f12).


Well what I did is set my VCORE to manual and do 1.3V and set Ai overclock tuner to manual BLCK to 100 disable asus multicore enhancement sync all cores to 50 and save it


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> Well what I did is set my VCORE to manual and do 1.3V and set Ai overclock tuner to manual BLCK to 100 disable asus multicore enhancement sync all cores to 50 and save it


Have you tried seeing if 4.8 GHz or something lower works first? You're Vcore may not be enough for 5 GHz as each chip is very different in what they require.


----------



## Gorhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Have you tried seeing if 4.8 GHz or something lower works first? You're Vcore may not be enough for 5 GHz as each chip is very different in what they require.


Got it working there's a new bios update. I updated to 3007, I never use those asus 3rd party so I didn't know

Question why is X264 Stress test makes my CPU reach 70-80C+ while others like prime95 XTU and other games example is watch dogs 2 makes my CPU tempos only into 60-70C


----------



## Gorhell

Well Here's mine. My temps spikes upto 80C+ but never stays there. Hoping I'll be on the list

User name: Gorhell
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100Mhz
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000Mhz
Cache Frequency: 4200Mhz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.3V
Vcore: 1.321V
FCLK: 1000Mhz
Cooling Solution: NZXT Kraken X52
Stability Test: OCCT 4.4.2 1Hour Large Data Set

Batch Number: Malaysia L639G102
Ram Speed: 1x16GB XMP 2400Mhz 15-15-15-35-2T
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: Auto
Ram Voltage: 1.21V
Motherboard: Asus Maximus VIII Ranger
LLC Setting: Auto
Misc Comments:


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> why the hell I'm setting 5ghz in bios but HWINFO and CPU-Z reports its only 4.4Ghz? Why I can't get it to 5ghz? is it because my temps are high and the PC won't let me go higher than 4.4ghz?
> 
> 
> 
> *Based on the overwhelming amount of information you've provided, maybe we can take a few guesses.
> *
> -your OC is crashing and defaulting before you actually make it to Windows.
> 
> -your not saving the overclock before reboot
> 
> Take a little time and explain in detail what you are doing or provide some screen captures from BIOS (f12).
Click to expand...

This cracked me up ... +R









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> Well Here's mine. My temps spikes upto 80C+ but never stays there. Hoping I'll be on the list
> 
> User name: Gorhell
> CPU Model: 7700K
> Base Clock: 100Mhz
> Core Multiplier: 52
> Core Frequency: 5000Mhz
> Cache Frequency: 4200Mhz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.3V
> Vcore: 1.321V
> FCLK: 1000Mhz
> Cooling Solution: NZXT Kraken X52
> Stability Test: OCCT 4.4.2 1Hour Large Data Set
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L639G102
> Ram Speed: 1x16GB XMP 2400Mhz 15-15-15-35-2T
> VCCIO: Auto
> VCCSA: Auto
> Ram Voltage: 1.21V
> Motherboard: Asus Maximus VIII Ranger
> LLC Setting: Auto
> Misc Comments:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Pretty nice, especially considering your ambients are pushing 90F! ... get some air conditioning and/or a delid








Your multiplier should be 50 ... and I thought something was wrong with OCCT as you were only pulling 88w ... just shows how "power efficient" Kabylake is! Would like to see a Realbench run as I think it is a bit tougher


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> This cracked me up ... +R


Thank you sir!









I know when I have a problem others are more than willing to help provided I put just the slightest amount of effort into my request.


----------



## Gorhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> This cracked me up ... +R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> Pretty nice, especially considering your ambients are pushing 90F! ... get some air conditioning and/or a delid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your multiplier should be 50 ... and I thought something was wrong with OCCT as you were only pulling 88w ... just shows how "power efficient" Kabylake is! Would like to see a Realbench run as I think it is a bit tougher


Yes Corrected it now. delidd is impossible here, AC would be the best way.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Thank you sir!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know when I have a problem others are more than willing to help provided I put just the slightest amount of effort into my request.


My bad its 3AM here and tired.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*
> 
> Yes Corrected it now. delidd is impossible here, AC would be the best way.
> My bad its 3AM here and tired.


No worries. We all have our shining moments.









Delid is always possible if you really want it bad enough.


----------



## outofmyheadyo

why is delid impossible ?


----------



## Gorhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> No worries. We all have our shining moments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Delid is always possible if you really want it bad enough.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *outofmyheadyo*
> 
> why is delid impossible ?


Well Yes If I really want it badly it's possible but I might not go there for now. I have to order it overseas as there no locally available here. I don't want to risk doing it since this will be my first time deliding. Maybe in the future when deliding is common


----------



## outofmyheadyo

I`ll add mine aswell.

User name: outofmyheadyo
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100Mhz
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000Mhz
Cache Frequency: 4200Mhz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.350
Vcore: 1.360 ( actual voltage it shows under load, with my LLC @ 5 )
FCLK: 1000Mhz
Cooling Solution: Noctua C14S @ 700rpm @ 22c ambient
Stability Test: custom x264 10 hours 80 loops, 16 threads, normal priority

Batch Number: L644G993 Malaysia
Ram Speed: 2x8GB Gskill TridentZ F4-3200C14D-16GTZ 3200 @ 14-14-14-34-2T-560
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: Auto
Ram Voltage: 1.35v
Motherboard: Asus Maximus VIII RANGER
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: havent really tried lowering the voltage for 5ghz, it did not like runnin 5.1 @ that so i settled for now.


----------



## erikinsc

User name: erikinsc
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 101Mhz
Core Multiplier: 51
Core Frequency: 5150Mhz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.39
FCLK: 1000Mhz
Cooling Solution: H110i

temp.JPG 168k .JPG file


----------



## ducegt

Here is mine after delidding...

User name: ducegt
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency: 5200
Cache Frequency: 4800
Vcore in UEFI: +270
Vcore: 1.424
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delidded H115i
Stability Test: 8 Hours RealBench

Batch Number: L639F977
Ram Speed: 3600 15-15-15-35 2T
VCCIO: 1.2
VCCSA: 1.2
Ram Voltage: 1.35v
Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty Gaming Z270 K6. BIOS: 1.22A
LLC Setting: 1
Misc Comments: 0 AVX Offset Ratio. Ambient 22C


----------



## damstr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> Not new, vdroop, this is why most use LLC. VID will fluctuate and result of vcore.


I thought manual vcore meant a static vcore 24/7. Isn't that what is adaptive is for?


----------



## OutlawII

For all of you with Asus boards here is the proper way to setup c-states running adaptive voltage. I couldnt get my voltage to scale with my clocks until i set it up this way.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> For all of you with Asus boards here is the proper way to setup c-states running adaptive voltage. I couldnt get my voltage to scale with my clocks until i set it up this way.


Thanks for sharing, but it's odd that you had to do anything extra. I simply carried over my manual voltage to adaptive.

I dropped my manual voltage requirement into the additional turbo and left offset set to auto. I then set IA AC Load Line and IA DC Load Line both to .01 per Raja's instructions in his EdgeUp Kaby Lake guide and boom, perfect voltage scaling.


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *damstr*
> 
> I thought manual vcore meant a static vcore 24/7. Isn't that what is adaptive is for?


Ya I'm not sure what they meant. LLC as far as I understand it is to control droop under load... whether that means voltage going up, down or staying near what you have set (relative to your LLC setting).

Once upon a time I swear that with manual... you could get voltage to change with C States. From what I've seen posted since Z270 comes out that seems to not be the case. Well obviously you could always set a fixed clock and voltage then it wouldn't change. Yet once upon a time I swear that by not using a fixed clock combined with C States you could get voltage to drop (at least some) with manual voltage. Then again my memory isn't that great anymore.

I also seem to remember it used to be a thing to disable C States when using adaptive... yet I see people posting that they can't get their voltage to scale unless they set C States a certain way. I disable C States with adaptive and I see voltage scaling.

I know my response is about more things than you were replying to... just sometimes I think I'm starting to lose my mind in regards to how things work... that I've been doing for a long time (lol).,


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *damstr*
> 
> I thought manual vcore meant a static vcore 24/7. Isn't that what is adaptive is for?


Adaptive Mode: Adaptive voltage affects voltage for Turbo multiplier ratios only. Unlike Offset, using Adaptive does not affect idle/light load Vcore. Therefore, Adaptive mode is the preferred method for overclocking Haswell processors if one wishes to retain dynamic voltage changes according to processor load without running into issues with idle Vcore becoming too low.. There is one issue with Offset and Adaptive Mode that needs to be taken into account. The processor contains a power control unit which requests voltage based upon software load. When the PCU detects AVX instructions, it will ramp Vcore automatically beyond normal load voltage. There is no way to lock Vcore to prevent this if using Offset or Adapative Mode. This is pre-programmed by Intel into the PCU. As an example, a CPU is perfectly stable at 1.25V using a manual voltage (static), if Adaptive or Offset Mode is used instead, it is impossible to lock the core voltage when running software that contains AVX instruction sets - stress tests such as AIDA and Prime contain AVX instruction sets. When the AVX instructions are detected by the PCU, the core voltage will be ramped an additional ~0.1V over your target voltage - so 1.25V will become ~1.35V under AVX load. If you intend to run heavy load AVX software, we recommend using Manual Vcore, NOT Adaptive or Offset Mode. Most of us do not run AVX related software, so this is a non-issue. Either way, dialing in an overclock using Manual Vcore to determine how much voltage the processor needs under full load is best - Adaptive or Offset mode can be used to match the stable voltage later on. Simply type the target load voltage into the entry box "Additional Turbo Mode CPU core voltage" to set adaptive voltage. https://rog.asus.com/articles/maximus-motherboards/maximus-vi-series-uefi-guide-for-overclocking/

Adaptive Mode: Adaptive Mode was developed to account for the inadequacies of Offset Mode for overclocking. We use it to specify the voltage used when the CPU is faced with a heavy application load. The voltage we set is the maximum voltage the PCU is allowed to apply, which takes all the load-related guesswork hampering Offset Mode out of the equation. The other boon of Adaptive Mode is that it does not alter voltages for non-Turbo CPU ratios, allowing us to enjoy the benefits of power saving without the voltage adjustment range issues presented by the Offset Mode function. We recommend Adaptive Mode for all normal overclocking. http://rog.asus.com/articles/guides/the-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


----------



## OutlawII

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Thanks for sharing, but it's odd that you had to do anything extra. I simply carried over my manual voltage to adaptive.
> 
> I dropped my manual voltage requirement into the additional turbo and left offset set to auto. I then set IA AC Load Line and IA DC Load Line both to .01 per Raja's instructions in his EdgeUp Kaby Lake guide and boom, perfect voltage scaling.


Might be different on the Formula i have the Hero


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> For all of you with Asus boards here is the proper way to setup c-states running adaptive voltage. I couldnt get my voltage to scale with my clocks until i set it up this way.


Leaving them all on Auto also will work .


----------



## Sand3853

Alright, so after messing with different settings, and changing some things with my loop, I have come to the conclusion that I am pretty much temperature limited, and that my 7600K is definitely in need of a delid... this chip though seems capable of doing some decent clocks though if it wasn't for the temps.

*Old*
My current settings are:
CPU: i5-7600k
BLCK: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4600
Vcore: 1.32
RAM- 3200 16-16-16-34



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Full stress puts the temps into the 80's, but gaming will stay in the 60's. I figure with a delid, the temps should come down enough to allow for 5.2+ long term.

The chip easily handles 5.2, but due to temps I can't maintain it very long. Edit: 5.2 @ 1.37v nets lower temps than 5ghz... so I'm sticking with 5.2 right now.

http://valid.x86.fr/p3bft6 - 5.2 validation

*New*
CPU- i5-7600K
BLCK 100
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency:5200
Cache: 4600
vCore: 1.37
LLC- Mode 1
Adaptive AVX: -3
RAM: 2666 14-14-14-34

Batch # L640F729
Motherboard: MSI z170AI Gaming Pro

All in all, can't complain with the results using an itx setup, and a less than optimal cooling configuration.


----------



## spddmn24

New motherboard, new cooler = 5.2 ghz at cooler temps than 5.1. Cache doesn't like anyting past 4600, even with the upped voltage. Asus guide says that might be normal from 3600+ ram though?

Username: spddmn24
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency: 5200
Cache Frequency: 4600
Vcore in UEFI: 1.40
Vcore: 1.4 average 1.424 peak
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delidded, ek-kit-L360
Stability Test: 8 hours realbench

Batch Number: Malaysia L640F751
Ram Speed: (3866 17-18-18-39)
VCCIO: 1.232
VCCSA: 1.272
Ram Voltage: 1.424
Motherboard: Asus Maximus IX Hero
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: 22 degrees ambient


----------



## OutlawII

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Leaving them all on Auto also will work .


No it doesnt tried it multiple ways.


----------



## Mr0czny

What you guy think... It stable for gaming etc... 1.32v + offset auto + LLC5


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *damstr*
> 
> I thought manual vcore meant a static vcore 24/7. Isn't that what is adaptive is for?


LCC controlled vdroop occurs whether using manual or adaptive.
You guys need to read up on this sheet before putzing with voltage rails at a high overclock.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Adaptive Mode: Adaptive voltage affects voltage for Turbo multiplier ratios only. Unlike Offset, using Adaptive does not affect idle/light load Vcore. Therefore, Adaptive mode is the preferred method for overclocking Haswell processors if one wishes to retain dynamic voltage changes according to processor load without running into issues with idle Vcore becoming too low.. There is one issue with Offset and Adaptive Mode that needs to be taken into account. The processor contains a power control unit which requests voltage based upon software load. When the PCU detects AVX instructions, it will ramp Vcore automatically beyond normal load voltage. There is no way to lock Vcore to prevent this if using Offset or Adapative Mode. This is pre-programmed by Intel into the PCU. As an example, a CPU is perfectly stable at 1.25V using a manual voltage (static), if Adaptive or Offset Mode is used instead, it is impossible to lock the core voltage when running software that contains AVX instruction sets - stress tests such as AIDA and Prime contain AVX instruction sets. *When the AVX instructions are detected by the PCU, the core voltage will be ramped an additional ~0.1V over your target voltage - so 1.25V will become ~1.35V under AVX load. If you intend to run heavy load AVX software, we recommend using Manual Vcore, NOT Adaptive or Offset Mode.* Most of us do not run AVX related software, so this is a non-issue. Either way, dialing in an overclock using Manual Vcore to determine how much voltage the processor needs under full load is best - Adaptive or Offset mode can be used to match the stable voltage later on. Simply type the target load voltage into the entry box "Additional Turbo Mode CPU core voltage" to set adaptive voltage. https://rog.asus.com/articles/maximus-motherboards/maximus-vi-series-uefi-guide-for-overclocking/
> 
> Adaptive Mode: Adaptive Mode was developed to account for the inadequacies of Offset Mode for overclocking. We use it to specify the voltage used when the CPU is faced with a heavy application load. The voltage we set is the maximum voltage the PCU is allowed to apply, which takes all the load-related guesswork hampering Offset Mode out of the equation. The other boon of Adaptive Mode is that it does not alter voltages for non-Turbo CPU ratios, allowing us to enjoy the benefits of power saving without the voltage adjustment range issues presented by the Offset Mode function. We recommend Adaptive Mode for all normal overclocking. http://rog.asus.com/articles/guides/the-kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


lol - this is a funny post considering the author.







The highlighted just is just plain wrong, I see vcore lower from the set adaptive vcore via the amount appropriate according to the LLC set - WITH NO 100MV OVERVOLTING. If you should see this, follow the instructions Raja described in the edgeup guide (IA AC load line and IA DC load line) linked in my sig. You can also search for Elmor's post on this same subject in the ASUS z270 thread.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Might be different on the Formula i have the Hero


I just picked up a Hero last night for use on a test bench so I'll let you know how I get it to work on that one.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> LCC controlled vdroop occurs whether using manual or adaptive.
> You guys need to read up on this sheet before putzing with voltage rails at a high overclock.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol - this is a funny post considering the author.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The highlighted just is just plain wrong, I see vcore lower from the set adaptive vcore via the amount appropriate according to the LLC set - WITH NO 100MV OVERVOLTING. If you should see this, follow the instructions Raja described in the edgeup guide (IA AC load line and IA DC load line) linked in my sig. You can also search for Elmor's post on this same subject in the ASUS z270 thread.


What about this one.

Serial Voltage Identification "SVID": A few generations back, Intel introduced serial voltage identification (SVID) which is a protocol the CPU uses to communicate with the voltage regulator. The power control unit inside the CPU uses SVID to communicate with the PWM controller that controls the voltage regulator. This allows the CPU to pick its optimum voltage depending on current conditions (temperature, frequency, load, etc.). You can actually use a combination of SVID and LLC to get an optimal VCore instead of manually setting it. If you start your system without making any changes, your VID (which some refer to as the stock voltage) might be 1.25v, but if you lower your CPU multiplier and restart, you will find your VID has dropped automatically. The reverse happens if you increase your clock and do not set any VCore. Intel's latest CPUs are able to pick their own voltage, and this comes into play if you want to utilize "offset" / "adaptive" voltage. The good news is that if you come from Haswell, you should look forward to a CPU that has the same or better durability.

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/guides/7481/tweaktowns-ultimate-intel-skylake-overclocking-guide/index5.html


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What about this one.
> 
> Serial Voltage Identification "SVID": A few generations back, Intel introduced serial voltage identification (SVID) which is a protocol the CPU uses to communicate with the voltage regulator. The power control unit inside the CPU uses SVID to communicate with the PWM controller that controls the voltage regulator. This allows the CPU to pick its optimum voltage depending on current conditions (temperature, frequency, load, etc.). You can actually use a combination of SVID and LLC to get an optimal VCore instead of manually setting it. If you start your system without making any changes, your VID (which some refer to as the stock voltage) might be 1.25v, but if you lower your CPU multiplier and restart, you will find your VID has dropped automatically. The reverse happens if you increase your clock and do not set any VCore. Intel's latest CPUs are able to pick their own voltage, and this comes into play if you want to utilize "offset" / "adaptive" voltage. The good news is that if you come from Haswell, you should look forward to a CPU that has the same or better durability.
> 
> Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/guides/7481/tweaktowns-ultimate-intel-skylake-overclocking-guide/index5.html


When using adaptive mode, VID is only a relevant when the CPU is in a non-Turbo state. The manually configured adaptive scale takes over once the CPU enters a Turbo state, which is all that anyone cares about.

I already provided you Raja's write up on how adaptive is works.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> When using adaptive mode, VID is only a relevant when the CPU is in a non-Turbo state. The manually configured adaptive scale takes over once the CPU enters a Turbo state, which is all that anyone cares about.
> 
> I already provided you Raja's write up on how adaptive is works.


lol, and didn't even credit you with the original post.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol, and didn't even credit you with the original post.












Glad someone else saw it even though I know you've probably read that article several times yourself despite your high level of experience.

I completely understand why this has become a repetitive debate as every now and then I also enjoy swimming up stream vice letting the current carry me.

As previously mentioned, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I'm smart enough to listen to the guys who have had a boatload of these chips and motherboards month before me.







Either I'm starting to understand or @[email protected] is doing a better job of breaking things down Barney style for guys like me. I'm going with the latter and I'm okay with that.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> When using adaptive mode, VID is only a relevant when the CPU is in a non-Turbo state. The manually configured adaptive scale takes over once the CPU enters a Turbo state, which is all that anyone cares about.
> 
> I already provided you Raja's write up on how adaptive is works.


I have tested adaptive/DVID stock voltage and it follows the VID steps. Depending on the mother board some have adaptive some have DVID some set total adaptive voltage. They all use VID for controlling the voltage increments.

With the Bios set to optimized default VID controls the Vcore. Adaptive (ASUS, MSI), DVID (Gigabyte) voltage fallows VID with setting the voltage you want to use.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have tested adaptive/DVID stock voltage and it follows the VID steps. Depending on the mother board some have adaptive some have DVID some set total adaptive voltage. They all use VID for controlling the voltage increments.
> 
> With the Bios set to optimized default VID controls the Vcore. Adaptive (ASUS, MSI), DVID (Gigabyte) voltage fallows VID with setting the voltage you want to use.


Generally speaking, prefacing a statement with "I have tested" doesn't do much for me with regards to the credibility of the words that follow. I personally prefer to rely on the information provided by no kidding experts or those with established credibility within the community, but I'm crazy like that.

Here's the entire in-depth write up that my motherboard manufacturer provided to me so that I don't have to speculate on what's happening with my motherboard when I make changes to something.

http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/5/

Admittedly, I know very little about Gigabyte z170 boards as I don't own one, but if you could link me to the in-depth write up that Gigabyte provided to you, I'd love to read up on what you're talking about.

.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have tested adaptive/DVID stock voltage and it follows the VID steps. Depending on the mother board some have adaptive some have DVID some set total adaptive voltage. They all use VID for controlling the voltage increments.
> 
> With the Bios set to optimized default VID controls the Vcore. Adaptive (ASUS, MSI), DVID (Gigabyte) voltage fallows *VID with setting the voltage you want to use.*


again.. this is only when non turbo multipliers are in use, at stock settings (eg, there is no request for a multiplier that is higher than the max stock turbo multi). With turbo multipliers the adaptive vcore is applied regardless of the VID stack. Otherwise it would be an offset, which it is not. This "tech": has been available since sandy (my 2700K is still running "adaptive" for 5.0. Except on z87 you had to set a nominal offset and put the rest of the voltage in turbo voltage. There are several Sandy guides on OCN that explain this).
Basically, once you exceed the max stock turbo multiplier (or max stock frequency) the VID stack is basically useless.


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Here is mine after delidding...
> 
> User name: ducegt
> CPU Model: 7700K
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 52
> Core Frequency: 5200
> Cache Frequency: 4800
> Vcore in UEFI: +270
> Vcore: 1.424
> FCLK: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Delidded H115i
> Stability Test: 8 Hours RealBench
> 
> Batch Number: L639F977
> Ram Speed: 3600 15-15-15-35 2T
> VCCIO: 1.2
> VCCSA: 1.2
> Ram Voltage: 1.35v
> Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty Gaming Z270 K6. BIOS: 1.22A
> LLC Setting: 1
> Misc Comments: 0 AVX Offset Ratio. Ambient 22C
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Very nice job! But if you want to be charted you need to set your ram to "up to 16GB" in the Realbench parameters. Wizzie explains this quite clearly in the OP. If you don't want to be charted, no worries, BUT I would suggest, especially with these ever increasing high speed ram kits, that you also run HCI Memtest at least 400% coverage per "Scones" instructions *HERE* ... it could save you some big headaches down the road








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> New motherboard, new cooler = 5.2 ghz at cooler temps than 5.1. Cache doesn't like anyting past 4600, even with the upped voltage. Asus guide says that might be normal from 3600+ ram though?
> 
> Username: spddmn24
> CPU Model: 7700k
> Base Clock: 4200
> Core Multiplier: 52
> Core Frequency: 5200
> Cache Frequency: 4600
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.40
> Vcore: 1.4 average 1.424 peak
> FCLK: Reminder: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Delidded, ek-kit-L360
> Stability Test: 8 hours realbench
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L640F751
> Ram Speed: (3866 17-18-18-39)
> VCCIO: 1.232
> VCCSA: 1.272
> Ram Voltage: 1.424
> Motherboard: Asus Maximus IX Hero
> LLC Setting: 5
> Misc Comments: 22 degrees ambient
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Really Nice! ... Could you do 5.3 or higher with the new "cool" AVX offset settings?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr0czny*
> 
> What you guy think... It stable for gaming etc... 1.32v + offset auto + LLC5


Maybe it is OCN acting up again, But no amount of "right clicks" allows me to see your screenshot in a readable way









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol, and didn't even credit you with the original post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Glad someone else saw it even though I know you've probably read that article several times yourself despite your high level of experience.
> 
> I completely understand why this has become a repetitive debate as every now and then I also enjoy swimming up stream vice letting the current carry me.
> 
> As previously mentioned, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I'm smart enough to listen to the guys who have had a boatload of these chips and motherboards month before me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Either I'm starting to understand or @[email protected] is doing a better job of breaking things down Barney style for guys like me. I'm going with the latter and I'm okay with that.
Click to expand...

I saw it!!! Keep up the FINE work









*@JP* ... just noticed you hit *1000 Reps!!!* ... do we have a party, do you get a prize!? ...
Anyway *THANKS* for all that you DO!!!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Generally speaking, prefacing a statement with "I have tested" doesn't do much for me with regards to the credibility of the words that follow. I personally prefer to rely on the information provided by no kidding experts or those with established credibility within the community, but I'm crazy like that..


Those are the same people that said those Asus articles are incorrect, take a look back at my posts.
Quote:


> Here's the entire in-depth write up that my motherboard manufacturer provided to me so that I don't have to speculate on what's happening with my motherboard when I make changes to something.
> 
> http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/5/
> 
> Admittedly, I know very little about Gigabyte z170 boards as I don't own one, but if you could link me to the in-depth write up that Gigabyte provided to you, I'd love to read up on what you're talking about.


Z170, Z270 Motherboards are all the same just different terminology in Bios. There is no voltage processing chip on the motherboards it is all done with CPU VID and VRM for Dynamic Vcore.

On Gigabyte you don't need a write up it says in the BIOS Dynamic DVID.

Serial Voltage Identification "SVID": A few generations back, Intel introduced serial voltage identification (SVID) which is a protocol the CPU uses to communicate with the voltage regulator. The power control unit inside the CPU uses SVID to communicate with the PWM controller that controls the voltage regulator. This allows the CPU to pick its optimum voltage depending on current conditions (temperature, frequency, load, etc.). You can actually use a combination of SVID and LLC to get an optimal VCore instead of manually setting it. If you start your system without making any changes, your VID (which some refer to as the stock voltage) might be 1.25v, but if you lower your CPU multiplier and restart, you will find your VID has dropped automatically. The reverse happens if you increase your clock and do not set any VCore. Intel's latest CPUs are able to pick their own voltage, and this comes into play if you want to utilize "offset" / "adaptive" voltage. The good news is that if you come from Haswell, you should look forward to a CPU that has the same or better durability.

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/guides/7481/tweaktowns-ultimate-intel-skylake-overclocking-guide/index5.html

You just need take some time and try stock see what is going on then Adaptive and compare the results and you will see what is going on.


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have tested adaptive/DVID stock voltage and it follows the VID steps. Depending on the mother board some have adaptive some have DVID some set total adaptive voltage. They all use VID for controlling the voltage increments.
> 
> With the Bios set to optimized default VID controls the Vcore. Adaptive (ASUS, MSI), DVID (Gigabyte) voltage fallows VID with setting the voltage you want to use.


Personally I'm reading this and scratching my head. I'm honestly not even sure what you are trying to say...

If I set my bios to default on any of my boards... MSI, Asus, Asrock or Gigabyte.. sure it will use default voltages. Let's pretend that is 1.16 for an example. If I go into my MSI/Asus and set an adaptive voltage of 1.3 at the max "default" core speed... then I'll be getting 1.3 not the default 1.16. On Gigabyte this would be DVid which if you have ever used it turns more into a guessing game because at least on the Z170X Gaming G1 it doesn't work like you would expect. However, as you put in the values you want to try obviously you start increasing your vcore... and my ASRock boards don't have an Adaptive option so it ends up being the same thing but with manual.

What I'm trying to understand... is how you are saying all these options follow VID... yet when I restore my bios to "default" and then change vcore relative to my brand of motherboard and it's now set higher than VID... how is it following VID? I mean when I can clearly see that the requested VID is for example 1.16 and instead I'm running the 1.3 I've set it to... I'm not sure where the relative relationship comes from.

If you are simply talking about non boost states... ya I guess I see what you are saying.. but my max clock/voltage relationship isn't really going to be relative to VID once I've changed it. *edit here* I see you say in a later post about how "default voltage" will change depending on multiplier you set. Yes I've seen that... but if I set an adaptive/dvid that is higher or potentially lower than what the cpu would request without me changing voltage.. then I'm no longer following that.. um I'll guess I'll call it default behaviour. You can use programs that will clearly show the requested VID for any given frequency... once you have changed your voltage.. you will also see the actual vcore is following what you have set as opposed to what is requested (this would be why I'm confused about what you are saying.)

Oh and if anyone was curious.. with Dvid at least on the G1. When I was reading about it the original write up i found (not on this site) claimed it was a default 1.2 voltage and you put in a number you wanted to add to that. So it came across like "Oh if I want 1.3 then I would simply add .1". My experience with Gigabyte DVid was that as you increase clocks the amount of total voltage you get changes even with the same value in the dvid box. So a setting that seemed fine at 4.5GHz might put you higher than you wanted at 4.7GHz. As opposed to Asus or MSI where you just enter the value that you want for adaptive. On the older Gigabyte bios versions with my 6700k that used 1.4v.. I would have to use a value of .07 and that was something which took a lot of trial and error to figure out. When Gigabyte did the updated bios versions for Kaby Lake support using that .07 was giving my vcore that was too high. I suddenly ended up using something like .02 to achieve the same total voltage that .07 used to give me. I can honestly say... I don't really like the DVid implementation on Z170. I haven't tried any of their Z270 boards for comparison.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> On Gigabyte you don't need a write up it says in the BIOS Dynamic DVID.


So no Gigabyte write-up? Do they even offer one? If not no worries, but I fear that not providing one might result in a lot of confused Gigabyte owners. I'm not sure that I would consider Tweaktown a viable replacement to a Gigabyte specific overclocking guide similar to the one provided by Asus.

When I see stuff like the following from the article you linked, I question how far the speculation has gone?
Quote:


> Adaptive Mode: Adaptive mode was introduced with Haswell because the integrated voltage regulator (FIVR) offered the CPU greater control of voltage over a large frequency range; it was much easier and much faster for the CPU to calculate how much voltage to apply at frequencies below the maximum set. Adaptive mode was basically an extension of the automatic CPU voltage mode and you could set a target voltage and/or an offset. *Skylake doesn't offer exactly the same level of voltage regulation, so adaptive mode seems to have been implemented a bit differently (through SVID) and BIOS manipulation.*


Here's yet another example of speculation from within the very same article.
Quote:


> I tried it on multiple boards (three of the five in this guide have the option) and *it seems broken* on most of the boards. On the one board it works on there are some users who complain about it screwing up after recovering from sleep. Word on the street is that Intel's recent base UEFI firmware screwed up adaptive mode, and Intel has yet to implement a proper fix. If adaptive mode is not working for you and you want your CPU frequency and VCore to drop at idle, then I recommend you use offset mode or use SVID auto voltage with LLC levels (it's why some manufacturers provide so many LLC levels).


As a matter of fact, if you read through the whole thing, there was a lot of back and forth on what was what and why it MIGHT have been so. Horrible thing to go by if you ask me. Words like "seems" don't elicit confidence from a simple creature like myself.

Either way, it's not a big deal as I know what I'm doing is working perfectly for my Kaby Lake overclock.

Speaking of which, do you have a Kaby Lake overclock to share with us? If so, make sure to submit because we need more data in the spreadsheet that @Darkwizzie has done a fantastic job of maintaining.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> [/SPOILER]I saw it!!! Keep up the FINE work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :


Thank you sir!

.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> Very nice job! But if you want to be charted you need to set your ram to "up to 16GB" in the Realbench parameters. Wizzie explains this quite clearly in the OP. If you don't want to be charted, no worries, BUT I would suggest, especially with these ever increasing high speed ram kits, that you also run HCI Memtest at least 400% coverage per "Scones" instructions *HERE* ... it could save you some big headaches down the road


Thanks. It's a lucky batch. I haven't tried up to 16 being I only have 16 so I certainly don't have 16 available. I just chose to avoid introducing a possible unstable variable. That is the stock speed for my ram kit. I've already tested it 100% stable with Google Stress App for several hours more than 8; and with all available memory. If there are no inherent problems with up to 16 with 16, then I'm sure I'd pass







I see you are in Reno. I lived there for 2 years. An evaporative cooler for a Kaby Lake could be interesting


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> again.. this is only when non turbo multipliers are in use, at stock settings (eg, there is no request for a multiplier that is higher than the max stock turbo multi). With turbo multipliers the adaptive vcore is applied regardless of the VID stack. Otherwise it would be an offset, which it is not. This "tech": has been available since sandy (my 2700K is still running "adaptive" for 5.0. Except on z87 you had to set a nominal offset and put the rest of the voltage in turbo voltage. There are several Sandy guides on OCN that explain this).
> Basically, once you exceed the max stock turbo multiplier (or max stock frequency) the VID stack is basically useless.


With Intel anything past base clock is Turbo. The VID sets the Turbo vcore, then folks have the option to Adaptive+ offset or DVID +. The voltage then scales in turbo mode Using VID for reference, it is very simple understanding. Watch the VID and Vcore stock then add Adaptive + offset. For Gigabyte it is DVID +0.075v so you add that to VID for the total and Asus adds the VID with offset for you to show the total with Adaptive+ offset. Try it and see for your self.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Digitalwolf*
> 
> Personally I'm reading this and scratching my head. I'm honestly not even sure what you are trying to say...
> 
> If I set my bios to default on any of my boards... MSI, Asus, Asrock or Gigabyte.. sure it will use default voltages. Let's pretend that is 1.16 for an example. If I go into my MSI/Asus and set an adaptive voltage of 1.3 at the max "default" core speed... then I'll be getting 1.3 not the default 1.16. On Gigabyte this would be DVid which if you have ever used it turns more into a guessing game because at least on the Z170X Gaming G1 it doesn't work like you would expect. However, as you put in the values you want to try obviously you start increasing your vcore... and my ASRock boards don't have an Adaptive option so it ends up being the same thing but with manual.
> 
> What I'm trying to understand... is how you are saying all these options follow VID... yet when I restore my bios to "default" and then change vcore relative to my brand of motherboard and it's now set higher than VID... how is it following VID? I mean when I can clearly see that the requested VID is for example 1.16 and instead I'm running the 1.3 I've set it to... I'm not sure where the relative relationship comes from.
> 
> If you are simply talking about non boost states... ya I guess I see what you are saying.. but my max clock/voltage relationship isn't really going to be relative to VID once I've changed it. *edit here* I see you say in a later post about how "default voltage" will change depending on multiplier you set. Yes I've seen that... but if I set an adaptive/dvid that is higher or potentially lower than what the cpu would request without me changing voltage.. then I'm no longer following that.. um I'll guess I'll call it default behaviour. You can use programs that will clearly show the requested VID for any given frequency... once you have changed your voltage.. you will also see the actual vcore is following what you have set as opposed to what is requested (this would be why I'm confused about what you are saying.)
> 
> Oh and if anyone was curious.. with Dvid at least on the G1. When I was reading about it the original write up i found (not on this site) claimed it was a default 1.2 voltage and you put in a number you wanted to add to that. So it came across like "Oh if I want 1.3 then I would simply add .1". My experience with Gigabyte DVid was that as you increase clocks the amount of total voltage you get changes even with the same value in the dvid box. So a setting that seemed fine at 4.5GHz might put you higher than you wanted at 4.7GHz. As opposed to Asus or MSI where you just enter the value that you want for adaptive. On the older Gigabyte bios versions with my 6700k that used 1.4v.. I would have to use a value of .07 and that was something which took a lot of trial and error to figure out. When Gigabyte did the updated bios versions for Kaby Lake support using that .07 was giving my vcore that was too high. I suddenly ended up using something like .02 to achieve the same total voltage that .07 used to give me. I can honestly say... I don't really like the DVid implementation on Z170. I haven't tried any of their Z270 boards for comparison.


With Adaptive offset or DVID the Vcore is adjusted with CPU temperature, load, multiplier, using the VID for reference and adding more voltage that folks have set.

When you use Adapted+ offset or DVID with different programs the voltage will vary according to load. VID (voltage Identification) is the reference for the change in Vcore.

Example DVID =+0.075 4.5GHz Prime95 1.332v RealBench 1.296v


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Thanks. It's a lucky batch. I haven't tried up to 16 being I only have 16 so I certainly don't have 16 available. I just chose to avoid introducing a possible unstable variable. That is the stock speed for my ram kit. I've already tested it 100% stable with Google Stress App for several hours more than 8; and with all available memory. If there are no inherent problems with up to 16 with 16, then I'm sure I'd pass
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I see you are in Reno. I lived there for 2 years. An evaporative cooler for a Kaby Lake could be interesting


Don't worry about only having 16GB of RAM, I only have 16GB of RAM as well RealBench when set to 16GB will only use about 12GB of that 16GB, see below. Would love to see another L639F977 on the chart, have a go


----------



## hotrod717

*


----------



## CharlesCC2

Just wanted to say thank you for this amazing thread. You've put together a ridiculously comprehensive yet easy to digest guide. I haven't built a gaming computer or had to overclock in a decade or so but feel very confident about getting my rig running and OCed once the rest of the parts come in this week.

I especially appreciate the stress testing section and inclusion of the custom x264 stress test. Bravo!


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Don't worry about only having 16GB of RAM, I only have 16GB of RAM as well RealBench when set to 16GB will only use about 12GB of that 16GB, see below. Would love to see another L639F977 on the chart, have a go


Done.










http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/280#post_25822677


----------



## scracy

Very nice awesome to see Vcore?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> *


lol - really have to have the BS filters cleaned regularly.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Very nice awesome to see Vcore?


1.4V+ is my guess based on average VIDs and the offset used.


----------



## ducegt

1.424 with 1.440 spikes


----------



## redone13

Username: redone13
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 51
Core Frequency: 5100MHz
Cache Frequency: 4800MHz
Vcore in UEFI: Adaptive 1.430
Vcore: 1.408
FCLK: 1000MHz
Cooling Solution: delid, Noctua NH-D15
Stability Test: x264 16T 8 hours

Batch Number: Malaysia, Batch# L639G050
Ram Speed: 3200MHz 16-16-16-36 2T
Ram Voltage: 1.35 UEFI, 1.344 HWinfo
VCCIO: 1.11250 UEFI, 1.136 HWinfo
VCCSA: 1.11250 UEFI, 1.129 HWinfo
Motherboard: z270, Asus Maximus Hero IX
LLC Setting: Level 4
Misc Comments: IA AC Load Line .01, IA DC Load Line .01, AVX Offset off


----------



## dlss

Username: dlss
CPU Model: i7-7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4500
Vcore in UEFI: Adaptive 1.285
Vcore: 1.280
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: no delid, Noctua NH-D15
Stability Test: x264 16 threads 10h

Batch Number: Malaysia, #L640G408
Ram Speed: 3000 (15-17-17-35)
Ram Voltage: 1.360
VCCIO: 1.15 UEFI / 1.184 actual
VCCSA: 1.15 UEFI / 1.200 actual
Motherboard: ASUS Z170-A
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: No AVX offset



Looks like I was lucky and got a good sample. Didn't try higher than 5GHz for now because 2 of the cores get a little hot. Will attempt higher clocks after delid.


----------



## damstr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Digitalwolf*
> 
> Ya I'm not sure what they meant. LLC as far as I understand it is to control droop under load... whether that means voltage going up, down or staying near what you have set (relative to your LLC setting).
> 
> Once upon a time I swear that with manual... you could get voltage to change with C States. From what I've seen posted since Z270 comes out that seems to not be the case. Well obviously you could always set a fixed clock and voltage then it wouldn't change. Yet once upon a time I swear that by not using a fixed clock combined with C States you could get voltage to drop (at least some) with manual voltage. Then again my memory isn't that great anymore.
> 
> I also seem to remember it used to be a thing to disable C States when using adaptive... yet I see people posting that they can't get their voltage to scale unless they set C States a certain way. I disable C States with adaptive and I see voltage scaling.
> 
> I know my response is about more things than you were replying to... just sometimes I think I'm starting to lose my mind in regards to how things work... that I've been doing for a long time (lol).,


I haven't messed with C states yet or LLC. The only thing I've done is put the PC into balance mode under power in Windows.

In the BIOS I have only setup manual voltage to 1.26v. In Windows I see max VID is 1.25 according to CPUZ and HWInfo under load.

With this setup while idle, my freqs drop to 800MHz and my VID drops to .8.


----------



## Mr0czny

Username: Mr0czny
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000 MHz
Cache Frequency: 4600 MHz
Vcore in UEFI: Adaptive 1.325 V + Offset Auto
Vcore: 1.353V
FCLK: 1000 MHz
Cooling Solution: Delidded + Phanteks TC14PE with one TY143 fan
Stability Test: Prime 27.9 Blend test 4 hours
Batch Number: L644G961 Malay
Ram Speed: 3866 16-16-16-30 tRFC300
Ram Voltage: 1.4V
VCCIO: 1.125V in UEFI, 1.192V in HWiNFO
VCCSA: 1.1375V in UEFI, 1.184V in HWiNFO
Motherboard: Z170, Asus Maximus VIII Gene
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: Beta BIOS 3201


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> Very nice job! But if you want to be charted you need to set your ram to "up to 16GB" in the Realbench parameters. Wizzie explains this quite clearly in the OP. If you don't want to be charted, no worries, BUT I would suggest, especially with these ever increasing high speed ram kits, that you also run HCI Memtest at least 400% coverage per "Scones" instructions *HERE* ... it could save you some big headaches down the road
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks. It's a lucky batch. I haven't tried up to 16 being I only have 16 so I certainly don't have 16 available. I just chose to avoid introducing a possible unstable variable. That is the stock speed for my ram kit. I've already tested it 100% stable with Google Stress App for several hours more than 8; and with all available memory. If there are no inherent problems with up to 16 with 16, then I'm sure I'd pass
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I see you are in Reno. I lived there for 2 years. An evaporative cooler for a Kaby Lake could be interesting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Don't worry about only having 16GB of RAM, I only have 16GB of RAM as well RealBench when set to 16GB will only use about 12GB of that 16GB, see below. Would love to see another L639F977 on the chart, have a go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/280#post_25822677
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Very Good! doesn't get any better than GSAT stable! ... And scracy is, as you proved also, correct. And I can confirm from a conversation w/Raja quite sometime ago that Realbench was set up this way, hence the "Up to xxRam" verbage









One more suggestion, to make it easier on Wizzie, go back to your original "chart" post *HERE* and replace your old 8GB creenshot with your new/updated one


----------



## Celcius

edit: nevermind


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - really have to have the BS filters cleaned regularly.


Im trying really hard, man ... but when I read -
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Those are the same people that said those Asus articles are incorrect, take a look back at my posts.
> Z170, Z270 Motherboards are all the same just different terminology in Bios. *There is no voltage processing chip on the motherboards it is all done with CPU VID and VRM for Dynamic Vcore.*
> 
> On Gigabyte you don't need a write up it says in the BIOS Dynamic DVID.










Oh, no?? You don't need to, but.....Also wonder what is controlling LLC, Phase, and current among other things??? Appearently I can't turn off SVID. Who knew??

https://rog.asus.com/technology/republic-of-gamers-motherboard-innovations/extreme-engine-digi-iii/

https://www.joomag.com/magazine/gigabyte-z270-overclocking-guide-gigabyte-200-series-overclocking-guide/0767815001483933769

"Kaby Lake CPUs stick to the external voltage-regulation circuitry that made its return with Z170 boards"

http://techreport.com/review/31186/aorus-z270x-gaming-5-motherboard-reviewed

I'm not on any bandwagon. I've used Asus, Asrock, and Gigabyte extensively. They all have their bright spots.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> Im trying really hard, man ... but when I read -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, no?? You don't need to, but.....Also wonder what is controlling LLC, Phase, and current among other things??? Appearently I can't turn off SVID. Who knew??
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/technology/republic-of-gamers-motherboard-innovations/extreme-engine-digi-iii/
> 
> https://www.joomag.com/magazine/gigabyte-z270-overclocking-guide-gigabyte-200-series-overclocking-guide/0767815001483933769
> 
> "Kaby Lake CPUs stick to the external voltage-regulation circuitry that made its return with Z170 boards"
> 
> http://techreport.com/review/31186/aorus-z270x-gaming-5-motherboard-reviewed
> 
> I'm not on any bandwagon. I've used Asus, Asrock, and Gigabyte extensively. They all have their bright spots.


VRM has the LL specification control. LLC (load line calibration) is calibration not processing.

Here is a link that I have been using since 2007 to answer peoples questions on LL and VID it is a good read.

Anandtech
If you've ever overclocked a system, chances are that at some point or another you've had opportunity to become upset with your Vdroop "problem." Some users, confused as to why their system refuses to exactly match actual processor supply voltage to the value specified in BIOS, are quick to blame the quality their motherboard; still others find fault with the difference noted between their board's idle and full-load processor supply voltages. Actually, load line droop (Vdroop) is an inherent part of any Intel power delivery design specification and serves an important role in maintaining system stability. In most cases, comments regarding unacceptable power delivery performance are completely unfounded. To make matters worse, unjustified negative consumer perception surrounding this often misunderstood design feature eventually forced a few motherboard manufacturers to respond to enthusiasts' demands for action by adding an option in their BIOS that effectively disables this important function. http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5


----------



## BrainSplatter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> For all of you with Asus boards here is the proper way to setup c-states running adaptive voltage. I couldnt get my voltage to scale with my clocks until i set it up this way.


Thanks for that! Using "*CPU default*" for "*Package C State limit*" finally caused the CPU voltage to drop in idle on my ASUS Z270F board (voltage mode is adaptive). With it on auto vcore doesn't drop.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BrainSplatter*
> 
> Thanks for that! Using "*CPU default*" for "*Package C State limit*" finally caused the CPU voltage to drop in idle on my ASUS Z270F board (voltage mode is adaptive). With it on auto vcore doesn't drop.


Didn't work on my board causes core voltage to drop to below 400mV whilst using light load applications and causes them to crash. My CPU voltage drops at idle as it should but thought i would try it and see what it does..now i know.


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> VRM has the LL specification control. LLC (load line calibration) is calibration not processing.
> 
> Here is a link that I have been using since 2007 to answer peoples questions on LL and VID it is a good read.
> 
> Anandtech
> If you've ever overclocked a system, chances are that at some point or another you've had opportunity to become upset with your Vdroop "problem." Some users, confused as to why their system refuses to exactly match actual processor supply voltage to the value specified in BIOS, are quick to blame the quality their motherboard; still others find fault with the difference noted between their board's idle and full-load processor supply voltages. Actually, load line droop (Vdroop) is an inherent part of any Intel power delivery design specification and serves an important role in maintaining system stability. In most cases, comments regarding unacceptable power delivery performance are completely unfounded. To make matters worse, unjustified negative consumer perception surrounding this often misunderstood design feature eventually forced a few motherboard manufacturers to respond to enthusiasts' demands for action by adding an option in their BIOS that effectively disables this important function. http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5


Totally missing the boat again. I think you are quite obvious to most now, so I'll just stop and use what i have available to avoid seeing it.


----------



## BrainSplatter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Didn't work on my board causes core voltage to drop to below 400mV whilst using light load applications and causes them to crash. My CPU voltage drops at idle as it should but thought i would try it and see what it does..now i know.


Didn't have much time yesterday but I tested stability for light load with some web surfing. No problem so far.
Do u use adaptive voltage with negative offset ? Because that could cause issues with lower voltage states I think.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BrainSplatter*
> 
> Didn't have much time yesterday but I tested stability for light load with some web surfing. No problem so far.
> Do u use adaptive voltage with negative offset ? Because that could cause issues with lower voltage states I think.


I don't use a negative offset with adaptive but when i watched Tv on my pc the picture became very pixelated and stuttered frames, noticed vcore was sitting at 0.357V. As soon as i changed it back to my normal settings no issue cpu idled at 800Mhz and Vcore was around 800mV. Only setting i changed to cause this was "CPU default" for "Package C State limit"


----------



## OutlawII

Could be different on the formula


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> VRM has the LL specification control. LLC (load line calibration) is calibration not processing.
> 
> Here is a link that I have been using since 2007 to answer peoples questions on LL and VID it is a good read.
> 
> Anandtech
> If you've ever overclocked a system, chances are that at some point or another you've had opportunity to become upset with your Vdroop "problem." Some users, confused as to why their system refuses to exactly match actual processor supply voltage to the value specified in BIOS, are quick to blame the quality their motherboard; still others find fault with the difference noted between their board's idle and full-load processor supply voltages. Actually, load line droop (Vdroop) is an inherent part of any Intel power delivery design specification and serves an important role in maintaining system stability. In most cases, comments regarding unacceptable power delivery performance are completely unfounded. To make matters worse, un*justified negative consumer perception surrounding this often misunderstood design feature eventually forced a few motherboard manufacturers to respond to enthusiasts' demands for action by adding an option in their BIOS that effectively disables this important function*. http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5


the only part of that decade-old article that is still relevant is what I put in bold. Vdroop is a good thing for 24/7 settings.. maybe not for benchmarking.
You really need to stop with the mis-information.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Could be different on the formula


Yeah probably is, also using beta uefi 3101 which probably has still got bugs, other users have reported adaptive voltage is not working properly with this version on the M8F uefi which might explain why i cant get 5.2 stable using adaptive but can with a fixed voltage. There is a new beta uefi 3201 but i havent tried it yet as it is not publicly available yet. Might wait for the final version to be released.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the only part of that decade-old article that is still relevant is what I put in bold. Vdroop is a good thing for 24/7 settings.. maybe not for benchmarking.
> You really need to stop with the mis-information.


The crowd goes silent as Jpmboy steps into the batter's box... Boom, strategic use of bold and the crowd goes wild!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Here is a link that I have been using since 2007 to answer peoples questions on LL and VID it is a good read.


Here's a fun fact. The original iPhone was released in 2007. We sure have made a lot of progress since then.


----------



## scracy

So dry lol


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Z170, Z270 Motherboards are all the same just different terminology in Bios. There is no voltage processing chip on the motherboards it is all done with CPU VID and VRM for Dynamic Vcore.


Perhaps you should go read up on motherboard VRM circuits. There most definitely is a processing chip controlling the voltages through the number of phases. Most boards these days use a 6 channel controller chip for the main core VRM. Expensive boards will sometimes use an 8 channel chip but those are fairly uncommon, and many of the cheap boards use a 4 channel controller.


----------



## Caos

Hello, some doubts. The spread spectrum I have to disable? Also like the load line calibration?


----------



## buddatech

Another to add to the chart

Username: Buddatech
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: Bclk. 100
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency: 5200MHz
Cache Frequency: 4800MHz
Vcore in UEFI: Adaptive 1.315 +.005 Offset= 1.32v
Vcore: 1.328v
FCLK: 1000MHz
Cooling Solution: Delidded w/ CLP, H100i v2
Stability Test: Real Bench v2.44 8HR

Batch Number: L639F977
Ram Speed: 3000MHz 14-16-16-35
Ram Voltage: 1.36v BIOS/1.348 OS
VCCIO: 1.13
VCCSA: 1.25
Motherboard: 270E Asus Strix
LLC Setting: LVL 6
Misc Comments: No AVX offset used

*EDIT New Results 2/7/17



Delid8HOURSRBrun1.33v52_48_30.PNG 1338k .PNG file


----------



## scracy

Very nice another one from the magic L639F977 batch


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> So dry lol


Less dry?

https://youtu.be/WL1hlzLsUaU?t=11s
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *buddatech*
> 
> Another to add to the chart
> 
> Username: Buddatech
> CPU Model: 7700k
> Base Clock: Bclk. 100
> Core Multiplier: 52
> Core Frequency: 5200MHz
> Cache Frequency: 4200MHz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.37v
> Vcore: 1.328v
> FCLK: 1000MHz
> Cooling Solution: Delidded w/ CLP, H100i v2
> Stability Test: Real Bench v2.44 8HR
> 
> Batch Number: L639F977
> Ram Speed: 3000MHz 14-16-16-35
> Ram Voltage: 1.36v BIOS/1.348 OS
> VCCIO: 1.13
> VCCSA: 1.25
> Motherboard: 270E Asus Strix
> LLC Setting: LVL 4
> Misc Comments: No AVX offset used


8hrs is a long time to run RealBench just to not have your Vcore in the HWinfo screen? Fixed

Sounds like a great chip man. Congrats!


----------



## scracy

Nice "visuals" on that link...but oh dear lol. Yeah noticed the lack of Vcore showing in hardware info but still its from a proven good batch congratts. Nevermind Vcore now showing


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Nice "visuals" on that link...but oh dear lol. Yeah noticed the lack of Vcore showing in hardware info but still its from a proven good batch congratts.


Glad you liked. Can't have too much dry floating around.









He fixed it. Damn good chip either way.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Glad you liked. Can't have too much dry floating around.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He fixed it. Damn good chip either way.


Nothing like a dry sense of humour but your comments were certainly to the point in a humorous way.
How many of these L639F977 on the chart now? I count about 4 or 5 once the chart is updated.


----------



## buddatech

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Very nice another one from the magic L639F977 batch


Thanks!

Question: Better to run 1.37v LLC 4 max 78c after 8 hour RB or 1.33v MAX 72c after 1 hour RB but with LLC 6 for same frequency 5.2GHz? High LLC Bad for long term?


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Nothing like a dry sense of humour but your comments were certainly to the point in a humorous way.
> How many of these L639F977 on the chart now? I count about 4 or 5 once the chart is updated.


I am hoping my L639F998 turns out to be godly too. Ill see this weekend hopefully. Same week of production as those others, just a later batch. So the good ones so far have all been the beginning of the week and mine most likely came from the end of the week.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> I am hoping my L639F998 turns out to be godly too. Ill see this weekend hopefully. Same week of production as those others, just a later batch. So the good ones so far have all been the beginning of the week and mine most likely came from the end of the week.


We have a saying in Australia about cars being built on a Friday being lemons...hopefully your cpu wasn't manufactured on a Friday lol...seriously though hope it turns out to be a good one for you.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> We have a saying in Australia about cars being built on a Friday being lemons...hopefully your cpu wasn't manufactured on a Friday lol...seriously though hope it turns out to be a good one for you.


Funny you mention that. The car sitting in my garage was built in Australia and must have been made on a Wednesday or Thursday. It's nothing more than a rebadged Holden. Love it.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Funny you mention that. The car sitting in my garage was built in Australia and must have been made on a Wednesday or Thursday. It's nothing more than a rebadged Holden. Love it.


Ah..so you drive an aussie Chevrolet known as a commodore here, nice! Funny a lot of holden commodore owners here actually put Chevrolet badges on their cars...go figure. Seems to me from what im seeing that Z270 boards seem to require a slightly lower Vcore for same clock...more mature uefi?


----------



## ducegt

I've never seen a Holden and I've spent some time in Europe as well. I'd at least recognize the commodore because Ive sim raced a lot of laps at Bathurst. The 12 hour DTM class or whatever they now call it was this last weekend. I caught a bit of it and played some Forza Apez which runs and looks amazing even with a 2gb video card. Solid 60fps. Manages to get my 5200 OC to peak at 68C while realbench does 75. DX12 isn't a minimalist when it comes to CPU after all.


----------



## Celcius

8 hours of realbench at 4.8ghz core, 4.5ghz cache, and 1.248v: http://imgur.com/ni03oCV


----------



## ReCkLeZz

Username:ReCkLeZz
CPU Model:7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier:51
Core Frequency:5100
Cache Frequency:4700
Vcore in UEFI: 1.400.
Vcore: 1.392
FCLK: 1.000
Cooling Solution: Cryorig A80, Delidded and Binned for 5.1 from silicon lottery
Stability Test: 1hr OCCT 4.4.3

Batch Number: Malaysia L640F751
Ram Speed: 3733 17-17-17-37 2T
Ram Voltage: 1.35v
VCCIO: 1.2v
VCCSA: 1.225v
Motherboard: Z270 Asus ROG Code
LLC Setting: LLC 5
Misc Comments: No AVx offset


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *buddatech*
> 
> Question: Better to run 1.37v LLC 4 max 78c after 8 hour RB or 1.33v MAX 72c after 1 hour RB but with LLC 6 for same frequency 5.2GHz? High LLC Bad for long term?


No question, go for option #2, lower volts/lower temps! You will not see any side effects for using LLC6 over LLC4, that's what it is there for ... to fine tune your voltage for stability and in the hopes of lowering temps









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReCkLeZz*
> 
> Username:ReCkLeZz
> CPU Model:7700K
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier:51
> Core Frequency:5100
> Cache Frequency:4700
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.400.
> Vcore: 1.392
> FCLK: 1.000
> Cooling Solution: Cryorig A80, Delidded and Binned for 5.1 from silicon lottery
> Stability Test: 1hr OCCT 4.4.3
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L640F751
> Ram Speed: 3733 17-17-17-37 2T
> Ram Voltage: 1.35v
> VCCIO: 1.2v
> VCCSA: 1.225v
> Motherboard: Z270 Asus ROG Code
> LLC Setting: LLC 5
> Misc Comments: No AVx offset
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Very Nice! and welcome. Those are some of the lowest load temps I've seen without a full custom loop. That Cryorig A80 is impressive. Looks like your ambients are right around 21-22c? Are you running an open bench? ... Fill in the rest of your system specs (see my sig)


----------



## Caos

Hi, I'm wanting to do only 4.7, just modify the vcore adaptive mode, (-) 0.280, LLC setting LLC2, in games reaches 1,200, is it normal for the desktop to have a peak of 1.248?

moherboard asus code IX


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Caos*
> 
> Hi, I'm wanting to do only 4.7, just modify the vcore adaptive mode, (-) 0.280, LLC setting LLC2, in games reaches 1,200, is it normal for the desktop to have a peak of 1.248?
> 
> moherboard asus code IX


read the OC guide in my sig.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the only part of that decade-old article that is still relevant is what I put in bold. Vdroop is a good thing for 24/7 settings.. maybe not for benchmarking.
> You really need to stop with the mis-information.


It's not misinformation that is what Intel added LL for 24/7 durability on processor life. You need to read the hole article to understand and become educated. History is what you can use to understand how things work in the past and now since there are no new articles because things have not changed how they work just more enhancements to old technology also digital VRM instead of analog. I know how the old VRM and VID worked and how the setup works on new motherboards and processors.

LINK: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5

Voltage regulator module
Some voltage regulators provide a fixed supply voltage to the processor, but most of them sense the required supply voltage from the processor, essentially acting as a continuously-variable adjustable regulator. In particular, VRMs that are soldered to the motherboard are supposed to do the sensing, according to the Intel specification.

Voltage identification
Instead of having a power supply unit generate some fixed voltage, the CPU uses a small set of digital signals, the VID lines, to instruct an on-board power converter of the desired voltage level. The switch-mode buck converter then adjusts its output accordingly. The flexibility so obtained makes it possible to use the same power supply unit for CPUs with somewhat different nominal supply voltages and to reduce power consumption during idle periods by lowering the supply voltage.[5]
LINK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage_regulator_module


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> It's not misinformation that is what Intel added LL for 24/7 durability on processor life. You need to read the hole article to understand and become educated. History is what you can use to understand how things work in the past and now since there are no new articles because things have not changed how they work just more enhancements to old technology also digital VRM instead of analog. I know how the old VRM and VID worked and how the setup works on new motherboards and processors.
> 
> LINK: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5
> 
> Voltage regulator module
> Some voltage regulators provide a fixed supply voltage to the processor, but most of them sense the required supply voltage from the processor, essentially acting as a continuously-variable adjustable regulator. In particular, VRMs that are soldered to the motherboard are supposed to do the sensing, according to the Intel specification.
> 
> Voltage identification
> Instead of having a power supply unit generate some fixed voltage, the CPU uses a small set of digital signals, the VID lines, to instruct an on-board power converter of the desired voltage level. The switch-mode buck converter then adjusts its output accordingly. The flexibility so obtained makes it possible to use the same power supply unit for CPUs with somewhat different nominal supply voltages and to reduce power consumption during idle periods by lowering the supply voltage.[5]
> LINK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage_regulator_module


dude - I read that article the day it published 10 years ago...
blocked.


----------



## buddatech

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> No question, go for option #2, lower volts/lower temps! You will not see any side effects for using LLC6 over LLC4, that's what it is there for ... to fine tune your voltage for stability and in the hopes of lowering temps
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you.


----------



## Celcius

hmm, I passed Asus realbench for 8 hours no problems at 4.8ghz core / 4.5ghz cache / 1.248v and x264 ran fine for hours but prime95 errored out within 17 minutes.
I think prime95 is a better test...

edit: Prime95 27.7 had my cpu at 88C before I stopped it. Now I don't know what to think. I ran it 24 hours straight on my 2600k and 930 before that back in the day but these new cpus don't seem to like it. Is it not a good idea to run prime95 on kaby lake?
Also, when running realbench or x264 my vcore was a steady 1.248 but when I load up prime95 is raises to 1.264.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> Perhaps you should go read up on motherboard VRM circuits. There most definitely is a processing chip controlling the voltages through the number of phases. Most boards these days use a 6 channel controller chip for the main core VRM. Expensive boards will sometimes use an 8 channel chip but those are fairly uncommon, and many of the cheap boards use a 4 channel controller.


You are correct that the VRM or PPM (power processing module) dose the processing of the voltage to the CPU, however it gets the commands from the processor CPU VID. The VID is used in Auto mode with stock voltage or adaptive with + elevated voltage command or DVID with + elevated voltage command. The VID is bypassed with Fixed voltage for the VRM.

VID = multiplier, load, temp.
Example Dynamic (DVID) +0.075 4.5GHz prime95 1.332v RealBench 1.263v.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> dude - I read that article the day it published 10 years ago...
> blocked.


I read it 10 years ago and just now, it still holds true to the basics.


----------



## ReCkLeZz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> No question, go for option #2, lower volts/lower temps! You will not see any side effects for using LLC6 over LLC4, that's what it is there for ... to fine tune your voltage for stability and in the hopes of lowering temps
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> 
> Very Nice! and welcome. Those are some of the lowest load temps I've seen without a full custom loop. That Cryorig A80 is impressive. Looks like your ambients are right around 21-22c? Are you running an open bench? ... Fill in the rest of your system specs (see my sig)


Hello, I am not on an open bench, although that would be nice prob. I just got good airflow. I put the spec into the sig. Sadly although this is good temp wise, this cpu is picky. Doesn't like 1.44 or 1.45v for 5.2 and won't stay stable under 1.4v in bios. Also this thing won't OC the ram sadly, not sure if ram issue is MB or IMC tho. But i can't complain since the temps are good and some ppl don't get 5ghz even.


----------



## Celcius

I can pass realbench for 8 hours at 4.8ghz & 1.248v but prime95 causes my temps to shoot up and then it errors out after a few minutes. Even if I drop down 100 mhz I have to stop the test at 88-89C. Others like realbench and aida64 are only 81C-83C for hours and run fine. Should I just not worry about prime95? Or go back to an older non-avx version? or use avx offset? (although that didn't seem to help temps much lol, unless I'm going to try dropping it way down)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Celcius*
> 
> I can pass realbench for 8 hours at 4.8ghz & 1.248v but prime95 causes my temps to shoot up and then it errors out after a few minutes. Even if I drop down 100 mhz I have to stop the test at 88-89C. Others like realbench and aida64 are only 81C-83C for hours and run fine. Should I just not worry about prime95? Or go back to an older non-avx version? or use avx offset? (although that didn't seem to help temps much lol, unless I'm going to try dropping it way down)


yeah, drop p95 or delid the cpu and use really good cooling - it's not reflective of any real-world use. That said, you can make any p95 not use AVX with the following commands in the local.txt file. details in the undoc file:

CpuSupportsAVX=0 or 1
CpuSupportsFMA3=0 or 1

note: disabling AVX disables FMA3 also. 1 = enabled.


----------



## hotrod717

*Not sure what happened w//hwinfo64 and blank out???(Before someone points it out.)

For prosperity--

Username: hotrod717
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Frequency: 52
Cache Frequency: 48
Vcore in UEFI: 1.37
Vcore: 1.376
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Custom Loop - D5, RX360, EK Supremecy Full Chrome, Deltas (of course)
Stability Test: Realbench 1hr. Full 16gb of Ram
Misc. No AVX Offset - Ambient < Sorry - got LN2 fishes to swim with and prefer a freshness to the chip over stability epeen.







> For the F977 gang.
Batch Number: Malaysia L639F977 - Delidded w/ gelid
Ram Speed: 3600 15-15-15-36-1t
Ram - Corsair Dom Plat. 3600c16
VCCIO: 1.25
VCCSA: 1.275
Ram Voltage: 1.375
Motherboard: Asus Maximus VIII Impact
LLC Setting: 6
Adaptive


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Not sure what happened w//hwinfo64 and blank out???(Before someone points it out.)
> 
> For prosperity--
> 
> Username: hotrod717
> CPU Model: i7 7700k
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Frequency: 52
> Cache Frequency: 48
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.37
> Vcore: 1.376
> FCLK: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Custom Loop - D5, RX360, EK Supremecy Full Chrome, Deltas (of course)
> Stability Test: Realbench 1hr. Full 16gb of Ram
> Misc. No AVX Offset - Ambient < Sorry - got LN2 fishes to swim with and prefer a freshness to the chip over stability epeen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > For the F977 gang.
> Batch Number: Malaysia L639F977 - Delidded w/ gelid
> Ram Speed: 3600 15-15-15-36-1t
> Ram - Corsair Dom Plat. 3600c16
> VCCIO: 1.25
> VCCSA: 1.275
> Ram Voltage: 1.375
> Motherboard: Asus Maximus VIII Impact
> LLC Setting: 6
> Adaptive


that looks good to me! same batch?


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that looks good to me! same batch?


Yeah. Unfortunately haven't had much time to do more. Decided to give the 1st (L639G023) chip another go as well and see how it fares delidded. Hopefully comparable to done12many2's after delid. Curious how the #1 and #2 scale in comparison on cold as well.


----------



## damstr

Anyone else rocking L639F993? Seems to be another golden batch similar to 977.

Does 4.9 @ 1.25 in Windows, 1.27 in the BIOS.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *damstr*
> 
> Anyone else rocking L639F993? Seems to be another golden batch similar to 977.
> 
> Does 4.9 @ 1.25 in Windows, 1.27 in the BIOS.


That would actually be slightly worse than average based on all the chips I've tested provided that it's the lowest you can go at 4.9 to boot Windows. I bet you can go lower just for that.

Most I've tested would boot into Windows at 5 GHz with 1.25v or less, but that wasn't a stressful thing at all.


----------



## damstr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> That would actually be slightly worse than average based on all the chips I've tested provided that it's the lowest you can go at 4.9 to boot Windows. I bet you can go lower just for that.
> 
> Most I've tested would boot into Windows at 5 GHz with 1.25v or less, but that wasn't a stressful thing at all.


Oh yeah I can easily boot. I'm saying this is stable from my testing. Hours of handbrake and games with zero crashes.

1.3v (in BIOS) peaking 1.275 in Windows @ 5GHz was RealBench stress tested for 4 hours and stable but temps were too high so I backed down until my delid kit comes.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *damstr*
> 
> Oh yeah I can easily boot. I'm saying this is stable from my testing. Hours of handbrake and games with zero crashes.
> 
> 1.3v (in BIOS) peaking 1.275 in Windows @ 5GHz was RealBench stress tested for 4 hours and stable but temps were too high so I backed down until my delid comes.


Sounds like a pretty good chip man!


----------



## damstr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Sounds like a pretty good chip man!


Thanks! 1.26 (in UEFI) peaked 1.24 in Windows @ 5GHz and was stable for roughly an hour in RealBench before crashing.

Is it possible that lower temps at the same voltage will give me more stability?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *damstr*
> 
> Thanks! 1.26 (in UEFI) peaked 1.24 in Windows @ 5GHz and was stable for roughly an hour in RealBench before crashing.
> 
> Is it possible that lower temps at the same voltage will give me more stability?


yes.


----------



## Caos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> read the OC guide in my sig.


ok thanks Jpmboy.


----------



## JoeUbi

Moved my 6700k out and my 7700k in... First boot at 1.3v and 5.0 Ghz. The L643 batch looks good.


----------



## skingun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JoeUbi*
> 
> Moved my 6700k out and my 7700k in... First boot at 1.3v and 5.0 Ghz. The L643 batch looks good.


Nice! My chip won't go to 4.9 without vcore peaking at 1.414 (I'm using DVID mode on a Gigabyte board) but will stay stable at 4.9 with a constant 1.36 vcore.

Takes 1.44 to hit 5ghz.

Backed down to 4.8 and my vcore spikes at 1.322 but generally hangs around 1.260 under full load (DVID mode again with stock XMP settings). Don't want to push it past this point for 24/7 use.


----------



## JoeUbi

Seems to be stable at 1.3v. I should probably try and drop the voltage and see what happens. Definitely going to need to do a de-lid on this one. Any recommendations for a tool? I was eyeballing the rockit 88 when I was getting my 6700k.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gorhell*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *outofmyheadyo*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erikinsc*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dlss*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr0czny*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *buddatech*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReCkLeZz*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*



Sample Size21  Average OC5.08Median OC5.10Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.38

All charted except erikinsc who did not fill the form. Hotrod put into secondary chart.

Chart has been updated to link to charting post (right hand corner).


----------



## redone13

Awesome. Thanks for the thread and keep up the good work.


----------



## CubanLegend

So my ASUS z270i STRIX Mini-ITX board came in I fitted my Corsair 4000MHz on there (no XMP) and my 7700k on there, with a Noctua NH-L9i, using NT-H1 Thermal Compound.

I can boot at 1.35v @ 5.0 no AVX (I will test if I'm stable at a lower vcore or at a higher clock), with no crash while running ROG Realbench, x264 custom load & Prime95 v27.9 ... but according to HWINFO this thing heats up to and past 90c almost instantly and throttles like crazy and I'm not comfy letting it get to 90c at all, should I be?... I am ready to delid but I'd like to stability test a lighter load that isn't going to get so hot (even if it takes longer to test). Keeping full-load temps below 80 Celsius is advised right? But I don't think it's possible using my HSF combo. But I really need to get a good set of temp numbers so I can accurately determine the temperature difference from before/after the delid.

Should I listen to any of the little details mentioned in this Kaby Lake OC guide by ASUS in my BIOS? Like the IA AC Load Line & DC Load Line of 0.01, and having the voltage on Adaptive Mode at 1.35v? Should I stick to manual voltage? And is it reliable to adjust my voltage while powered on and in Windows using AISuite between tests so I don't have to jump back into the BIOS each time?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CubanLegend*
> 
> So my ASUS z270i STRIX Mini-ITX board came in I fitted my Corsair 4000MHz on there (no XMP) and my 7700k on there, with a Noctua NH-L9i, using NT-H1 Thermal Compound.
> 
> I can boot at 1.35v @ 5.0 no AVX (I will test if I'm stable at a lower vcore or at a higher clock), with no crash while running ROG Realbench, x264 custom load & Prime95 v27.9 ... but according to HWINFO this thing heats up to and past 90c almost instantly and throttles like crazy and I'm not comfy letting it get to 90c at all, should I be?... I am ready to delid but I'd like to stability test a lighter load that isn't going to get so hot (even if it takes longer to test). Keeping full-load temps below 80 Celsius is advised right? But I don't think it's possible using my HSF combo. But I really need to get a good set of temp numbers so I can accurately determine the temperature difference from before/after the delid.
> 
> Should I listen to any of the little details mentioned in this Kaby Lake OC guide by ASUS in my BIOS? Like the IA AC Load Line & DC Load Line of 0.01, and having the voltage on Adaptive Mode at 1.35v? Should I stick to manual voltage? And is it reliable to adjust my voltage while powered on and in Windows using AISuite between tests so I don't have to jump back into the BIOS each time?


the OC guide will be very helpful... but you're not gonna get a drop in load temperatures at the same voltage using adaptive vs manual voltage. I do not like to use OS tools to adjust voltages in general, but if you do, vcore is my limit. (too many others align for a solid OC during the power on self tet - POST).
Stick with manual while tuning in on an OC then you can always switch to adaprive once you now what voltages the cpu needs.


----------



## JoeUbi

The spreadsheet definitely make it clear that if you want to get 5 Ghz you need to delid.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JoeUbi*
> 
> The spreadsheet definitely make it clear that if you want to get 5 Ghz you need to delid.


That's not true. Asus studied many chips and 80℅ could do 5 with an AVX offset of 4.8.


----------



## CubanLegend

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> That's not true. Asus studied many chips and 80℅ could do 5 with an AVX offset of 4.8.


What was their metric for those 5GHZ chips being stable though?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the OC guide will be very helpful... but you're not gonna get a drop in load temperatures at the same voltage using adaptive vs manual voltage. I do not like to use OS tools to adjust voltages in general, but if you do, vcore is my limit. (too many others align for a solid OC during the power on self tet - POST).
> Stick with manual while tuning in on an OC then you can always switch to adaprive once you now what voltages the cpu needs.


thanks, will do!


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CubanLegend*
> 
> What was their metric for those 5GHZ chips being stable though?
> thanks, will do!


I'm sure their tests had merit. I'd guess realbench. See the OC guide in jpm's signature.


----------



## JoeUbi

I meant to say *over* 5 Ghz. Luckily mine hits 5 Ghz at 1.3v with ease before delidding.


----------



## Celcius

I'm finally done tuning the overclock on my 7700k: 4.7ghz core, 4.5ghz cache, 1.264v-1.280v.
Prime95 28.10 passed for 24 hours: http://imgur.com/B8BGXtT
The hottest it got was 93C, but prime95 26.6 (without avx/avx2/fma3) only gets up to about 80C after 14.5 hours, and games like Battlefield 1 only get up to about 73C so I'm totally fine with it.


----------



## buddatech

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> That's not true. Asus studied many chips and 80℅ could do 5 with an AVX offset of 4.8.


Delidding has a huge impact on krabby lake CPU's.


----------



## bakemono

Username: Bakemono
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: Bclk. 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore in UEFI: 1.344
Vcore: 1.328
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: corsair h115i
Stability Test: x264 Stability Test v2.06 7hours+ *for some reason it only did 50 loops* maybe I should've type infinite when asked? I just left it blank

Batch Number: Malaysia L639G772
Ram Speed: Corsair dominator platinum 16GB 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35
Ram Voltage: 1.5v
VCCIO: Auto @ 1.152
VCCSA: Auto @ 1.144
Motherboard: z170 Maximus VIII Extreme
LLC Setting: level 5
Misc Comments: no AVX. temp is 68c max, I may need to delid this summer.


----------



## buddatech

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> Username: Bakemono
> CPU Model: i7 7700k
> Base Clock: Bclk. 100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4200
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.344
> Vcore: 1.328
> FCLK: Reminder: 1000
> Cooling Solution: corsair h115i
> Stability Test: x264 Stability Test v2.06 7hours+ *for some reason it only did 50 loops* maybe I should've type infinite when asked? I just left it blank
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L639G772
> Ram Speed: Corsair dominator platinum 16GB 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35
> Ram Voltage: 1.5v
> VCCIO: Auto @ 1.152
> VCCSA: Auto @ 1.444
> Motherboard: z170 Maximus VIII Extreme
> LLC Setting: level 5
> Misc Comments: no AVX. temp is 68c max, I may need to delid this summer.


Your RAM voltage looks high for that timing and speed same RAM as you and I'm now running 14-15-15-35 3000 @1.36v also your VCCSA Auto @ 1.444 seems a bit high as well.


----------



## OutlawII

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> Username: Bakemono
> CPU Model: i7 7700k
> Base Clock: Bclk. 100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4200
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.344
> Vcore: 1.328
> FCLK: Reminder: 1000
> Cooling Solution: corsair h115i
> Stability Test: x264 Stability Test v2.06 7hours+ *for some reason it only did 50 loops* maybe I should've type infinite when asked? I just left it blank
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L639G772
> Ram Speed: Corsair dominator platinum 16GB 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35
> Ram Voltage: 1.5v
> VCCIO: Auto @ 1.152
> VCCSA: Auto @ 1.444
> Motherboard: z170 Maximus VIII Extreme
> LLC Setting: level 5
> Misc Comments: no AVX. temp is 68c max, I may need to delid this summer.


I dont think 50 loops is gonna cover it for a 8 hour stability test


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> I dont think 50 loops is gonna cover it for a 8 hour stability test


took mine about 70 ;loops. folks should just attached the report file.


----------



## bakemono

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *buddatech*
> 
> Your RAM voltage looks high for that timing and speed same RAM as you and I'm now running 14-15-15-35 3000 @1.36v also your VCCSA Auto @ 1.444 seems a bit high as well.


thanks for pointing that out, It was a typo, my vccsa is 1.144. I′m going to oc my mem as soon as I can.


----------



## bakemono

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> I dont think 50 loops is gonna cover it for a 8 hour stability test


I′m doing the 1 hour OCCT 4.4.3 test as we speak, gonna update my post when I can.
I won′t have time to do the x264 test again.

maybe I′ll oc my ram next just like what buddatech did.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Celcius*
> 
> I'm finally done tuning the overclock on my 7700k: 4.7ghz core, 4.5ghz cache, 1.264v-1.280v.
> Prime95 28.10 passed for 24 hours: http://imgur.com/B8BGXtT
> The hottest it got was 93C, but prime95 26.6 (without avx/avx2/fma3) only gets up to about 80C after 14.5 hours, and games like Battlefield 1 only get up to about 73C so I'm totally fine with it.


Seems like you either have quite a bit of space between the die and IHS, or the IHS is not very flat. That is some really high temps with no AVX instructions for not very high core speed.


----------



## Lostman

Hey everyone, new to overclocking and decided to OC my 7600k today (air cooled with Noctua U14S on an Asus Prime Z270-A mobo)
My goal was to hit 4.8 GHz and after a few BSODs I managed to get it stable at 1.38v level 5 LLC in the bios
After this I ran the custom X264 test (16 threads, normal) as per the guide recommended. I came back a few hours later and noticed a "h.264 encoder has stopped working" error window had popped up and the stress test had paused after running for an hour. Windows 10 itself was fine and nothing else was broken so I closed the error window and it resumed the test (it went to the next loop).
I thought maybe there still wasn't enough voltage so I bumped up the LLC to level 6 and ran the x264 test again. This time it managed to run for 9+ hours before the same error window popped up and paused the test.
My question is should I consider 9 hours of stress testing good enough and leave it be or should I go back to bios and fiddle with th voltage again?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Celcius*
> 
> I can pass realbench for 8 hours at 4.8ghz & 1.248v but prime95 causes my temps to shoot up and then it errors out after a few minutes. Even if I drop down 100 mhz I have to stop the test at 88-89C. Others like realbench and aida64 are only 81C-83C for hours and run fine. Should I just not worry about prime95? Or go back to an older non-avx version? or use avx offset? (although that didn't seem to help temps much lol, unless I'm going to try dropping it way down)


If you want to use the new Prime95 with all the bug fixes and disable AVX/FMA3 just use this command CpuSupportsAVX=0 in Prime95 local.txt


----------



## Owlfury

I will appreciate some advice here please. Running i5-7600k / MSI Z270M Mobo / Cryorig H5 Universal.
Trying to reach 4.8. First question here - should it be possible with an air cooler?
Here are some screenshots for reference (stock, 4.7, 4.8):





Weird thing is that it works OK with 4.7 @ 1.25 vcore (adaptive mode, xmp disabled, rest bios settings are default), but soon as I try to hit 4.8 @ 1.3 (with 1.25 test cannot be passed) it throttles down to 4.5 even though temps are 80C max. Googled, doublechecked the power limit setting (was set to auto), changed it to 91, had no effect. Besides the VRAM temp I have no other ideas.


----------



## bakemono

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> Username: Bakemono
> CPU Model: i7 7700k
> Base Clock: Bclk. 100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4200
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.344
> Vcore: 1.328
> FCLK: Reminder: 1000
> Cooling Solution: corsair h115i
> Stability Test: x264 Stability Test v2.06 7hours+ *for some reason it only did 50 loops* maybe I should've type infinite when asked? I just left it blank
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L639G772
> Ram Speed: Corsair dominator platinum 16GB 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35
> Ram Voltage: 1.5v
> VCCIO: Auto @ 1.152
> VCCSA: Auto @ 1.144
> Motherboard: z170 Maximus VIII Extreme
> LLC Setting: level 5
> Misc Comments: no AVX. temp is 68c max, I may need to delid this summer.


updated

CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: Bclk. 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore in UEFI: 1.344
Vcore: 1.328
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: corsair h115i
Stability Test: OCCT 4.4.3 and x264 Stability Test v2.06 7hours

Batch Number: Malaysia L639G772
Ram Speed: Corsair dominator platinum 16GB 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35
Ram Voltage: 1.5v
VCCIO: Auto @ 1.152
VCCSA: Auto @ 1.144
Motherboard: z170 Maximus VIII Extreme
LLC Setting: level 5
Misc Comments: no AVX. temp is 68c max, I may need to delid this summer.









Next is RAM OC, thanks to buddatech for the tip


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> updated
> 
> CPU Model: i7 7700k
> Base Clock: Bclk. 100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4200
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.344
> Vcore: 1.328
> FCLK: Reminder: 1000
> Cooling Solution: corsair h115i
> Stability Test: OCCT 4.4.3 and x264 Stability Test v2.06 7hours
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L639G772
> Ram Speed: Corsair dominator platinum 16GB 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35
> Ram Voltage: 1.5v
> VCCIO: Auto @ 1.152
> VCCSA: Auto @ 1.144
> Motherboard: z170 Maximus VIII Extreme
> LLC Setting: level 5
> Misc Comments: no AVX. temp is 68c max, I may need to delid this summer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Next is RAM OC, thanks to buddatech for the tip


Why is the Vccsa on auto so low, what are you using to see the voltage level? My Vccsa on Auto is 1.248v


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> updated
> 
> CPU Model: i7 7700k
> Base Clock: Bclk. 100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4200
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.344
> Vcore: 1.328
> FCLK: Reminder: 1000
> Cooling Solution: corsair h115i
> Stability Test: OCCT 4.4.3 and x264 Stability Test v2.06 7hours
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L639G772
> Ram Speed: Corsair dominator platinum 16GB 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35
> Ram Voltage: 1.5v
> VCCIO: Auto @ 1.152
> VCCSA: Auto @ 1.144
> Motherboard: z170 Maximus VIII Extreme
> LLC Setting: level 5
> Misc Comments: no AVX. temp is 68c max, I may need to delid this summer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Next is RAM OC, thanks to buddatech for the tip


I noticed your ram is at 1.5V. The max I see even DDR4 4266 is 1.4v with 1.35 being the norm. You may want to look into this.


----------



## bakemono

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Why is the Vccsa on auto so low, what are you using to see the voltage level? My Vccsa on Auto is 1.248v


I actually don't know myself, I use Hwinfo64 to monitor the Vccsa voltage.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> I noticed your ram is at 1.5V. The max I see even DDR4 4266 is 1.4v with 1.35 being the norm. You may want to look into this.


thanks for pointing that one out, I use xmp at the moment, gonna manually lower the voltage and perhaps tighten the timings while I'm there.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> I actually don't know myself, I use Hwinfo64 to monitor the Vccsa voltage.
> thanks for pointing that one out, I use xmp at the moment, gonna manually lower the voltage and perhaps tighten the timings while I'm there.


Your XMP settings are 1.5v for 3000 c15? That's very likely not the case.


----------



## bakemono

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Your XMP settings are 1.5v for 3000 c15? That's very likely not the case.


I always had xmp on and dram voltage @ auto, looking back at my old screenshots, I noticed that it was running @ 1.144.
I dont know when or how but I guess something made my motherboard give dram 1.5v @ auto.
I lowered the dram to 1.15v now.

Update:

I remember messing around with DRAM OC, and putting the DRAM voltage to auto when reverting the changes. activating XMP will set the DRAM voltage to 1.35 not "auto".


----------



## Sptz

Hey guys,

I have an i7 7700k in an Asus z270G. I just loaded XMP profile and have everything set to auto.

Is there a reason CPU-Z is reporting 1.26V @ 4.5 idle (I have c-states and speedstep disabled) but when I run the x264 benchmark it goes down to 1.21?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sptz*
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> I have an i7 7700k in an Asus z270G. I just loaded XMP profile and have everything set to auto.
> 
> Is there a reason CPU-Z is reporting 1.26V @ 4.5 idle (I have c-states and speedstep disabled) but when I run the x264 benchmark it goes down to 1.21?


Auto on that board bumps each core to turbo 4.5Ghz i believe. Voltage will drop under load due to load due to Vdroop have you set your load line calibration? On some Asus boards the Auto load line calibration doesnt work, have you updated your UEFI to the latest?


----------



## Sptz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Auto on that board bumps each core to turbo 4.5Ghz i believe. Voltage will drop under load due to load due to Vdroop have you set your load line calibration? On some Asus boards the Auto load line calibration doesnt work, have you updated your UEFI to the latest?


Latest UEFI yes. It is turbo'ed to 4.5, so without speedstep its @ 4.5 all the time.

I haven't messed with LLC as I have no idea what that does.
Thing is, @ 1.21v it ran x264 stress test for 10 hours, I'd just like to bring it down when idling


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sptz*
> 
> Latest UEFI yes. It is turbo'ed to 4.5, so without speedstep its @ 4.5 all the time.
> 
> I haven't messed with LLC as I have no idea what that does


Vdroop is an intel spec that allows core voltage to drop slightly when under load. LLC or if you prefer load line calibration is a way of offsetting the Vdroop. Vdroop is why you are seeing a lower core voltage under load. If you look for a setting in your UEFI for LLC you can change it to suit your needs usually most Asus boards have 8 levels of LLC, most users usually set it to level 4 or 5. Basically experiment once you start to overclock and see what your particular CPU requires. If you want to bring down the voltage enable all your power saving options such as c states speedstep etc. Also make sure your power plan in Windows is in balanced mode which it usually is by default. Also use adaptive voltage for your Vcore or offset mode


----------



## Sptz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Vdroop is an intel spec that allows core voltage to drop slightly when under load. LLC or if you prefer load line calibration is a way of offsetting the Vdroop. Vdroop is why you are seeing a lower core voltage under load. If you look for a setting in your UEFI for LLC you can change it to suit your needs usually most Asus boards have 8 levels of LLC, most users usually set it to level 4 or 5. Basically experiment once you start to overclock and see what your particular CPU requires. If you want to bring down the voltage enable all your power saving options such as c states speedstep etc. Also make sure your power plan in Windows is in balanced mode which it usually is by default. Also use adaptive voltage for your Vcore or offset mode


Thanks! I don't have much need to overclock, and enabling C-states isn't ideal for me as I work with audio and having the CPU going up and down isn't ideal to deal with realtime audio. So that's why I have all of that disabled. It doesn't affect the temperature at all. It's idling at 25C. I have that urge to overclock it just because it's in my DNA from the old days but I don't feel it's necessary.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sptz*
> 
> Thanks! I don't have much need to overclock, and enabling C-states isn't ideal for me as I work with audio and having the CPU going up and down isn't ideal to deal with realtime audio. So that's why I have all of that disabled. It doesn't affect the temperature at all. It's idling at 25C. I have that urge to overclock it just because it's in my DNA from the old days but I don't feel it's necessary.


No problem here is a link that explains thing better than i can while im on my phone. There is an overclocking guide there for KabyLake and explains what all the buttons in your UEFI do








http://edgeup.asus.com


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skingun*
> 
> Nice! My chip won't go to 4.9 without vcore peaking at 1.414 (I'm using DVID mode on a Gigabyte board) but will stay stable at 4.9 with a constant 1.36 vcore.
> 
> Takes 1.44 to hit 5ghz.
> 
> Backed down to 4.8 and my vcore spikes at 1.322 but generally hangs around 1.260 under full load (DVID mode again with stock XMP settings). Don't want to push it past this point for 24/7 use.


Exactly same voltage for exactly same speed my chip needs.

I hate it man. looks like everbody arround has better chips then we do









delided with x62 in prime95 it would hit 79C when ram is 2133 speed, if i get ram to 3200 tems go up with 10C .

so all in all delided i7 7700k, with nzxt x62 hits 90C in prime95 after 5 min









ill go now to Microcenter and buy (just for test) other chip to see what it gives me.


----------



## MaKeN

Just hooked up a new i7 for test of temps.

so the new one on same exact voltage as old one :

Cinabench it hits 89C








Prime95 reaches 100C in 20 sec

so the "delid" on old one works good.


----------



## hotrod717

Shortly be adding another 7600k to the list. So far -http://www.overclock.net/t/1620203/kaby-lake-5ghz-milestone/1279
L643G497 - Stock VID 1.052v. Stock Voltage 1.136v
50/45 - 3600c15 - 1.232v
51/45 - 3600c15 - 1.296v.
52/45 - 3600c15 - 1.36v
53/45 - 3600c15 - 1.44v
Still testing, but will do a stress run once i hit the ambient wall.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> I actually don't know myself, I use Hwinfo64 to monitor the Vccsa voltage.
> thanks for pointing that one out, I use xmp at the moment, gonna manually lower the voltage and perhaps tighten the timings while I'm there.


Hwinfo64 might be reporting the voltage incorrectly. Try setting it manual to the same Vccsa and see what you get.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> Shortly be adding another 7600k to the list. So far -http://www.overclock.net/t/1620203/kaby-lake-5ghz-milestone/1279
> L643G497 - Stock VID 1.052v. Stock Voltage 1.136v
> 50/45 - 3600c15 - 1.232v
> 51/45 - 3600c15 - 1.296v.
> 52/45 - 3600c15 - 1.36v
> 53/45 - 3600c15 - 1.44v
> Still testing, but will do a stress run once i hit the ambient wall.


I'm running an 8hr RB on another 7700k at the moment with very similar voltage scaling to your 7600k with the exception of 52x where it's at 1.34v. 53x is the same. I hope it passes so I can replace my first 5.3 GHz ambient chip.







Added bonus, this chip will run CB R15 at 54x with 1.47v, where my first one took just over 1.5v.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I'm running an 8hr RB on another 7700k at the moment with very similar voltage scaling to your 7600k with the exception of 52x where it's at 1.34v. 53x is the same. I hope it passes so I can replace my first 5.3 GHz ambient chip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Added bonus, this chip will run CB R15 at 54x with 1.47v, where my first one took just over 1.5v.


Good to see you are back with another 7700K. Is that delidded yet ?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Good to see you are back with another 7700K. Is that delidded yet ?


Yeah. I just realized that @hotrod717 numbers were for a stock 7600k, correct? If so, apologies as I was comparing my delidded voltages with his stock voltages. Hey, rookie move. Lol


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I'm running an 8hr RB on another 7700k at the moment with very similar voltage scaling to your 7600k with the exception of 52x where it's at 1.34v. 53x is the same. I hope it passes so I can replace my first 5.3 GHz ambient chip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Added bonus, this chip will run CB R15 at 54x with 1.47v, where my first one took just over 1.5v.


Just delidded 7600k and approximately .015-.02v under posted with delid. About 10*c better. Still dont have my loop where it should be.







Once I see 20*c or under at idle, will get a better handle on all my chips.
I also delidded 1st 7700k chip L639G023, like yours , but havent tested yet.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> Just delidded 7600k and approximately .015-.02v under posted with delid. About 10*c better. Still dont have my loop where it should be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once I see 20*c or under at idle, will get a better handle on all my chips.
> I also delidded 1st 7700k chip L639G023, like yours , but havent tested yet.


Nice!

I usually idle around 21c depending on ambient of course. May dip lower or a hair higher, but that's about average.

I've learned a good bit about DTS thanks to the DTS on core0 on my L639G023 chip getting knocked out of calibration so all wasn't a loss. The fact that is still runs faster with a crippled sensor than most chips I've tested is what's even more amazing. Either way, I'm fairly confident the replacement is here. Just running further tests to confirm.

So far into my binning, I've come across A LOT of 5.1 and slightly better chips without delidding while using the AIO cooler on my bench. I've got 3 from L640F761 that are running great delidded. 2 are 5.2 GHz (1.37v and 1.38v) using an AIO (Corsiar H115i) and the 3rd is the one in my daily rig at 5.3 GHz with 1.44v at the moment. It does 5.2 GHz at 1.34v in RB and may be lower, but didn't spend much time with it.

Having popped the top on 8 of these things already, I can say that what a chip does prior to delid is not a very good indicator of how it will do after delid. I have ones that I thought were going to be worthless due to voltage requirements before delid turn out to be great chips onced delidded. Then there are those that are really good before delidding that end up improving temp wise, but not really voltage wise once delidded. The TIM / gapping from the factory is so inconsistent that it's truly hard to gauge a chip based on stock performance. You kinda just have to chance it and delid it anyways.

I've given up on batch numbers, yet I still find myself interest in certain ones from time to time.


----------



## hotrod717

My idle temps end up being 26*-30*. Haven't really benched since challenger rd.1 last year and broke down my bench loop in the spring. Just finished getting the a/c in line and waiting for temps to drop. Real curious as this can bring the temps down to 12* on a good day.








Definitely believing 51-52 is possible on more chips than first believed in the right hands.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> My idle temps end up being 26*-30*. Haven't really benched since challenger rd.1 last year and broke down my bench loop in the spring. *Just finished getting the a/c in line and waiting for temps to drop*. Real curious as this can bring the temps down to 12* on a good day.


I want this stuff to be a part of my future. I just need to get confident with cold stuff first.


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I want this stuff to be a part of my future. I just need to get confident with cold stuff first.


Hooking up a a/c to duct air into case is a no brainer. Case environment is kept same temp so little condensation if any. I literally use a box, gorilla tape and a 10,000btu a/c into a MM UFO Ext.
The trick is jumping to dice or ln2. LN2 is much cleaner and less worry than dice and having acetone sloshing around. All about prep and sealing mobo. In, not wanting to trash a mobo, i've found dragonskin to be the friendliest to keeping a board healthy and reversible in terms of resale.
Seeing 5600mhz+ on any given chip is addictive! Now we have KL and closing in on 7ghz. What!.


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> Just delidded 7600k and approximately .015-.02v under posted with delid. About 10*c better. Still dont have my loop where it should be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once I see 20*c or under at idle, will get a better handle on all my chips.
> I also delidded 1st 7700k chip L639G023, like yours , but havent tested yet.
> 
> 
> 
> Nice!
> 
> I usually idle around 21c depending on ambient of course. May dip lower or a hair higher, but that's about average.
> 
> I've learned a good bit about DTS thanks to the DTS on core0 on my L639G023 chip getting knocked out of calibration so all wasn't a loss. The fact that is still runs faster with a crippled sensor than most chips I've tested is what's even more amazing. Either way, I'm fairly confident the replacement is here. Just running further tests to confirm.
> 
> So far into my binning, I've come across A LOT of 5.1 and slightly better chips without delidding while using the AIO cooler on my bench. I've got 3 from L640F761 that are running great delidded. 2 are 5.2 GHz (1.37v and 1.38v) using an AIO (Corsiar H115i) and the 3rd is the one in my daily rig at 5.3 GHz with 1.44v at the moment. It does 5.2 GHz at 1.34v in RB and may be lower, but didn't spend much time with it.
> 
> Having popped the top on 8 of these things already, I can say that what a chip does prior to delid is not a very good indicator of how it will do after delid. I have ones that I thought were going to be worthless due to voltage requirements before delid turn out to be great chips onced delidded. Then there are those that are really good before delidding that end up improving temp wise, but not really voltage wise once delidded. The TIM / gapping from the factory is so inconsistent that it's truly hard to gauge a chip based on stock performance. You kinda just have to chance it and delid it anyways.
> 
> I've given up on batch numbers, yet I still find myself interest in certain ones from time to time.
Click to expand...

Very interesting and informative post! ... +R


----------



## Enso

Cinebench R15 score, run in real time

i7 7700k @ 5ghz with 1.356v
1125 cb


----------



## bakemono

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Hwinfo64 might be reporting the voltage incorrectly. Try setting it manual to the same Vccsa and see what you get.


I tried setting it manually, and still get the same readings.


----------



## Sptz

Do you guys have Speed Shift enabled or disabled? I have no idea what this does. It's enabled by default, I'm not using any c-states or speed step.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sptz*
> 
> Do you guys have Speed Shift enabled or disabled? I have no idea what this does. It's enabled by default, I'm not using any c-states or speed step.


Speed Shift is an improved upon version of SpeedStep. SpeedStep, which is controlled by Windows, scales clock speed as a power savings measure. Speed Shift, which is now hardware controlled by the CPU itself, does the same thing, but much faster. Speed Shift is capable of getting to max turbo speed much faster than Speed Shift.

I personally use Speed Shift, SpeedStep, and Adaptive voltage in order to keep the clock speeds, voltage and temps down when I don't need them. I've never had a problem with any of them.


----------



## skingun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Exactly same voltage for exactly same speed my chip needs.
> 
> I hate it man. looks like everbody arround has better chips then we do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> delided with x62 in prime95 it would hit 79C when ram is 2133 speed, if i get ram to 3200 tems go up with 10C .
> 
> so all in all delided i7 7700k, with nzxt x62 hits 90C in prime95 after 5 min
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ill go now to Microcenter and buy (just for test) other chip to see what it gives me.


I haven't delidded mine yet.

It's worth remembering that people don't tend to post results of unexceptional chips. The results on this sub forum should not be used as reference to guide expectations when purchasing a retail cpu, but as an example of potential.


----------



## Sptz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Speed Shift is an improved upon version of SpeedStep. SpeedStep, which is controlled by Windows, scales clock speed as a power savings measure. Speed Shift, which is now hardware controlled by the CPU itself, does the same thing, but much faster. Speed Shift is capable of getting to max turbo speed much faster than Speed Shift.
> 
> I personally use Speed Shift, SpeedStep, and Adaptive voltage in order to keep the clock speeds, voltage and temps down when I don't need them. I've never had a problem with any of them.


The only reason I don't want to use any of it is because I work with audio professionally and speedstep / c-states etc increase dpc latency which isn't desirable for realtime audio. Unless it's been changed, my frame of mind comes from the technology years and years ago.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sptz*
> 
> The only reason I don't want to use any of it is because I work with audio professionally and speedstep / c-states etc increase dpc latency which isn't desirable for realtime audio. Unless it's been changed, my frame of mind comes from the technology years and years ago.


Sounds like your original question was a bit loaded.

If you're concerned about these features interfering with your work, don't use them or research whether or not they are actually going to interfere.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sptz*
> 
> The only reason I don't want to use any of it is because I work with audio professionally and speedstep / c-states etc increase dpc latency which isn't desirable for realtime audio. Unless it's been changed, my frame of mind comes from the technology years and years ago.


Most studios have regular old Mac Pro towers with Intel CPUs and they have all basic functionality enabled. If it works fine for the major studios it shouldn't be a problem for boutique stuff.


----------



## bakemono

I updated my OC settings!
I found out that using adaptive works better for me instead of manual. I can't get stable below 1.32v LLC5 using manual but with adaptive, My vcore is stabling @ 1.296v during full load.
and also clocked the cache to 4.5Ghz, corrected my memory voltage, etc..

Username: Bakemono
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: Bclk. 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4500
Vcore in UEFI: Adaptive (1.340 @ - offset)
Vcore: 1.296
FCLK: 1
Cooling Solution: Corsair H115i
Stability Test: x264 Stability Test v2.06 (8 Hours 68 Loops) 16 Threads, normal priority

Loops = infinity
Threads = 16
Priority = normal

Batch Number: Malaysia L639G772
Ram Speed: Corsair Dominator Platinum 2x8GB 3000 15-17-17-35
Ram Voltage: 1.344
VCCIO: auto @ 1.152
VCCSA: auto @ 1.144
Motherboard: Maximus VIII Extreme
LLC Setting: Level 2
Misc Comments: no AVX, xmp profile is on, using integrated gpu atm



log file of stress test

x264-log_bakemono.rtf 5k .rtf file


----------



## OutlawII

Nice bakemono! I will be retesting mine after delid, i think i will be able to get 5.1 stable for sure. Hell might even try 5.2


----------



## done12many2

This submission is for a different 5.3 GHz 7700k from another batch.

Username: done12many2
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: 100 MHz
Core Multiplier: 53
Core Frequency: 5300 MHz
Cache Frequency: 4500 MHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.45v
Vcore: 1.439v average in load
FCLK: Reminder: 1000 MHz
Cooling Solution: Delidded, full loop, ambient, 65c Max core temp
Stability Test: RealBench 2.44 with memory set to maximum physical memory (32 GB)

Batch Number: Malaysia, L640F761 <-- Say what??? The infamous crap batch








Ram Speed: 3200 XMP 14-14-14-34-2T
VCCIO: 1.1v (BIOS)
VCCSA: 1.1v (BIOS)
Ram Voltage: 1.35v in BIOS as set per XMP
Motherboard: Asus ROG Maximus IX Formula
LLC Setting: LLC 5
Misc Comments: No AVX offset


----------



## OutlawII

Man popping the lid makes a differenc,your temps are cooler than mine at 1.34 volts lol


----------



## areczek1987

Lets hope my l640f770 will won't be a potato...


----------



## Duality92

Quote:


> "Safe Voltages (Always TENTATIVE):
> Vcore: 1.45v/1.37v"


Let's say I do like I did with my 6600K and run up to 1.5v (was 1.488v for 4.7 GHz under load), you guys think it's alright also? It'll be cooled with at least 360mm of radiator and a very good CPU block. It will also be delidded. (7700K).


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Duality92*
> 
> Let's say I do like I did with my 6600K and run up to 1.5v (was 1.488v for 4.7 GHz under load), you guys think it's alright also? It'll be cooled with at least 360mm of radiator and a very good CPU block. It will also be delidded. (7700K).


yes that will be fine. Intel says this is a very similar but slightly tweaked version of the node used for Skylake, which had very good voltage stability to 1.5v. This tweaked node is supposed to have a slightly better V/F curve so we can assume 1.5 is still plenty safe.


----------



## Duality92

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> yes that will be fine. Intel says this is a very similar but slightly tweaked version of the node used for Skylake, which had very good voltage stability to 1.5v. This tweaked node is supposed to have a slightly better V/F curve so we can assume 1.5 is still plenty safe.


Thanks! This is what I figured too, but wanted to check, also, does this mean I can feel still decent at like 1.525v? I like to live dangerously.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Duality92*
> 
> Thanks! This is what I figured too, but wanted to check, also, does this mean I can feel still decent at like 1.525v? I like to live dangerously.


Im not going to go through and pull graphs out of the PDF from Intel's very in depth study again right now, but basically some worst case scenario stuff says that Skylake at 1.475v has the same degradation as Haswell did at only 1.35v (Something just about everyone considered safe 24/7 voltages), and Skylake at 1.525v has the same degradation that Haswell has at 1.4 volts. And Kaby is supposed to improve that V/F curve a little bit. So while I would not ever recommend to anyone that over 1.5v is perfectly safe all the time, Intel's study shows that for us overclockers who like to live dangerously, 1.525v could be considered in the "decent zone". Whether you want to push it that far is up to you, but I fell perfectly safe at 1.5v for myself.

I also want to point out though that Intel specified 1.52v as the maximum safe voltage.


----------



## Duality92

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> Im not going to go through and pull graphs out of the PDF from Intel's very in depth study again right now, but basically some worst case scenario stuff says that Skylake at 1.475v has the same degradation as Haswell did at only 1.35v (Something just about everyone considered safe 24/7 voltages), and Skylake at 1.525v has the same degradation that Haswell has at 1.4 volts. And Kaby is supposed to improve that V/F curve a little bit. So while I would not ever recommend to anyone that over 1.5v is perfectly safe all the time, Intel's study shows that for us overclockers who like to live dangerously, 1.525v could be considered in the "decent zone". Whether you want to push it that far is up to you, but I fell perfectly safe at 1.5v for myself.
> 
> I also want to point out though that Intel specified 1.52v as the maximum safe voltage.


1.52v it is!

Thanks kind sir







I can't wait to see what my SL bin does. Hope there's a step that falls into that voltage.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Duality92*
> 
> 1.52v it is!
> 
> Thanks kind sir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't wait to see what my SL bin does. Hope there's a step that falls into that voltage.


What was your chip binned by SL at?

How are you cooling it?


----------



## Duality92

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> What was your chip binned by SL at?
> 
> How are you cooling it?


The chip I have coming is a binned 4.9 GHz model. I will be deliding it myself (I have a delidder) and I will be using in it's final form a 420mm radiator with 6 fans for it. For testing I will be using a 240+280 or 360mm radiator.


----------



## MaKeN

Interesting to see your temps


----------



## Jpmboy

Rad space just enables the loop to shed heat at a faster rate vs a set ambient (eg, it can handle a higher heat load from more components on the coolant volume vs smaller rad space even at the same loop volume, ). MOre rad space does not result in a lower temp coolant circulating ; when the heat load surpasses the loop heat capacity and shed capacity at steady-state is when more rad area helps.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sptz*
> 
> Do you guys have Speed Shift enabled or disabled? I have no idea what this does. It's enabled by default, I'm not using any c-states or speed step.


Does the CPU speed and voltage go up and down according to load? if it does you are using Speed Shift. I use all the dynamic features to reduce wear and tear, I use my PC all the time.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> I tried setting it manually, and still get the same readings.


I guess that is what the board sets for Vccsa 3000 speed memory and it is working fine.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> Im not going to go through and pull graphs out of the PDF from Intel's very in depth study again right now, but basically some worst case scenario stuff says that Skylake at 1.475v has the same degradation as Haswell did at only 1.35v (Something just about everyone considered safe 24/7 voltages), and Skylake at 1.525v has the same degradation that Haswell has at 1.4 volts. And Kaby is supposed to improve that V/F curve a little bit. So while I would not ever recommend to anyone that over 1.5v is perfectly safe all the time, Intel's study shows that for us overclockers who like to live dangerously, 1.525v could be considered in the "decent zone". Whether you want to push it that far is up to you, but I fell perfectly safe at 1.5v for myself.
> 
> I also want to point out though that Intel specified 1.52v as the maximum safe voltage.


I just want to point out 1.52v is Intel's safe voltage without overclocking.


----------



## BoredErica

There have been reports of 6600k degrading at <1.45.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZbBj9bC7wU


----------



## bakemono

according to der8auer, 1.4v should be the the safe voltage limit for kaby lake using water/air cooling, this coming from a professional overclocker and current kaby lake highest oc world record holder.
maybe what he meant is safe for 24/7 usage?

anyway, here′s the link for his video
https://youtu.be/kS8alLc6-wE


----------



## bakemono

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Nice bakemono! I will be retesting mine after delid, i think i will be able to get 5.1 stable for sure. Hell might even try 5.2


thanks, I will also delid mine this summer, I hope everything will be ok for both of us ?


----------



## BoredErica

They are all estimates. Cyro said he degraded @ 1.392v. What people do with their chips vary, for example I've put more load on my Haswell chip than the average person would in five years.

I ended up pulling back to 4.7 on Skylake. I've already decreased the recommended voltage to 1.375v since this thread's inception but the maximum voltage remains the same.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> according to der8auer, 1.4v should be the the safe voltage limit for kaby lake using water/air cooling, this coming from a professional overclocker and current kaby lake highest oc world record holder.
> maybe what he meant is safe for 24/7 usage?
> 
> anyway, here′s the link for his video
> https://youtu.be/kS8alLc6-wE


I'm not sure that a background in extreme overclocking qualifies anyone as an expert on safe voltages for prolonged daily use. As a matter of fact, when he was talking about 1.4v, he was only using it as a comparative value while talking about the 2 volt max when using ln2.

At the end of the day it's going to boil down to how any given chip spends its life. I'm not sure that's something that der8auer actually spends much time testing.


----------



## bakemono

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I'm not sure that a background in extreme overclocking qualifies anyone as an expert on safe voltages for prolonged daily use. As a matter of fact, when he was talking about 1.4v, he was only using it as a comparative value while talking about the 2 volt max when using ln2.
> 
> At the end of the day it's going to boil down to how any given chip spends its life. I'm not sure that's something that der8auer actually spends much time testing.


good point








I guess it really depends on how comfortable a user is when it comes to vcore and temps.
If kaby lake chips in general can run 1.4v+ and will last for 4~7 years before degrading or dying. by that time, a better/faster processor is already on the market.
but it would really suck if the chip degrades or dies after 1~2 years or after a few months even


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> good point
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it really depends on how comfortable a user is when it comes to vcore and temps.
> If kaby lake chips in general can run 1.4v+ and will last for 4~7 years before degrading or dying. by that time, a better/faster processor is already on the market.
> but it would really suck if the chip degrades or dies after 1~2 years or after a few months even


folks tend to forget that voltage is a potential only. When that voltage is asked to do work, it is the current that kills, and high current at high voltage is the worst scenario. Intel's max voltage requires that all other conditions in the AOR are met (Acceptable Operating Range) for that voltage to be "safe"... so the current draw max still applies (eg, the CPU is doing very little work).


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> folks tend to forget that voltage is a potential only. When that voltage is asked to do work, it is the current that kills, and high current at high voltage is the worst scenario. Intel's max voltage requires that all other conditions in the AOR are met (Acceptable Operating Range) for that voltage to be "safe"... so the current draw max still applies (eg, the CPU is doing very little work).


Sounds kinda like a fuse to me. 12 volt fuse at 60 amps will still pop the same as a 110 volt fuse at 60 6.5 amps. <-- Tango Jpm


----------



## OutlawII

I could've swore i read from Intel 1.50


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> I could've swore i read from Intel 1.50


There is a data sheet that says 1.52, but that doesn't mean it's safe while overclocking like the conversation in above posts. High voltage doesn't even kill people or animals, its the current.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Sounds kinda like a fuse to me. 12 volt fuse at 60 amps will still pop the same as a 110 volt fuse at 60 amps.


yuuuuuge







difference in watts right there.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> There is a data sheet that says 1.52, but that doesn't mean it's safe while overclocking like the conversation in above posts. High voltage doesn't even kill people or animals, its the current.


No matter how hard Edison tried to prove otherwise.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yuuuuuge
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> difference in watts right there.
> No matter how hard Edison tried to prove otherwise.


LOL. I meant to change the amps on that 110v. Oh well I know how it works in my simple head. Thanks bud.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> LOL. I meant to change the amps on that 110v. Oh well I know how it works in my simple head. Thanks bud.


Lol, yeah, the sad thing is I've actually turned a cpu or 2 into a "fuse" or flash-blub.








(saved by the ITP!)


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Lol, yeah, the sad thing is I've actually turned a cpu or 2 into a "fuse" or flash-blub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (saved by the ITP!)


First thing I pictured you doing when that happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT8CRi9k4bo


----------



## Jpmboy




----------



## Lostman

CPU: i5 7600k 4.8GHz @ manual 1.38v (1.376v shown) LLC 6
Speed step on, C states off
Mobo: Asus Prime Z270-A mobo (latest UEFI version)
Cooler: NH-U14S
RAM: 8GB x 2 3000MHz C15 using auto XMP OC
PSU: Corsair SuperNOVA 650 G2

After running 9+ hours of custom x264 and 12+ hours of AIDA64 stress tests with no problems I thought I had finally found a stable OC.
However, the PC will still occasionally (about after 1 -2 hours from boot) freeze, followed by a BSOD (either Machine_Check_Exception or Clock_Watchdog_Timeout)
I figured I needed to raise the voltage more but for some reason the voltage reading stays stuck at 1.376v (both in UEFI and CPUz) and refuses to go higher, even if I enter 1.39v. The only way I can get the voltage to increase seems to be by raising the LLC to level 7.
At LLC 7 the voltage stays fixed at 1.392v, even when the voltage I manually set is still at 1.38v. Is 1.392v too high or unsafe for a "mere" 4.8 GHz? Or should I just leave the settings as they currently are and hope it's stable?


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> There have been reports of 6600k degrading at <1.45.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZbBj9bC7wU


One of the better Vids out there explaining CPU Degradation ... +R








Crushing the dreams of some ... to bad it's over 20min stressing the attention span of many ...








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> according to der8auer, 1.4v should be the the safe voltage limit for kaby lake using water/air cooling, this coming from a professional overclocker and current kaby lake highest oc world record holder.
> maybe what he meant is safe for 24/7 usage?
> 
> anyway, here′s the link for his video
> https://youtu.be/kS8alLc6-wE
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure that a background in extreme overclocking qualifies anyone as an expert on safe voltages for prolonged daily use. As a matter of fact, when he was talking about 1.4v, he was only using it as a comparative value while talking about the 2 volt max when using ln2.
> 
> At the end of the day it's going to boil down to how any given chip spends its life. I'm not sure that's something that der8auer actually spends much time testing.
Click to expand...

+R







... took the words right out of my mouth ... luv it when that happens


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> There have been reports of 6600k degrading at <1.45.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZbBj9bC7wU


While that is a great video, and the one after it where he killed the Sempron when he got up to 2v, it is also saying some of the same stuff being talked about with high voltage here already. The fact that you need good cooling, and serious water is the bare minimum, and that voltage is not what is killing the CPUs but the current. Some good info about ASUS finding that you are reaching the 100A max current limit at 1.45v under 100% load. Ill keep that in mind.

As for the voltage itself in the videos, Intel's study shows that 14nm is quite a bit more resilient than 22nm was, but it still gets into a very significant curve as the voltage gets up which everyone doing overclocking should know already:


You can see how steep those curves are getting at 1.6v, you can probably imagine how much steeper they would be going past 1.7 and even approaching 2v. Or instead of imagining, we can look at some other charts from Intel:




degradation and time to fail starts going crazy as you go up beyond 1.5 and approach 2v.
So going from what Intel themselves have found in studies and the info from Asus saying 1.45v for staying in the 100A limit, I am going to by that 1.45v being safe for everyday usage and up to 1.5v for those with top cooling who dont mind some degradation and plan on replacing their CPU in 2-3 years.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> While that is a great video, and the one after it where he killed the Sempron when he got up to 2v, it is also saying some of the same stuff being talked about with high voltage here already. The fact that you need good cooling, and serious water is the bare minimum, and that voltage is not what is killing the CPUs but the current. Some good info about ASUS finding that you are reaching the 100A max current limit at 1.45v under 100% load. Ill keep that in mind.
> 
> As for the voltage itself in the videos, Intel's study shows that 14nm is quite a bit more resilient than 22nm was, but it still gets into a very significant curve as the voltage gets up which everyone doing overclocking should know already:
> 
> You can see how steep those curves are getting at 1.6v, you can probably imagine how much steeper they would be going past 1.7 and even approaching 2v. Or instead of imagining, we can look at some other charts from Intel:
> 
> degradation and time to fail starts going crazy as you go up beyond 1.5 and approach 2v.
> So going from what Intel themselves have found in studies and the info from Asus saying 1.45v for staying in the 100A limit, I am going to by that 1.45v being safe for everyday usage and up to 1.5v for those with top cooling who dont mind some degradation and plan on replacing their CPU in 2-3 years.


People have managed to degrade their chips, and they weren't running P95 recreationally. It's possible that most people did not and I didn't hear from others simply because nothing bad happened rather than people not telling me. We're talking 1.42-1.392v in the span of a say, 16 months.

For the two incidents I know of either both are somehow user error or the rule has holes. And so, I put the voltage recommendations the way I did (1.45/1.375v).


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> People have managed to degrade their chips, and they weren't running P95 recreationally. It's possible that most people did not and I didn't hear from others simply because nothing bad happened rather than people not telling me. We're talking 1.42-1.392v in the span of a say, 16 months.
> 
> For the two incidents I know of either both are somehow user error or the rule has holes. And so, I put the voltage recommendations the way I did (1.45/1.375v).


You can put me down for 2 6700K's running 15 18 months (Sorry, had a brain fart. Got them in August '15, it is now Feb '17, so 18 mo.) at 1.5v with no degradation. I have also talked to 2-3 other people on these forums with 6700K's running the same voltage since release with no issues. Ill try and find some of their posts if I have time this week.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> You can put me down for 2 6700K's running 15 months at 1.5v with no degradation. I have also talked to 2-3 other people on these forums with 6700K's running the same voltage since release with no issues. Ill try and find some of their posts if I have time this week.


The fact that you've been running 1.5v for 15 months leads me to believe that those two 6700k CPUs aren't being battered by a lot of power brought on by heavy loads.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The fact that you've been running 1.5v for 15 months leads me to believe that those two 6700k CPUs aren't being battered by a lot of power brought on by heavy loads.


Depends on the game really. Your right that not all of them put the CPU under 100% for hours on end, most hover anywhere from maxing out 1-2 cores to some newer, multithreaded ones getting anywhere from 75-100%. Both processors were tested with x264 and Prime95 for many hours during initial OC testing. Usually anywhere from 30 minutes to a couple hours during start of OC to running 8-12 hours straight for final test of the OC. So they were both hit hard at those voltages at the start, and then have just spent most of their lives doing gaming for 20-30 hours a week. And again, load during games can be anywhere really depending on what is being played, so ya not 100% 24/7.

Intel specifies CPUs to last multiple decades at stock speed and voltages. And even under stress voltages the time to fail testing shows they expect lifetimes to be anywhere from a few years to multiple decades of time (depending on stress voltage). So putting the upper limits of safe everyday voltage in and staying pretty far down the typical degradation curve Intel posted for 1.5v means I really should not be expecting any noticeable form of degradation yet on these chips. If you dont believe me on the decade(s) time frames, Intel says this when talking about stress testing of the newer 14nm process:
Quote:


> Stress induced leakage currents (SILC) can lead to unacceptable gate leakage and power consumption, ultimately leading to a circuit fail and leakage power increase. The intrinsic improvement in the 4th generation high-κ metal gate process used in Intel's 14nm technology reduces time zero oxide leakage currents by nearly a decade compared to 22nm (Fig 4). The gate stack process also delays the onset of leakage increase by nearly 3 decades of stress time.


Gate failure and Bias Temperature Instability are the two main areas of degradation and failure, with positive BTI being almost negligible and the failures in that area happening almost exclusively on the negative doped side. negative doped BTI being the weakest area and gate stress being the 2nd most fragile.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> Depends on the game really. Your right that not all of them put the CPU under 100% for hours on end, most hover anywhere from maxing out 1-2 cores to some newer, multithreaded ones getting anywhere from 75-100%. Both processors were tested with x264 and Prime95 for many hours during initial OC testing. Usually anywhere from 30 minutes to a couple hours during start of OC to running 8-12 hours straight for final test of the OC. *So they were both hit hard at those voltages at the start*, and then have just spent most of their lives doing gaming for 20-30 hours a week. And again, load during games can be anywhere really depending on what is being played, so ya not 100% 24/7.


Thanks for the better description of loads. Out of curiosity, was your Prime95 (assuming avx?) and x264 testing done with ambient cooling at 1.5v or some other means?


----------



## BoredErica

Cyro wants to do more testing.

Unless I'm high my Skylake chip has degraded in the past. While my load on 4670k was far exceeding what people would do to their chip I still did rack up quite a few hundred hours of chess (all core 100%) on Skylake. With Kaby I'm tired of everything degrading, so I went with 1.4v and no more chess. It's a long experiment with a sample size of one of course. Either way, unless I did something wrong, it degraded. And I don't see how I could have screwed it up.

A very longshot would have been the mobo's power delivery but I'm using the same mobo and my Kaby chip is clocking just fine so far with no crashes at all. The ram was chilling at XMP the entire time because it clocked badly and I just left it alone.

The reason why I PMed people during my Haswell thread for degradation is because I know people tend to not report these things. It's like clockspeed: Once you require proof and you set guidelines everyone's overclocks magically go down. And so I'm inherently suspicious of what people claim. I'm not directly saying anyone in particular is lying/deceiving, I'm just saying in general that seems to be a human tendency. And since to my eyes the problems I've had in the past were valid problems combined with what I just said it is inherently hard to convince me that I have it all backwards.

Lots of people hit their chips with prime at the start, but it's only 30 hr or less. You pop chess or maybe folding your chip could be at it for a hundred times that in less than a year, ez. Prime's a doozy for sure, but given 30 hr of prime or 3000 hours of some other 100% load I'll take the latter.

Plus I'm sure you understand that running a thread, despite all of my disclaimers I still have a responsibility for other people's chips to some extent. It would be terrible if I was screwing people over silently as the years went on.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Thanks for the better description of loads. Out of curiosity, was your Prime95 (assuming avx?) and x264 testing done with ambient cooling at 1.5v or some other means?


Prime95 testing with AVX and FM3 for a multi-hour run set to small FFT, another multi-hour run of large FFT, another multi-hour run of blend, and another multi-hour run of 8k (I think 8k? Whatever it was where people thought it was the hardest one to test back when Skylake came out), and finally a few hours run of small FFT with AVX disabled just for good measure.
Cooling is custom loop water. A single 360mm radiator with a Heatkiller IV block.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Unless I'm high my chip has degraded in the past. While my load on 4670k was far exceeding what people would do to their chip I still did rack up quite a few hundred hours of chess (all core 100%). With Kaby I'm tired of everything degrading, so I went with 1.4v and no more chess. It's a long experiment with a sample size of one of course. Either way, unless I did something wrong, it degraded. And I don't see how I could have screwed it up.


Sorry for the confusion, I am only talking about Skylake and now Kaby with the voltage ratings. Haswell had far inferior voltage ratings. 1.4v on Haswell would be up where 1.5v is on Skylake, and presumable where 1.51v is on Kaby (assuming what Intel says is true about Kaby being a tweaked node with slightly better V/F curve). And on top of the weak node when it comes to voltage, it was more fragile and prone to problems because of the FIVR not being optimized for desktop level voltages and loads at all.


----------



## TK421

Is a 7700K thinner than a 6700K overall (chip + ihs)?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> Sorry for the confusion, I am only talking about Skylake and now Kaby with the voltage ratings. Haswell had far inferior voltage ratings. 1.4v on Haswell would be up where 1.5v is on Skylake, and presumable where 1.51v is on Kaby (assuming what Intel says is true about Kaby being a tweaked node with slightly better V/F curve). And on top of the weak node when it comes to voltage, it was more fragile and prone to problems because of the FIVR not being optimized for desktop level voltages and loads at all.


I am aware. I was just telling you why I started getting impatient with degradation and it bothered me more when it still happened on Skylake.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> Is a 7700K thinner than a 6700K overall (chip + ihs)?


I regret that I did not measure this. But in my experience when I was replacing my chip I didn't detect any difference. But I wasn't explicitly looking for differences, so take it with a grain of salt.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> Prime95 testing with AVX and FM3 for a multi-hour run set to small FFT, another multi-hour run of large FFT, another multi-hour run of blend, and another multi-hour run of 8k (I think 8k? Whatever it was where people thought it was the hardest one to test back when Skylake came out), and finally a few hours run of small FFT with AVX disabled just for good measure.
> Cooling is custom loop water. A single 360mm radiator with a Heatkiller IV block.


Remarkable that you were able to transfer heat from the chip to the water so efficiently. I tried similar testing with a couple of 6700k CPUs on a larger loop (admittedly more than necessary) with less voltage and I couldn't move heat to the water fast enough. RealBench is one thing, but running the loads that you just described at 1.5v is nothing short of remarkable.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Remarkable that you were able to transfer heat from the chip to the water so efficiently. I tried similar testing with a couple of 6700k CPUs on a larger loop (admittedly more than necessary) with less voltage and I couldn't move heat to the water fast enough. RealBench is one thing, but running the loads that you just described at 1.5v is nothing short of remarkable.


Hmm. I never really thought much of it but then again I never really looked at what temps other people were getting. lol. Maybe the Heatkiller block is just that incredible







Of maybe what I did with the delid just worked really well. IDK. Both my 6700K's run around 65 absolute highest when under Prime at those voltages.

You are both making me want to go do some testing again though. I haven't run prime for 6 months now on the primary machine (the one with my Titan), so I will run it again for a short while tonight just to see if there has been any noticeable degradation leading to higher leakage current (where degradation typically starts showing itself) and thus leading to higher temperatures. Stay tuned tomorrow for screenshots of whether the chip has shown degradation yet.


----------



## BoredErica

I've said in the past to friends that if I won the lottery I would have a room which I would call 'The Testing Room'. I'd be testing all the misc. crap that nobody bothered to test which isn't settled on yet. Like for example, chip safety. I'd run a row of computers and test their longevity.

Unfortunately I haven't won the lottery yet.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I've said in the past to friends that if I won the lottery I would have a room which I would call 'The Testing Room'. I'd be testing all the misc. crap that nobody bothered to test which isn't settled on yet. Like for example, chip safety. I'd run a row of computers and test their longevity.
> 
> Unfortunately I haven't won the lottery yet.


If you win the lottery, you can just hire me to do it for you. Rich people can't be bothered with that type of stuff. They just need the results.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> If you win the lottery, you can just hire me to do it for you. Rich people can't be bothered with that type of stuff. They just need the results.


Nah.

It'll give me something to do. Unless I find the testing super tedious or something.


----------



## TK421

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> Is a 7700K thinner than a 6700K overall (chip + ihs)?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I am aware. I was just telling you why I started getting impatient with degradation and it bothered me more when it still happened on Skylake.
> 
> I regret that I did not measure this. But in my experience when I was replacing my chip I didn't detect any difference. But I wasn't explicitly looking for differences, so take it with a grain of salt.


That's a shame, thanks though.

Anyone else have input?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> That's a shame, thanks though.
> 
> Anyone else have input?


Why??


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> That's a shame, thanks though.
> 
> Anyone else have input?


I dont think so. I didnt measure either but I did a quick look at the PCB when I was delidding and it looked really thin like Skylake is. All coolers mount fine so it cant really be any different total height.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Remarkable that you were able to transfer heat from the chip to the water so efficiently. I tried similar testing with a couple of 6700k CPUs on a larger loop (admittedly more than necessary) with less voltage and I couldn't move heat to the water fast enough. RealBench is one thing, but running the loads that you just described at 1.5v is nothing short of remarkable.


Here are some pictures of quick testing tonight. Do not pay attention to the CPUz vcore reading it tells you, it is wrong. I suspect many other people on the forum have wrong vcore too and they just dont know it. A more true reading of vcore is taken from directly behind the CPU on the motherboard with a high quality multimeter. This shows the real voltage on the VRM and CPU components and what the CPU is actually receiving. I took pictures of my multimeter to show what the real vcore is.

IDLE:




LOAD:




So as you can see, the CPU is 1 degree higher than it used to be. I wish I could eliminate all the variables to get a more accurate test. Since I initially did the OC I have removed the waterblock and remounted with a different TIM. I used to use CLU, now I use Kryonaut. Similar enough though. I noticed the waterblock had bonded with the CLU and produced rough, protruding areas. I didnt bother cleaning them off and making it flat again so the 1 degree difference may be from that. Or it could come from a version difference from Prime95 (used newer version today), or it could come from different ambients. Or it could come from degradation. Cant say for sure. If you want to believe the 1 degree difference is from degradation causing higher leakage you are more than welcome to. I myself am putting it down to the waterblock buildup.

If anyone has any other questions just let me know, but I don't want to clog up Darkwizzie's Kabylake thread too much with old Skylake business. Hopefully Ill finally get around to brining my 7700K under the water loop soon. I know I have said that a lot the past month though.

It all lapped and ready to go







(ignore my dirty fingerprints on the IHS):


----------



## scracy

Degrading is the primary reason why I tend to use adaptive voltage and all the power saving stuff when overclocking (although adaptive just doesn't work on my board







) hopefully Asus will issue a new UEFI update soon. Another thing is I don't pound the hell out of my chips with hours and hours of stability testing. I cant say I have ever had a degrading problem with any of my chips but then again I have never kept one long enough to notice (looks at @done12many2 and nods)


----------



## TK421

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> Is a 7700K thinner than a 6700K overall (chip + ihs)?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Why??


I have notebook P870DM3, I upgraded to 7700K from 6700K, same treatment of delid and relid using CLU and rockit88 kit.

The temp on 7700K is higher than 6700K, even when consuming same watt to each other, I tried to make them as close as possible around 110w with a very slight overclock.

An expert tell me that the P870KM1 Z270 heatsink actually sits closer to the IHS due to the chip being thinner, I still have the P870DM3 Z170 with the same Skylake heatsink.

Would be nice to know if the 7700K is actually thinner than the 6700K so I can justify spending money on a new CPU heatsink from P870KM1.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Degrading is the primary reason why I tend to use adaptive voltage and all the power saving stuff when overclocking (although adaptive just doesn't work on my board
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) hopefully Asus will issue a new UEFI update soon. Another thing is I don't pound the hell out of my chips with hours and hours of stability testing. I cant say I have ever had a degrading problem with any of my chips but then again I have never kept one long enough to notice (looks at @done12many2 and nods)


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*


Lol....yep


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> I dont think so. I didnt measure either but I did a quick look at the PCB when I was delidding and it looked really thin like Skylake is. All coolers mount fine so it cant really be any different total height.
> Here are some pictures of quick testing tonight. Do not pay attention to the CPUz vcore reading it tells you, it is wrong. I suspect many other people on the forum have wrong vcore too and they just dont know it. A more true reading of vcore is taken from directly behind the CPU on the motherboard with a high quality multimeter. This shows the real voltage on the VRM and CPU components and what the CPU is actually receiving. I took pictures of my multimeter to show what the real vcore is.


Have you tried testing the accuracy on load with some LLC? Usually CPuz is close enough to Hwinfo unless CPUZ's number is totally out to lunch.

And of course it's worth asking, do you know the accuracy of your multimeter in the situation you are using it in?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> Lol....yep


The bulk of the problem comes when the chip is under load.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Have you tried testing the accuracy on load with some LLC? Usually CPuz is close enough to Hwinfo unless CPUZ's number is totally out to lunch.
> 
> And of course it's worth asking, do you know the accuracy of your multimeter in the situation you are using it in?
> 
> The bulk of the problem comes when the chip is under load.


Agreed, which is why I don't do hours and hours of e-peen stress testing 1 hour of Realbench and an hour of OCCT plus some IBT runs is stable enough for my purposes


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Agreed, which is why I don't do hours and hours of e-peen stress testing 1 hour of Realbench and an hour of OCCT plus some IBT runs is stable enough for my purposes


Yes, but to echo what I said in the posts before yours, stressing is only going to take say, 30 hours? What one does on the computer for the rest of the 1-5 years matters a lot too, if not much more. The Prime or Die mentality seems to have died down, and probably Haswell was the catalyst. Better off that way, I say.

--
Current is one thing but the thing I get to tweak is voltage. AFAIK all I can do is try to do some back of the envelope math and hope my current figures are correct. Okay, we can at least try to get a more accurate reading of voltage off the motherboard. This should be pretty important if the difference between vcore via software and multimeter (which let's just assume is accurate for the task right now) can be up to 0.05v. Of course, most people are not running 1.5v in the bios and the difference will be smaller but it can still be quite significant. Then you add in LLC and if you picked LLC such that software voltage is similar to vcore in bios then things can get a bit wonky.

If we're thinking in terms of current (as opposed to voltage and a more vague idea of 'load') I was thinking about whether a single core load would be much easier on the CPU or not very much so since it puts everything on one core. Then I remembered that's not really how it goes anymore since like Q6600 days. Right? I remember vaguely in those days if you popped a single core load in the task manager we'd see one core go 100% and the rest falling asleep, whereas now the load is spread across all the cores.

One more thing and it's on LLC again. I've asked this in the past and I can't quite get the answer I wanted. If I need 1.4v say, to be stable I can achieve it in one of two ways: Raise voltage above 1.4v so that it reads 1.4v under load (let's say I check it via multimeter). Or I could raise LLC so that voltage remains at around 1.4v at load. Yes, vdroop was to prevent overshoot but isn't that overshoot just what comes with having a voltage so high?

1.45v No LLC

1.45v Idle, 1.4v Load

1.4v LLC Level 5
1.4v Idle, 1.4v Load

If I had to guess without knowing anything I'd say the latter is better for the chip. Okay, we could run Cstates and stuff and get that idle voltage down. But when people are ringing the alarm bells and saying that vdroop exists for a reason, does it matter if we need a certain voltage to be stable? Won't the overshoot be the same in both instances?

I know people don't care when I get too meta on these threads. But while I am feeling as lazy as all get out nowadays about these threads and I've put up disclaimers saying I'm just a dude hobbyist on the internet with zero formal background in electronics and that I'm really only there because nobody else is doing these threads, I still at least owe it to the readers not to give them settings that will hurt their computer. Or bring it up to people's attention if voltage can vary that much.

And good grief, I forgot that my power plan settings were set to high performance, so my original testing on dropping vcore on idle are all void. ughhhhh


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Agreed, which is why I don't do hours and hours of e-peen stress testing 1 hour of Realbench and an hour of OCCT plus some IBT runs is stable enough for my purposes


I use my PC all the time, a 24 hour stress test is minor amount of stress given.


----------



## bakemono

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> folks tend to forget that voltage is a potential only. When that voltage is asked to do work, it is the current that kills, and high current at high voltage is the worst scenario. Intel's max voltage requires that all other conditions in the AOR are met (Acceptable Operating Range) for that voltage to be "safe"... so the current draw max still applies (eg, the CPU is doing very little work).


correct me if I'm wrong, the higher the voltage the more likely the processor will degrade or die when that worst case scenario occurs correct?
and also, does having a good motherboard with a good vrm prevents over current?


----------



## caenlen

How do I overclock my Kaby Lake i7-7820HK? When I go into BIOS, it shows 45000 and I can increase that number by 125mv increments, how how would I need to set it to try for around 42 4.2ghz on each core? Currently they are all set at 39 3.9 ghz


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I use my PC all the time, a 24 hour stress test is minor amount of stress given.


I use my p.c all the time too but i have found that an hour of stress testing with Realbench and OCCT combined with few runs of IBT is sufficient for my purposes. Once i have done this i dont get bluescreens or stability issues. My p.c is for general purpose use and some light gaming so it never really gets stressed that hard. Everyones idea of stable is different i guess.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> How do I overclock my Kaby Lake i7-7820HK? When I go into BIOS, it shows 45000 and I can increase that number by 125mv increments, how how would I need to set it to try for around 42 4.2ghz on each core? Currently they are all set at 39 3.9 ghz


If im not mistaken that is a mobile cpu? Does it have an unlocked multiplier? If not the only way you might be able to overclock is with Intel XTU. Most laptops have a locked down UEFI which doesnt allow you to do much at all. Im not sure overclocking a laptop is a wise move given the limited cooling available.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I use my p.c all the time too but i have found that an hour of stress testing with Realbench and OCCT combined with few runs of IBT is sufficient for my purposes. Once i have done this i dont get bluescreens or stability issues. My p.c is for general purpose use and some light gaming so it never really gets stressed that hard. Everyones idea of stable is different i guess.


That's all that matters bud. Why run a Prime95 type voltage if you spend your day running Microsoft Office?

There are folks running stupid levels of voltage at moderate clock speeds just because there are still some Prime95 or bust type mentalities out there convincing them that anything less is substandard or unstable. I generally find those folks to be the guys who ended up with average chips and decided to focus on "stability" since clock speed didn't work out for them.









Then there's the other side. The guys/gals who think loading Windows without a bluescreen means that they won the "Silicon Lottery"

With that said, I understand @Darkwizzie's drive to maintain some type of standard. Even if I don't agree with the change of standards between SKL and KBL.









Most of the comparative stuff, to include this thread, comes down to presentation of what you want others to see or believe.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> That's all that matters bud. Why run a Prime95 type voltage if you spend your day running Microsoft Office?
> 
> There are folks running stupid levels of voltage at moderate clock speeds just because there are still some Prime95 or bust type mentalities out there convincing them that anything less is substandard or unstable. I generally find those folks to be the guys who ended up with average chips and decided to focus on "stability" since clock speed didn't work out for them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then there's the other side. The guys/gals who think loading Windows without a bluescreen means that they won the "Silicon Lottery"
> 
> With that said, I understand @Darkwizzie's drive to maintain some type of standard. Even if I don't agree with the change of standards between SKL and KBL.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the comparative stuff, to include this thread, comes down to presentation of what you want others to see or believe.


Totaly agree with you in regards to prime 95. Im not suggesting my p.c only has light loads but what i am saying is for day to day use browsing the internet, gaming occasionally transcoding videos,occasional benching etc its fine no stability issues.
I hope the guys that have average or below average chips post their results too as i think this whole chart is about finding a realistic average and not just about the golden chips. On a different note asking those who know more than i do (looks at jpmboy) i cant get my cpu stable at 5.2Ghz using adaptive volts since the beta uefi for my board has issues (known issue) but it is with a fixed core voltage of 1.39V. Do you guys think running a manual voltage of 1.39V is going to do any harm long term? Or should i downclock until beta uefi 3101 is fixed? Thoughts?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Totaly agree with you in regards to prime 95. Im not suggesting my p.c only has light loads but what i am saying is for day to day use browsing the internet, gaming occasionally transcoding videos etc.
> I hope the guys that have average or below average chips post their results too as i think this whole chart is about finding a realistic average and not just about the premium chips. On a different note asking those who know more than i do (looks at jpmboy) i cant get my cpu stable at 5.2Ghz using adaptive volts since the beta uefi for my board has issues (known issue). Do you guys think running a manual voltage of 1.39V is going to do any harm long term? Or should i downclock until beta uefi 3101 is fixed? Thoughts?


I hope you didn't think I was implying that you only use Microsoft Office. It was merely an example.

Moving on, I think you are more than fine at your current fixed voltage.

Have you tried offset while you wait for the fix on adaptive? If that's not an option, how about high LLC so that your idle voltage drops a bit and increases in load?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> I have notebook P870DM3, I upgraded to 7700K from 6700K, same treatment of delid and relid using CLU and rockit88 kit.
> The temp on 7700K is higher than 6700K, even when consuming same watt to each other, I tried to make them as close as possible around 110w with a very slight overclock.
> An expert tell me that the P870KM1 Z270 heatsink actually sits closer to the IHS due to the chip being thinner, I still have the P870DM3 Z170 with the same Skylake heatsink.
> Would be nice to know if the 7700K is actually thinner than the 6700K so I can justify spending money on a new CPU heatsink from P870KM1.


Ah, okay - the cooler on the notebook is not likely a hard mount (no springs) so the few microns variance will not matter in closing the book once mounted. The 1151 socket specs require a min raise above the lock down plate, (this is detailed in the Intel Spec sheet to cooler manufacturers and board manufrs.). But the Max raise is a generous spec. Comparing a 7350k with a 6320 the IHS is different but REALLY close in height. (my 7700K is in use)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> correct me if I'm wrong, the higher the voltage the more likely the processor will degrade or die when *that worst case scenario occurs correct*?
> and also, does having a good motherboard with a good vrm prevents over current?


Yes, but in this IC scenario, the max current possible is limited by the voltage ceiling. So.. as you set a higher voltage, the max possible current increases so higher watts (power) results. When you are running your CPU at 1.5-2.0 times the TDP for long periods, you can expect some decay of the micro architecture, years not days or moments. Above 2x the TDP... ??
For sure a good MB and PCU (VRM, FIVR etc) is always better. What "over current" are you referring to?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I hope you didn't think I was implying that you only use Microsoft Office. It was merely an example.
> 
> Moving on, I think you are more than fine at your current fixed voltage.
> 
> Have you tried offset while you wait for the fix on adaptive? If that's not an option, how about high LLC so that your idle voltage drops a bit and increases in load?


Never tried offset to be honest, i have always used adaptive to be on the safe side so to speak. It is possible offset maybe broken too. There is a 3201 uefi available for my board which from what i have read on another forum that it does fix the adaptive voltage issue but its not publicaly available yet (i do have it though) but i also heard some users have bricked their boards with 3201 hence my apprehension. What i find strange is i can run [email protected] using adaptive LLC pushes it to 1.328V under load but using adaptive @5.2Ghz with 1.39V is a no go not stable and the voltage under load is all over place,but fixed at 1.39V it is stable weird. I think this is why i had issues with the first chip from silicon lottery because tried to run it with adaptive instead of fixed voltage. I might take your advice and run a manual voltage of 1.39V to maintain stability until Asus gets their uefi sorted out. Since it is more so current than it is voltage short term 1.39V should be ok i would think.


----------



## ducegt

Scracy. - I've noticed that when I do offset, during a load I might be at say 1.424 98℅ of the time, but it will spike higher to 1.44 or even 1.456. Now the thing is my chip seems to not like voltage above 1.424. At a fixed 1.43 I can XTU 51, but at 1.435 or higher it won't pass. It fails even if I back down to 5ghz. Could you see if you are running into such a wall as well?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Never tried offset to be honest, i have always used adaptive to be on the safe side so to speak. It is possible offset maybe broken too. There is a 3201 uefi available for my board which from what i have read on another forum that it does fix the adaptive voltage issue but its not publicaly available yet (i do have it though) but i also heard some users have bricked their boards with 3201 hence my apprehension. What i find strange is i can run [email protected] using adaptive LLC pushes it to 1.328V under load but using adaptive @5.2Ghz with 1.39V is a no go not stable and the voltage under load is all over place,but fixed at 1.39V it is stable weird. I think this is why i had issues with the first chip from silicon lottery because tried to run it with adaptive instead of fixed voltage. I might take your advice and run a manual voltage of 1.39V to maintain stability until Asus gets their uefi sorted out. Since it is more so current than it is voltage short term 1.39V should be ok i would think.


I'm not sure if there is any data showing that adaptive is better for cpu-life than manual override at the same load voltage. When the CPU is idle, there really is nothing going on in there. Sure cuts back on on idle power of the CPU tho. When looked at as whole-system power consumption, idling at 1.3V or 0.8V doesn't even register on my killawatt meter








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Scracy. - I've noticed that when I do offset, during a load I might be at say 1.424 98℅ of the time, but it will spike higher to 1.44 or even 1.456. Now the thing is my chip seems to not like voltage above 1.424. At a fixed 1.43 I can XTU 51, but at 1.435 or higher it won't pass. It fails even if I back down to 5ghz. Could you see if you are running into such a wall as well?


when you run/fail XTU with offset do you set windows power plan to High Performance? It may be failing due to LLC. What LLC setting are you using?


----------



## scracy

Good to know, do you think there are temperture benefits from running adaptive? I live in a hot climate.


----------



## TK421

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Ah, okay - the cooler on the notebook is not likely a hard mount (no springs) so the few microns variance will not matter in closing the book once mounted. The 1151 socket specs require a min raise above the lock down plate, (this is detailed in the Intel Spec sheet to cooler manufacturers and board manufrs.). But the Max raise is a generous spec. Comparing a 7350k with a 6232 the IHS is different but REALLY close in height. (my 7700K is in use)
> Yes, but in this IC scenario, the max current possible is limited by the voltage ceiling. So.. as you set a higher voltage, the max possible current increases so higher watts (power) results. When you are running your CPU at 1.5-2.0 times the TDP for long periods, you can expect some decay of the micro architecture, years not days or moments. Above 2x the TDP... ??
> For sure a good MB and PCU (VRM, FIVR etc) is always better. What "over current" are you referring to?


The CPU heatsink does have springs, should I be concerned?

https://www.tapatalk.com/topic/33462-notebookreview-com/787821-how-to-upgrade-the-phoenix-clevo-p870dm-g-from-fhd-to-4k-picture-guide


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Good to know, do you think there are temperture benefits from running adaptive? I live in a hot climate.


if you mean Idle temperatures... a couple of degrees only. At load, if adaptive is delivering the same load voltage as manual O, then the temps should be the same with the same load.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> The CPU heatsink does have springs, should I be concerned?
> 
> https://www.tapatalk.com/topic/33462-notebookreview-com/787821-how-to-upgrade-the-phoenix-clevo-p870dm-g-from-fhd-to-4k-picture-guide


should be fine, pop the new cpu in and the bvook should close right up.


----------



## scracy

Ducegt-mine doesnt hit a wall until 5.3Ghz at which point it will boot into windows but thats about it. Seems to scale nicely upto and including 5.2Ghz but anything beyond that is a no go. My previous silicon lottery chip was benchable at 5.3Ghz but took more volts to get a stable 5.2Ghz at least according to them 1.44V this one they claim 1.375V but given how hot it is here right now on my system it takes 1.39V manual volts to get stable. Im curious to know how many of you guys are running their highly clocked 7700K's on a test bench where airflow is not an issue? When i ran my stability tests i did it as if it was being used in situe ie:in a case under normal conditions that i would be using the p.c day to day which includes living in a hot house.


----------



## scracy

Thanks for that jpmboy yeah i meant at idle which using adaptive does seem to produce lower temps. I agree though that under load using adaptive or manual shouldnt make any difference if applying the same volts and same load.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Ducegt-mine doesnt hit a wall until 5.3Ghz at which point it will boot into windows but thats about it. Seems to scale nicely upto and including 5.2Ghz but anything beyond that is a no go. My previous silicon lottery chip was benchable at 5.3Ghz but took more volts to get a stable 5.2Ghz at least according to them 1.44V this one they claim 1.375V but given how hot it is here right now on my system it takes 1.39V manual volts to get stable.


The last one I was running did 5.4 GHz, but it wasn't a simple 54x multiplier and go type deal. It took some serious voltage at right around 1.5v to get there. I'd have to run 53x and some bclk to get it to 5.4 GHz.

The one I'm using now boots 54x multiplier at 1.43 - 1.44v. and does Cinebench at I believe 1.45v. Running cache on this one seems to require a bit more voltage than my last one, but I'll take CPU clock speed any day.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Im curious to know how many of you guys are running their highly clocked 7700K's on a test bench where airflow is not an issue? When i ran my stability tests i did it as if it was being used in situe ie:in a case under normal conditions that i would be using the p.c day to day which includes living in a hot house.


I run mine in the case all buttoned up as it is on a daily bases. I will say that motherboard temps in my case are lower than on my open air bench. The way I have my fans configured on the upper case portion of my case results in no less than 5 x 120mm blowing fresh filtered air straight across the motherboard. Two blow on the PCIe half and the other three are up toward the CPU/VRM area. My VRM, GPUs and CPU are all watercooled so the amount of air I have moving over the board is a bit much, but it works. My motherboard temps are always the same as ambient or maybe a degree or two warmer. So fresh air in across the board, which is then sucked out through the 6 x 120mm rad fans directly above the motherboard, which is horizontally mounted. Like I said, my motherboard and upper case temps are usually at ambient.

My pedestal is a bit different. It can get as high as 5 to 6c above ambient, but none of that gets into my upper case.

On top of all that, I probably have much cooler ambient temps than you during the winter. Usually around 20 to 22c when my wife and kids are home, but I don't mind dipping to 19c or a bit lower when I'm the only one here. During the summer 22 -24c.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> when you run/fail XTU with offset do you set windows power plan to High Performance? It may be failing due to LLC. What LLC setting are you using?


I actually don't see the high performance option, but I do have it set as custom with everything set toward high performance. It's not on balanced. I've tried every LLC. It's like it's failing because of too much voltage. I just want to get XTU stable at 52 being I'm RB stable. If I can XTU at 5ghz at 1.2 9 and 5.1 at 1.328, why would it keep working up to 1.424, but any further fail? I did notice XTU doesn't detect my increased current allowance from my BIOS but setting in XTU to 255 doesn't change what I'm seeing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Ducegt-mine doesnt hit a wall until 5.3G


I'm not talking about a clock wall. Like a max voltage wall. Is 5ghz at 1.45+ volts stable? More volts is giving me problems seemingly regardless of my clocks.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I actually don't see the high performance option, but I do have it set as custom with everything set toward high performance. It's not on balanced. I've tried every LLC. It's like it's failing because of too much voltage. I just want to get XTU stable at 52 being I'm RB stable. If I can XTU at 5ghz at 1.2 9 and 5.1 at 1.328, why would it keep working up to 1.424, but any further fail? I did notice XTU doesn't detect my increased current allowance from my BIOS but setting in XTU to 255 doesn't change what I'm seeing.
> I'm not talking about a clock wall. Like a max voltage wall. Is 5ghz at 1.45+ volts stable? More volts is giving me problems seemingly regardless of my clocks.


My bad i havent tried running above 1.45V on this chip as i havent needed to. I can try and clock it down with that voltage when i get home and see what it does. The last chip i had didnt like anything above 1.4V but that may have been due to the issues with my beta uefi not specifically that cpu.


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> correct me if I'm wrong, the higher the voltage the more likely the processor will degrade or die when that worst case scenario occurs correct?
> and also, does having a good motherboard with a good vrm prevents over current?


I would think that depends on how "high" you mean by higher voltage and in what scenario. Over a certain level of voltage is going to potentially cause problems in a cpu due to the unique environment. Something like Electromigration isn't going to be an issue in many electronics. Where those other "electronics" will still have potential issues for different reasons.

The main thing in my mind as you take a CPU out of spec is that you are in general raising it's wattage use. Wattage is a direct function of VA (volt amps) where V*A=W. I don't really have a background to tell you in a CPU at what point you could see potential damage and it would also depend on the period of time you are going to use the product. Obviously if you go to high you are going to shorten the time required.

Most electronics are more easily damaged by Amps than Volts. Obviously that depends on a certain um restraint in your limits (like sticking a 12 volt device into a 120 volt line is obviously going to be an issue regardless of Amps). So like years ago I would lose some devices because the area I lived in had brown outs. As the votlage drops the Wattage required by the device is a constant so it draws more amps and eventually cooks its self. This might be why when you have a chip that can hit a higher frequency at a lower vcore it will often run hotter than a chip that requires more vcore. Simply because if they are actually pulling the same wattage.. the lower voltage chip will actually be pulling more amperage to hit that wattage.

The short version in regards to your "worst case scenario" would depend. Just because you are running lower voltage alone in that worst case scenario isn't going to always prevent damage. If you are actually pulling more amperage due to wattage requirements.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Have you tried testing the accuracy on load with some LLC? Usually CPuz is close enough to Hwinfo unless CPUZ's number is totally out to lunch.
> 
> And of course it's worth asking, do you know the accuracy of your multimeter in the situation you are using it in?


The ExTech EX570 is one of those most accurate multimeters you can get, the only one better than I know of is the Fluke87. Fluke87 is 0.05%, EX570 is 0.06%. The EX570 is also half the cost of the Fluke87 though.

I am using level 3 LLC. I found that level 2 LLC actually raises the voltage quite a bit (ASRock levels are opposite ASUS, lower number = higher level of LLC), and level 1 LLC boosts insane amounts of voltage. The big problem is that both CPUz and HWInfo do NOT report these correct voltages.

For instance, level 3 LLC:
idle volts CPUz, 1.508
idle volts multimeter, 1.509...
load volts cpuz, 1.408
load volts multimeter, 1.445...

Level 2 LLC:
idle volts cpuz, bounce between 1.508 and 1.520
idle volts multimeter, 1.511...
load volts cpuz, 1.44
load volts multimeter, 1.532...

Level 1 LLC:
idle volts cpuz, 1.52
idle volts multimeter, 1.520...
load volts cpuz, 1.49
load voltz multimeter, 1.585...
(yes I did take my processor up to 1.585 volts under load for a short while last night to double check this data that I had discovered over a year ago when doing the initial overclocking)

How much this behavior has changed over launch bios to newest beta bios varies, but the constant fact remains that multimeter testing at the back of the CPU socket on the motherboard shows that voltage is increasing drastically under higher levels of LLC, compared to what is reported by CPUz and HWInfo which say the exact opposite. software readings cannot be trusted on any ASRock board I have used so far, going back all the way to Z87. (Will test the Z170 OC Formula soon).

This I suspect is the reason for different overclocks for the "same" voltage on different brand boards, and for supposed degradation at "safe volts" as reported by software. I really doubt the volts people think they have, are the volts the CPU is actually getting.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I actually don't see the high performance option, but I do have it set as custom with everything set toward high performance. It's not on balanced. I've tried every LLC. It's like it's failing because of too much voltage. I just want to get XTU stable at 52 being I'm RB stable. If I can XTU at 5ghz at 1.2 9 and 5.1 at 1.328, why would it keep working up to 1.424, but any further fail? I did notice XTU doesn't detect my increased current allowance from my BIOS but setting in XTU to 255 doesn't change what I'm seeing.
> I'm not talking about a clock wall. Like a max voltage wall. Is 5ghz at 1.45+ volts stable? More volts is giving me problems seemingly regardless of my clocks.


click the 'Show additional plans" symbol below those that are shown. if not, you want to ensure that min proc state = 100% before running XTU.


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> If im not mistaken that is a mobile cpu? Does it have an unlocked multiplier? If not the only way you might be able to overclock is with Intel XTU. Most laptops have a locked down UEFI which doesnt allow you to do much at all. Im not sure overclocking a laptop is a wise move given the limited cooling available.


Fans run at max speed (my custom settings in BIOS) and my cpu does not break 50 Celsius when gaming, and yes you can overclock this CPU in the BIOS, this is their mobile flagship CPU for Kaby Lake. Overclocking it is hard though because it uses numbers that the desktop overclocks doesn't use....


----------



## TK421

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Fans run at max speed (my custom settings in BIOS) and my cpu does not break 50 Celsius when gaming, and yes you can overclock this CPU in the BIOS, this is their mobile flagship CPU for Kaby Lake. Overclocking it is hard though because it uses numbers that the desktop overclocks doesn't use....


hello, which laptop is this?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Fans run at max speed (my custom settings in BIOS) and my cpu does not break 50 Celsius when gaming, and yes you can overclock this CPU in the BIOS, this is their mobile flagship CPU for Kaby Lake. Overclocking it is hard though because it uses numbers that the desktop overclocks doesn't use....


When you say numbers what do you mean? Different terminology maybe?


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> hello, which laptop is this?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> When you say numbers what do you mean? Different terminology maybe?


Pictures incoming tomorrow, cheers!







Actually, I may just do a little 30 second video showing you guy, then you can tell me what to adjust, lol


----------



## caenlen

here is video, help me understand these values and help me overclock this baby... it isn't as easy as my 2500k was lol


----------



## Tcoppock

So i bought a new motherboard the other day, it is a Gigabyte X150M-PRO-ECC (which has a C232 chipset) waiting on my xeon to arrive, i have been playing around with my Pentium g4600 on the board and found out this board has an external clock gen. However anything over +.5 mhz causes the system to become unstable and shut down so I can confirm that kaby lake no matter what is not bclk overclock-able. Sorry if this was off topic. Just thought I would share info.


----------



## The_Nephilim

Hi Everybody,

I am trying to get my OC stable. now I have the OC at 5ghz with 1.28v on the cpu.. I ran x264 all night and it ran 68 times.. I am now trying to run Intel Burn Test on Standard 2 times and the test says my OC is not stable??

Should I even run IBT or should I not?? I did run it the other day on its highest setting once and it passed so I am confused as to why I can not pass 2 runs on Standard??

IF I run the other test I would probally fail them as well. should I just leave it as it stands and not worry about IBT?? I played Elite Dangerous last night for 2 hours no issues..

I will reread the stress test part in this guide I was just wondering what I should o as far as testing and my OC??


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Nephilim*
> 
> Hi Everybody,
> 
> I am trying to get my OC stable. now I have the OC at 5ghz with 1.28v on the cpu.. I ran x264 all night and it ran 68 times.. I am now trying to run Intel Burn Test on Standard 2 times and the test says my OC is not stable??
> 
> Should I even run IBT or should I not?? I did run it the other day on its highest setting once and it passed so I am confused as to why I can not pass 2 runs on Standard??
> 
> IF I run the other test I would probally fail them as well. should I just leave it as it stands and not worry about IBT?? I played Elite Dangerous last night for 2 hours no issues..
> 
> I will reread the stress test part in this guide I was just wondering what I should o as far as testing and my OC??


Do you feel like it's stable enough for your needs? That's really all that matters. No need to adjust your overclock to someone else's standards. Give it a whirl for a few days and hit it will all of the heaviest tasks that you think you might be doing with your PC. If you don't have any issues, you're good.

Probably wouldn't hurt to test your memory, but that's discretionary as well.

One of my biggest problems is I spend too much time tweaking and verifying instead of just enjoying and using my rigs.


----------



## TK421

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> here is video, help me understand these values and help me overclock this baby... it isn't as easy as my 2500k was lol


Power limit 1 = max out
Power limit 1 time = max out
Power limit 2 override = enabled/yes
Power limit 2 / time = max out
Core ratio override = set all to 0 (auto)
Cache ratio / Ring OC ratio = set 0 (auto)

Show me the processor and memory section

I believe this is a Sager/Clevo? Did you buy one from a PREMA PARTNER SHOP?

https://biosmods.wordpress.com/partner/

I suggest making a return if you're within a the return period and get one from the prema partner shop with modified bios.

Clevo/Sager stock bios is useless for OC.

Thin out the thermal paste to cause overheat, etc etc, do whatever you can to get return and money back.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> here is video, help me understand these values and help me overclock this baby... it isn't as easy as my 2500k was lol


I did not see any settings to overclock on that laptop. The intel turbo boost bins start at 3.5 GHz that is normal on that laptop.


----------



## The_Nephilim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Do you feel like it's stable enough for your needs? That's really all that matters. No need to adjust your overclock to someone else's standards. Give it a whirl for a few days and hit it will all of the heaviest tasks that you think you might be doing with your PC. If you don't have any issues, you're good.
> 
> Probably wouldn't hurt to test your memory, but that's discretionary as well.
> 
> One of my biggest problems is I spend too much time tweaking and verifying instead of just enjoying and using my rigs.


Well it did pass the test for x264 so that is a good sign.. I can test the memory with memtest 86 I guess.. Well not adjusting to someone elses standards I have use IBT in the past and founf it pretty reliable as If I can pass a test on the highest standard the PC was usually pretty stable for years..

I just find it funny that the other day I was able to pass these tests with ease and now on Standard for 2 runs It will sya my system is unstable.. I am just a little bit concerned about that that is all and curious to why I can't pass those test today when the other day I did??

Should I increase my voltage on the cpu until I can pass or should I not worry about it..??


----------



## caenlen

Thanks everyone, I will just leave it at stock speeds, I am honestly very happy with the price I paid for the specs I got, and a 7820HK is already about 20% faster than a 7700HQ


----------



## TK421

Again, what brand laptop do you have and where did you buy it?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Nephilim*
> 
> Well it did pass the test for x264 so that is a good sign.. *I can test the memory with memtest 86 I guess*.. Well not adjusting to someone elses standards I have use IBT in the past and founf it pretty reliable as If I can pass a test on the highest standard the PC was usually pretty stable for years..
> 
> I just find it funny that the other day I was able to pass these tests with ease and now on Standard for 2 runs It will sya my system is unstable.. I am just a little bit concerned about that that is all and curious to why I can't pass those test today when the other day I did??
> 
> Should I increase my voltage on the cpu until I can pass or should I not worry about it..??


I doubt it is the ram, but you should rest ram stability anyway (really important if you are overclocking it or not - it's one oif few was to corrupt an OS without any warnings). Use HCi Memtet or google stressapptest (linux or windows Bash).
http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-ddr4-z170-z270-and-x99-24-7-memory-stability-thread/0_20

Don;t juice the cpu yet... you have not made ANY changes to bios during the time from when IBT passed to now that it fails?


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> Again, what brand laptop do you have and where did you buy it?


Well I am not refunding it, it was $1,330, free ship no tax, and it has gtx 1070, i7-7820HK, 100hz IPS gsync enabled, RGB keyboard. It is a Clevo model, assembled by Cyberpower PC. I love it honestly, it is insane specs for the price.







FN + 1 function sets fans on max, and sets them back to auto when I am done gaming. I get around 75 Celsius in most games, 90 in Witcher 3 fully maxed out, but if I lower witcher 3 down to 60 fps cap and lower a few specs that are not needed it doesn't break 75 celsius lol

I know your going to say eww cyberpower refund it, but no I am not, because these specs at that price can not be matched by anyone, not even close.


----------



## The_Nephilim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I doubt it is the ram, but you should rest ram stability anyway (really important if you are overclocking it or not - it's one oif few was to corrupt an OS without any warnings). Use HCi Memtet or google stressapptest (linux or windows Bash).
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-ddr4-z170-z270-and-x99-24-7-memory-stability-thread/0_20
> 
> Don;t juice the cpu yet... you have not made ANY changes to bios during the time from when IBT passed to now that it fails?


Well I made some changes but not anything like increase multiplyer.. it was stuff BIOS told me to disable when OverClcoking recommended anyhow..

I ran RealBench and that passed as far as I can tell.. I ran it for 30minutes to start.. I will recheck BIOS and see if anything is way out of line..


----------



## TK421

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Well I am not refunding it, it was $1,330, free ship no tax, and it has gtx 1070, i7-7820HK, 100hz IPS gsync enabled, RGB keyboard. It is a Clevo model, assembled by Cyberpower PC. I love it honestly, it is insane specs for the price.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FN + 1 function sets fans on max, and sets them back to auto when I am done gaming. I get around 75 Celsius in most games, 90 in Witcher 3 fully maxed out, but if I lower witcher 3 down to 60 fps cap and lower a few specs that are not needed it doesn't break 75 celsius lol
> 
> I know your going to say eww cyberpower refund it, but no I am not, because these specs at that price can not be matched by anyone, not even close.


Cyberpower is just another clevo reseller.


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> Cyberpower is just another clevo reseller.


That is fine with me, it saved me about 700 bucks then buying equivalent specs from newegg/amazon, not to mention the Clevo lets me adjust fan speed to max with a shortcut, and I am running 100hz IPS on a vibrant screen.

/shrug I am happy with my decision, $1,360 for a laptop of this caliber is insanely good, came with Intel m.2 boot drive as well, solid


----------



## The_Nephilim

OK I did some more reading and rereading, with Intel Burn Test and Kaby Lake I do not need to run max setting.. I ran on the High Setting and ran it twice for a pre test. Well temps got pretty hot but this time it said my system was stable.. What changed you ask well upon lookin at the other chips they had a way higher VCore then I did initially..

I was running 1.270 so I bumped it up a little bit and ket testing until I ran IBT 2 times on High.. well it passed and I just ran Real Bench for 15 minutes and it passed with Flying colors.. I think my initial problem with IBT was the Voltage was too low on the VCore..

I would also say that if running IBT if I was to have run the max setting the temps would have spiked way past 100c.. With the setting on IBT was High the temps got to about 95c.. I think either I should try to get a water Cooler or maybe run the fans faster..

Reading the other guide about delidding I am definitely gonna go that route I think.. I believe it seems pretty straight forward with the Rocket 88 delidding tool and some good metal paste.. I might even get it delidded and add a water cooler I think temps would be a lot cooler for longevity sake but as it stands right now while running RealBench the temp where about 80c which is fine by me for normal use..

I was able to play Elite Dangerous for 2.5 hours ealier and don't see heat being a major issue.. I don't know what the temps where while playing ED but next time I run it I'll run RealTemp too just to get an idea but I would say probally temps around 75c..

Well I do believe I am finally stable but gonna run IBT a few more runs and see how it goes there..

Thank you for the guide


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> *
> click the 'Show additional plans" symbol below those that are shown. if not, you want to ensure that min proc state = 100% before running XTU.*


That's how it was. Yesterday I did manage to complete XTU at 52 after I increased PLL from 1 to 1.2 which actually increased core load 12mv. I also toyed with keeping the current limit at 150 instead of 255 as it will freeze at 255. My core was throttling a few hundred MHz despite my temps seeming okay so it's either the current or the readings in Windows don't reflect the thermals...and Im aware they are inperfect because of DTS reading distance from T-junction etc. I suppose my cooling just isn't enough so the leakage is too much. When you have current limit set in the bios, does XTU detect it when you open it or does it show the default 120?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> That's how it was. Yesterday I did manage to complete XTU at 52 after I increased PLL from 1 to 1.2 which actually increased core load 12mv. I also toyed with keeping the current limit at 150 instead of 255 as it will freeze at 255. My core was throttling a few hundred MHz despite my temps seeming okay so it's either the current or the readings in Windows don't reflect the thermals...and Im aware they are inperfect because of DTS reading distance from T-junction etc. I suppose my cooling just isn't enough so the leakage is too much. When you have current limit set in the bios, does XTU detect it when you open it or does it show the default 120?


XTU bench or Stress?
Current limit and Power limits need to be set in relation to each other. I would set the long term PL to 300, and the time window to 127 (max). Short term limit will then be automatically set to 2x the LTPL and XTU will tell you is there is any thermal throttling. DTS reports distance to TJmax.. when you say the temps "seeming okay" what peak temp are you seeing in XTU?


----------



## ducegt

Bench. I wasn't aware the time settings matters as my BIOS preset OC config has them on auto. XTU has never showed me thermal throttling happening. I can see the down clock in XTU but it's easier to see with CPUZ as it refreshes faster. At 5100 1.328 the ending max is only 51C. The most I've ever got it to with over 1.45v and 1.2 PLL was 81C.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Bench. I wasn't aware the time settings matters as my BIOS preset OC config has them on auto. XTU has never showed me thermal throttling happening. I can see the down clock in XTU but it's easier to see with CPUZ as it refreshes faster. At 5100 1.328 the ending max is only 51C. The most I've ever got it to with over 1.45v and 1.2 PLL was 81C.


can you grab a snip of the downclock? XTU will cycle thru core count and multipliers - I don't quite get what you are seeing. PLL... erm, cpu pch or? Either way. phase lock loop voltage is not a rail where more is always better. I really do not think you need to adjust this at the core and ram oc you are at.


----------



## The_Nephilim

Well I ran Real Bench Stress test and it crashed after 113Minutes.. I am thinking I still need a little more voltage?? Could that be why it crashed?


----------



## Jpmboy

need more info... please fill out rig builder and add your rig to your sig. How to link in mine.
... was the crash a bsod? luxmark fail ... what?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> can you grab a snip of the downclock? XTU will cycle thru core count and multipliers - I don't quite get what you are seeing. PLL... erm, cpu pch or? Either way. phase lock loop voltage is not a rail where more is always better. I really do not think you need to adjust this at the core and ram oc you are at.


So to be clear, this is with no AVX offset ratio and only happens for a second. That's with XTU reading default 120A that seems to ignore my BIOS setting. So I increased it to 255.75 and passed with a score of 1307 and max temp of 68. So current limit lowers the multi it seems.


----------



## The_Nephilim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> need more info... please fill out rig builder and add your rig to your sig. How to link in mine.
> ... was the crash a bsod? luxmark fail ... what?


I'm Sorry I thought I added the rig but I needed to also add to my Signature but anyhow it should be there now..

When I ran RealBench Luxmark failed after 113M, I was trying to run it for 4 hours.. tht was right after I did a fresh reboot and only ran RealBench..My House is climate controlled and 70F year round..


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> So to be clear, this is with no AVX offset ratio and only happens for a second. That's with XTU reading default 120A that seems to ignore my BIOS setting. So I increased it to 255.75 and passed with a score of 1307 and max temp of 68. So current limit lowers the multi it seems.


Yes, current limit will drop clock bins.. but frankly, the rig should not be hitting that limit (even with Auto in that setting) running xtu bench). But you know - if it is ain't broke (now) don't fix it.








what's more concerning is that you have cpuZ showing a max of 100x51, but XTU showing 5200?? WTH?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Nephilim*
> 
> I'm Sorry I thought I added the rig but I needed to also add to my Signature but anyhow it should be there now..
> 
> When I ran RealBench Luxmark failed after 113M, I was trying to run it for 4 hours.. tht was right after I did a fresh reboot and only ran RealBench..My House is climate controlled and 70F year round..


no OC on the 980 right? PSU?


----------



## The_Nephilim

Well the EVGA 980 is Factory OC the PSU is a Corsair 850w


----------



## damstr

Username: damstr
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore in UEFI: 1.30
Vcore: 1.312
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delidded / Thermaltake Water 3.0 Riing 360
Stability Test: OCCT S 1 hour 10 mins

Batch Number: L639F993
Ram Speed: 3000 15-17-17-35
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: Auto
Ram Voltage: 1.35
Motherboard: Asus Strix Z270F
LLC Setting: Auto/Default
Misc Comments: Ambient room temp 26-27C, no AVX offset used. Average temp across all cores during OCCT start was 61/64/66/70.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Yes, current limit will drop clock bins.. but frankly, the rig should not be hitting that limit (even with Auto in that setting) running xtu bench). But you know - if it is ain't broke (now) don't fix it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what's more concerning is that you have cpuZ showing a max of 100x51, but XTU showing 5200?? WTH?


Booted 51 and increased to 52. So apparently Asrock pulled the beta BIOS I had been using from their page so I went back to one they still have posted. They were missing some of the power settings in the one I had been using. So now XTU recognizes the limits properly, but XTU is still is giving me inconsistent results so $#&% it. I'll go for 5150 with no offset.

I got a passmark single thread score of 2939 while it looks like a 3.8ghz Ryzen does about 2050


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> So to be clear, this is with no AVX offset ratio and only happens for a second. That's with XTU reading default 120A that seems to ignore my BIOS setting. So I increased it to 255.75 and passed with a score of 1307 and max temp of 68. So current limit lowers the multi it seems.


Where are you able to see how many amps your processor is drawing in those benchmarks and it is telling you 120A?


----------



## bakemono

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Yes, but in this IC scenario, the max current possible is limited by the voltage ceiling. So.. as you set a higher voltage, the max possible current increases so higher watts (power) results. When you are running your CPU at 1.5-2.0 times the TDP for long periods, you can expect some decay of the micro architecture, years not days or moments. Above 2x the TDP... ??
> For sure a good MB and PCU (VRM, FIVR etc) is always better. What "over current" are you referring to?


the current that flows to the cpu that might kill or degrade it.
anyway, I've been thinking of deliding my cpu and going to try how far 1.4+vcore will take me.
either that or take advantage of the lower vcore for 5.0Ghz after delid. It's too much anyway, and I won't be seeing much difference in gaming.


----------



## becks

For whoever needs this information:
XMP Memory for Intel core processors 7th-gen !

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19yYFXm-fTrvJsKv3XDa8iwqrweOmBIvp9pSrMtlRib0/edit?usp=sharing;output=html&widget=true


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> Where are you able to see how many amps your processor is drawing in those benchmarks and it is telling you 120A?


I'm referring to the slider in XTU that sets a limit. Not monitoring any readings.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Nephilim*
> 
> Well the EVGA 980 is Factory OC the PSU is a Corsair 850w


yeah, luxmark can be NV driver sensitive.. and really has problems with SLI. I'
d either raise vcore a tad, or lower cache if possible before lowing core.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Booted 51 and increased to 52. So apparently Asrock pulled the beta BIOS I had been using from their page so I went back to one they still have posted. They were missing some of the power settings in the one I had been using. So now XTU recognizes the limits properly, but XTU is still is giving me inconsistent results so $#&% it. I'll go for 5150 with no offset.
> I got a passmark single thread score of 2939 while it looks like a 3.8ghz Ryzen does about 2050


if you are trying to get a high benchmark score, there are several things that need to be tuned - especially ram. And, specifically for the benchmark, the score is determined in the first few seconds, the rest is just an AVX "exercise". If you know what slow-mode is...








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bakemono*
> 
> *the current that flows to the cpu that might kill or degrade it.*
> anyway, I've been thinking of deliding my cpu and going to try how far 1.4+vcore will take me.
> either that or take advantage of the lower vcore for 5.0Ghz after delid. It's too much anyway, and I won't be seeing much difference in gaming.


thanks - learn something new every day.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you are trying to get a high benchmark score, there are several things that need to be tuned - especially ram. And, specifically for the benchmark, the score is determined in the first few seconds, the rest is just an AVX "exercise". If you know what slow-mode is...


I heard about that tweak cough cheat. I'm not going for any high score it. Using it as a quick stress test. I went as far as booting an old hard drive and limiting memory to 4096 to find I get the same score. I was interested in comparing the score to honest 24/7 rigs, but all those higher scores at lesser clocks had me worried something was very wrong. Anyway, thanks for the help. I RB'd 8 hours last night at 5150 1.376-1.392 LLC2 which can pass aida64 benchmarks unlike 52 which takes RB 1.424-1.44. 5150 RB peaked at 68c with a 23C ambient so this should be good even when the wife doesn't want the AC on xD


----------



## madmeatballs

When luxmark fails in rb what does it usually mean?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> When luxmark fails in rb what does it usually mean?


if the rig can otherwise pass x264, it's likely OpenCL on the gpu/driver
http://www.luxmark.info/

... add moar powa !


----------



## caenlen

Anyone here that has mobile Kaby Lake, I just dropped 20 celsius by undervolting AND increasing all 4 of my cores to 4ghz each.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1623460/how-to-give-extra-cooling-to-my-i7-7820hk-flagship-mobile-cpu-98-celsius

I don't break 80 celsius now, stable.







before I was hitting 97 and 98 celsius with lower clocks default.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I'm referring to the slider in XTU that sets a limit. Not monitoring any readings.


If you are throttling at 120A setting, you may want to back down your OC a bit. According to Intel specifications 100A is supposed to be the absolute maximum before degradation will start occurring.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> If you are throttling at 120A setting, you may want to back down your OC a bit. According to Intel specifications 100A is supposed to be the absolute maximum before degradation will start occurring.


Do you have a link and page for that specification.


----------



## tknight

This is all the specification documents for 7th, 6th and HEDT generation cpus.

http://www.intel.com.au/content/www/au/en/processors/core/core-technical-resources.html


----------



## hotrod717

hmm.


----------



## jasjeet

Username: jasjeet
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: Bclk: 100mhz
Core Multiplier: x49
Core Frequency: 4900Mhz
Cache Frequency: 4200Mhz
Vcore in UEFI: Adaptive 1.28v additional turbo, +0.03v offset = 1.31v
Vcore: 1.344v
FCLK: 1000mhz
Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-U14S. Delidded with CLU between IHS and die. Arctic Cooling MX4 IHS to CPU HSF.
Stability Test: Prime95 28.10 AVX enabled. Blend min fft 300k, 12GB Ram tested.

Batch Number: L640F768
Ram Speed: 3000Mhz 14-14-14-35 2N
Ram Voltage: 1.35v
VCCIO: 1.05v
VCCSA: 1.05v
Motherboard: Z170 Asus Z170I Pro Gaming
LLC Setting: Level 5
Misc Comments: AVX offset 1. Itll run 1.312v at 4.9Ghz on non AVX loads. Was pulling 130W in screenshot test.
Tested with some Prime95 with AVX flag set to 0.
5Ghz 1.36v unstable.
All power savings enabled.


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if the rig can otherwise pass x264, it's likely OpenCL on the gpu/driver
> http://www.luxmark.info/
> 
> ... add moar powa !


more power to vcore? or?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> more power to vcore? or?


not if the system is stable to x264 stress test. It may be the gfx subsystem or cache. Try with no OC on the GPU, and cache at stock multiplier.


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not if the system is stable to x264 stress test. It may be the gfx subsystem or cache. Try with no OC on the GPU, and cache at stock multiplier.


Alright, thanks! I'll let you know what turns up.


----------



## FrostyAMD

Hey fellas anyone have the approx. shipping time frame for Rockit 88 toolkit and relid kit to Virginia USA ? Ordered and paid 2/16/17 . Checked on order and status was Unfulfilled


----------



## JoeUbi

I ordered mine last Friday, shipped this Friday.


----------



## FrostyAMD

wow that's quite a bit of time ! But thanks for the reply


----------



## Dry Bonez

With ryzen on a come up, be honest if it applies to you.... do you regret having this chip knowing ryzen is upon us?I too have this chip and feel some what regretful. What about you guys?


----------



## JoeUbi

No regrets here. AMD usually just blows a lot of hot air then lets us down. Hopefully they prove me wrong and force me to upgrade. Otherwise I'm glad I didn't wait!


----------



## Naked Snake

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Username: jasjeet
> CPU Model: i7 7700k
> Base Clock: Bclk: 100mhz
> Core Multiplier: x49
> Core Frequency: 4900Mhz
> Cache Frequency: 4200Mhz
> Vcore in UEFI: Adaptive 1.28v additional turbo, +0.03v offset = 1.31v
> Vcore: 1.344v
> FCLK: 1000mhz
> Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-U14S. Delidded with CLU between IHS and die. Arctic Cooling MX4 IHS to CPU HSF.
> Stability Test: Prime95 28.10 AVX enabled. Blend min fft 300k, 12GB Ram tested.
> 
> Batch Number: L640F768
> Ram Speed: 3000Mhz 14-14-14-35 2N
> Ram Voltage: 1.35v
> VCCIO: 1.05v
> VCCSA: 1.05v
> Motherboard: Z170 Asus Z170I Pro Gaming
> LLC Setting: Level 5
> Misc Comments: AVX offset 1. Itll run 1.312v at 4.9Ghz on non AVX loads. Was pulling 130W in screenshot test.
> Tested with some Prime95 with AVX flag set to 0.
> 5Ghz 1.36v unstable.
> All power savings enabled.


Pretty much the same settings I'm using on my Z170 Maximus Hero VIII, I'm unstable @5Ghz with 1.36v and I'm afraid I can't up the voltage more, my temps are already at 80C because I'm afraid of doing a delid.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Naked Snake*
> 
> Pretty much the same settings I'm using on my Z170 Maximus Hero VIII, I'm unstable @5Ghz with 1.36v and I'm afraid I can't up the voltage more, my temps are already at 80C because I'm afraid of doing a delid.


It is safe to stress test up to 90c, the CPU TJmax is 100c then it will throttle to keep it there at 100c.


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> With ryzen on a come up, be honest if it applies to you.... do you regret having this chip knowing ryzen is upon us?I too have this chip and feel some what regretful. What about you guys?


5+GHz 24/7 is still a milestone! ... BUT Ryzen is checking all the right boxes, including PRICING! CONFIRMED 1800X - $489 / 1700X - $389 Fry's see *HERE* ... Asus CF VI AM4 $209 ... Pretty exciting stuff for us enthusiasts, some real Intel competition for the 1st time in almost a decade









Still need to see real in the wild benching ... BUT these look pretty darn good $$$/Performance








http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-7-1800x-8-core-benchmarks/
http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-cpu-benchmark-leak/

PS Edit ... what do you think JP/Enigma/et al?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> With ryzen on a come up, be honest if it applies to you.... do you regret having this chip knowing ryzen is upon us?I too have this chip and feel some what regretful. What about you guys?


No.

Why would anyone regret buying a chip that launched this far ahead of a new product launch? What little we have seen looks promising, but I personally do not give much credence to any benchmarks seen thus far - we need to see in our own hands. An awful lot is riding on what kind of OC headroom ryzen has. Stock clock comparos are basically meaningless for this community


----------



## OutlawII

Please lets keep on subject we have enough Ryzen hope and dream threads


----------



## Dry Bonez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Please lets keep on subject we have enough Ryzen hope and dream threads


yes,i agree..... can you help me out? can you,or anyone explain to me why in the world my voltages go wayyyyy up to 1.425 when in the bios i set it to 1.320 to reach 5.1ghz on my 7700k. the mobo i use is a gigabyte z270x Gaming 7.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> If you are throttling at 120A setting, you may want to back down your OC a bit. According to Intel specifications 100A is supposed to be the absolute maximum before degradation will start occurring.


It's only drawing more than a 100 with AVX loads. I hit 154w with IBT above 1.4v which is 110A.

It still looks like the 7700K will offer better single core performance and that's what I care about the most. Zen is looking better than I would have thought a month ago though. Competition is always good. I'm not a broke college student anymore so I'll gladly handle out a little extra cash to who can provide more performance...with the exception of nVidia!


----------



## jasjeet

Prime 95 28.10 blend isn't enough, my rig with my screenshot proof gave a BSOD 0xD1 with 20 minutes of playing overwatch in 4K @ 140fps. CPU was running around 70c in game since fans are running much slower.

Not sure if I'm giving enough VCCSA/IO or just lack of vcore on transient loads.

So before I up vcore 0.015v,
I will test LLC L4 but same target load vcore of 1.312v in non AVX loads.
If that fails in game then I'll try
VCCSA /IO 1.08v from 1.05v.
Then if that fails I'll raise vcore.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Prime 95 28.10 blend isn't enough, my rig with my screenshot proof gave a BSOD 0xD1 with 20 minutes of playing overwatch in 4K @ 140fps. CPU was running around 70c in game since fans are running much slower.
> 
> Not sure if I'm giving enough VCCSA/IO or just lack of vcore on transient loads.
> 
> So before I up vcore 0.015v,
> I will test LLC L4 but same target load vcore of 1.312v in non AVX loads.
> If that fails in game then I'll try
> VCCSA /IO 1.08v from 1.05v.
> Then if that fails I'll raise vcore.


yes.. that's because p95 only stresses a limited amount of the cpu architecture, and even more limited when taking all subsystems into account for a gaming rig. Use RealBench, HCi Memtest, and if you must, a high current stressor (TDP virus) like p95 or IBT or OCCT. I prefer IBT for 10 loops at standard for this purpose.
Basically, p95 has nothing to do with game stability.


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes.. that's because p95 only stresses a limited amount of the cpu architecture, and even more limited when taking all subsystems into account for a gaming rig. Use RealBench, HCi Memtest, and if you must, a high current stressor (TDP virus) like p95 or IBT or OCCT. I prefer IBT for 10 loops at standard for this purpose.
> Basically, p95 has nothing to do with game stability.


Yeah, but a little surprising since it's usually been pretty close for all of my other builds, skylake, ivy, sandy, nehalem. With blend test and 12gb of ram tested.
I haven't run google stress test app yet, think that's what I'll try next.
I'm going to see which stress test actually causes a failure then tweak to get it stable and hopefully that'll patch the hole.

Is there a way to prevent realbench from using the GPU?
Since I use the Intel GPU for audio and GTX 970 for video.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Is there a way to prevent realbench from using the GPU?
> Since I use the Intel GPU for audio and GTX 970 for video.


Yup. There is a check box to unmark after you start the test.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Prime 95 28.10 blend isn't enough, my rig with my screenshot proof gave a BSOD 0xD1 with 20 minutes of playing overwatch in 4K @ 140fps. CPU was running around 70c in game since fans are running much slower.
> 
> Not sure if I'm giving enough VCCSA/IO or just lack of vcore on transient loads.
> 
> So before I up vcore 0.015v,
> I will test LLC L4 but same target load vcore of 1.312v in non AVX loads.
> If that fails in game then I'll try
> VCCSA /IO 1.08v from 1.05v.
> Then if that fails I'll raise vcore.


How long did you test with Prime95?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes.. that's because p95 only stresses a limited amount of the cpu architecture, and even more limited when taking all subsystems into account for a gaming rig. Use RealBench, HCi Memtest, and if you must, a high current stressor (TDP virus) like p95 or IBT or OCCT. I prefer IBT for 10 loops at standard for this purpose.
> Basically, p95 has nothing to do with game stability.


Prime95 tests the integer and floating point of the Processor. Games use the floating point and integer.


----------



## caenlen

going from windows 8.1 to windows 10, my temps have dropped 15 celsius in all the same tests and same clocks.

wow kaby lake really is DRM with windows 10 or something


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> How long did you test with Prime95?
> Prime95 tests the integer and floating point of the Processor. Games use the floating point and integer.


1 hour. Usually I test 4 hours so maybe it was that.
But Realbench is crashing within 1 minute!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> 1 hour. Usually I test 4 hours so maybe it was that.
> But Realbench is crashing within 1 minute!


I have had it work all different ways like Prime95 would fail and RealBench did not. Try running Prime95 again at the same settings.

With the new Prime95 you have to look for the failed worker it won't turn red.


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have had it work all different ways like Prime95 would fail and RealBench did not. Try running Prime95 again at the same settings.
> 
> With the new Prime95 you have to look for the failed worker it won't turn red.


Nah it definitely ran 1 hour fine, just see the screenshot on the previous page probably.

I'm isolating the issue now in terms of CPU vs ram instability.

Edit dropped ram to 2400mhz and is looking much better.


----------



## caenlen

im at 4.2ghz right now on one core with -130 voltage offset adaptive, and everything is stable, but when i run prime95 it shows current core usage is 3.6ghz for all 4 cores, is it auto downclocking? i dont get why... temps are fine, not breaking 70 celsius in prime95, about 80 celsius in witcher 3... so windows 10 def helped.... not sure why i guess DRM with it or something proper drivers only work on win 10 for kaby i guess


----------



## jasjeet

Just not having it on realbench at 4.9ghz with 1 AVX offset.
Dropping to 4.8ghz with 0 AVX offset is going for 10 minutes 1.296v.
It's not the AVX workload, but the non AVX workload that's failing. But if I up the vcore then the AVX workload is way over volted and the chips getting too hot.

Realbench is also causing temps to be higher than prime95 28.10. Maybe because I did not test 8-300k fft length.


----------



## caenlen

im so confused.... HWINFO shows never breaking 80 celsius but HWmonitor is showing 97 celsius.... sigh im losing my mind.... gods save me....


----------



## caenlen

HWmonitor was reading temps wrong. HWinfo shows my temps never breaking 75 celsius on all 4 cores as well as intel extreme utility... so hwmonitor was the culprit i guess

fyi why does overclocking with intel extreme utility downclock to 3.5ghz on all 4 cores? i have it at 4.2ghz and it will jump up to 4.2 rarely, but usually stays at 3.5ghz, what gives? i have high performance selected in control panel power settings and temperature doesn't seem to be an issue


----------



## caenlen

can you tell me what I am doing wrong? every test I run is stable, temps are fine, but it doesn't run at 4.1ghz it will sometimes, but 90% of time it is just 3.7ghz


----------



## MooMoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> can you tell me what I am doing wrong? every test I run is stable, temps are fine, but it doesn't run at 4.1ghz it will sometimes, but 90% of time it is just 3.7ghz


Please go search for the overclocking basics and other basics related to this stuff. You will find answers to most of your questions. You can use this forums own search or google.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> can you tell me what I am doing wrong? every test I run is stable, temps are fine, but it doesn't run at 4.1ghz it will sometimes, but 90% of time it is just 3.7ghz


Increase Turbo Boost Short Power Max Watts to like 100 or 150


----------



## Dnic41

OC to 4.8GHz yesterday and ran RealBench for 2 hours and its stable. The only settings I touched for now was setting the core ration to 48x with a Vcore of 1.25V. I also set the IA DC/IA AC load line to 0.01.

Below my temps peaked at 84 on one of the cores. The averages are a bit lower because it was sitting idle after the test for about 30 minutes.
Should I lower the Vcore and OC? I believe the CPU fan RPM was basically at max.


----------



## caenlen

I ended up downclocking, all 4 cores at 3.7ghz (7820HK), undervolte adaptive offset at -140, and temps never break 80 celsius even most demanding games and 3.7ghz stays solid entire time... still kind of a bummer since most people can run 4.2ghz with this same chip... might try to repaste someday









even if I bump it up to 3.8ghz temps will break 90... 3.7 is sweet spot. makes no sense to me but oh well


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dnic41*
> 
> OC to 4.8GHz yesterday and ran RealBench for 2 hours and its stable. The only settings I touched for now was setting the core ration to 48x with a Vcore of 1.25V. I also set the IA DC/IA AC load line to 0.01.
> 
> Below my temps peaked at 84 on one of the cores. The averages are a bit lower because it was sitting idle after the test for about 30 minutes.
> Should I lower the Vcore and OC? I believe the CPU fan RPM was basically at max.


I would not lower the Vcore, just keep overclocking maybe you can hit 5.0GHz.


----------



## Dnic41

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I would not lower the Vcore, just keep overclocking maybe you can hit 5.0GHz.


While I would like to hit 5GHz, I doubt I will try since I've already hit over 80 in my temps during the stress test.
I'll likely add a second fan for a push/pull setup to my cooler, though I doubt it will make a huge difference.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dnic41*
> 
> While I would like to hit 5GHz, I doubt I will try since I've already hit over 80 in my temps during the stress test.
> I'll likely add a second fan for a push/pull setup to my cooler, though I doubt it will make a huge difference.


You can safely run up to 90c, the Processor will throttle at over a 100c. Just increasing the multiplier 200Mhz wont raise the heat much. Give it a go.


----------



## jasjeet

I'm finding that some days the VID is higher and then my vcore is much higher as a result. Running adaptive vcore.

Is it recommended to use CLU in between the IHS and CPU cooler after delid?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> I'm finding that some days the VID is higher and then my vcore is much higher as a result. Running adaptive vcore.
> 
> Is it recommended to use CLU in between the IHS and CPU cooler after delid?


The VID is set by Intel according to load and multiplier, VID works dynamically controlling Adaptive. If you don't like the peak voltage lower it.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> I ended up downclocking, all 4 cores at 3.7ghz (7820HK), undervolte adaptive offset at -140, and temps never break 80 celsius even most demanding games and 3.7ghz stays solid entire time... still kind of a bummer since most people can run 4.2ghz with this same chip... might try to repaste someday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> even if I bump it up to 3.8ghz temps will break 90... 3.7 is sweet spot. makes no sense to me but oh well


Are you on stock cooling? Those are some low speeds for that high of temps.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Is it recommended to use CLU in between the IHS and CPU cooler after delid?


I would not recommend that. CLU definitely between the die and IHS, but I have had too many bad experiences between the IHS and cooler. And it only keeps you a couple degrees lower, so it isnt worth it to ruin heatsinks IMO. Just use some Kryonaut or Gelid Extreme.


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> Are you on stock cooling? Those are some low speeds for that high of temps.
> I would not recommend that. CLU definitely between the die and IHS, but I have had too many bad experiences between the IHS and cooler. And it only keeps you a couple degrees lower, so it isnt worth it to ruin heatsinks IMO. Just use some Kryonaut or Gelid Extreme.


I'm talking laptop here


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The VID is set by Intel according to load and multiplier, VID works dynamically controlling Adaptive. If you don't like the peak voltage lower it.


Yes I know that but it was peaking 1.28v yesterday and now 1.312v without any changes.
I think it's not possible to set adaptive below the VID even with adaptive with negative offset.
So if the VID is going up then the resultant vcore ends up higher on any given day.
My chip has really high VID comparing here.


----------



## NIK1

Going to build my Kaby Lake system soon. Is it true that Kaby Lake processors made in Vietnam are better for overclocking than the Malaysian one.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> I'm talking laptop here


ah I knew there was something I was forgetting about your hardware







So ya, pretty good temps for a laptop on Kaby

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NIK1*
> 
> Going to build my Kaby Lake system soon. Is it true that Kaby Lake processors made in Vietnam are better for overclocking than the Malaysian one.


lol. Well considering there is not a single CPU I have seen yet from Vietnam I would say the answer is no one knows? If the batch number starts with "L" (which they all do) then it is a Malaysia piece.
What matters much more is the piece of silicon the CPUs came from and where in that silicon your CPU came from. CPUs closer to the center of the wafer typically overclock better than CPUs towards the outside of the wafer.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NIK1*
> 
> Going to build my Kaby Lake system soon. Is it true that Kaby Lake processors made in Vietnam are better for overclocking than the Malaysian one.


Vietnam Devils Canyon chips were better overclockers overall than Malay chips, possibly because Intel's newest fab plant is Vietnam. I think you will find there are not any Vietnam 7700K/6700K chips available yet, Intel tends to start manufacturing the higher end chips in Vietnam towards the end of the product cycle possibly to gear up Malaysia fab plant for the next generation of chips


----------



## The_Nephilim

Hi Overclockers,

I did as requested and bumped up the VCore to 1.35v and when I ran RealBench Stress test it BSOD in about an hour..Now my OC is at 5.0 with the volts I ust said.. should I bump up the VCore to 1.36 and retest???

Just curious how high can I go on the vCore withing what Intel recommends??


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> im so confused.... HWINFO shows never breaking 80 celsius but HWmonitor is showing 97 celsius.... sigh im losing my mind.... gods save me....


Did you try real temp?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Yes I know that but it was peaking 1.28v yesterday and now 1.312v without any changes.
> I think it's not possible to set adaptive below the VID even with adaptive with negative offset.
> So if the VID is going up then the resultant vcore ends up higher on any given day.
> My chip has really high VID comparing here.


If you set negative adaptive, the Vcore will be below VID.


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If you set negative adaptive, the Vcore will be below VID.


Right now I have
SVID enabled
LLC L5
Additional Turbo 1.28v
Offset +0.001v

Non AVX load vcore 1.312/1.328v

No difference if I set offset to -0.04v.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Right now I have
> SVID enabled
> LLC L5
> Additional Turbo 1.28v
> Offset +0.001v
> 
> Non AVX load vcore 1.312/1.328v
> 
> No difference if I set offset to -0.04v.


Doesn't the Additional Turbo override the offset?

I can work it on my Gigabyte motherboard.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Right now I have
> SVID enabled
> LLC L5
> Additional Turbo 1.28v
> Offset +0.001v
> 
> Non AVX load vcore 1.312/1.328v
> 
> No difference if I set offset to -0.04v.


When you have SVID on doesnt it not matter what voltage you set anyway? Thats how mine works at least. Doesnt matter what offset I use, SVID chooses voltages all the way up even to 1.56v if it feels like it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Right now I have
> SVID enabled
> LLC L5
> Additional Turbo 1.28v
> Offset +0.001v
> Non AVX load vcore 1.312/1.328v
> No difference if I set offset to -0.04v.


Is that your ASUS z170?? You did update to the most recent bios? If yes, look for IA AC and IA DC load line in bios and set these to 0.01. offset to Auto, Turbo to the max voltage you want applied at the highest multiplier you set. SVID can be left on Auto for all but the most extreme OC manual override voltages (none of which we're talking about).








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If you set negative adaptive, the Vcore will be below VID.


there is no such thing as negative ADDITIONAL TURBO VOLTAGE.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Is that your ASUS z170?? You did update to the most recent bios? If yes, look for IA AC and IA DC load line in bios and set these to 0.01. offset to Auto, Turbo to the max voltage you want applied at the highest multiplier you set. SVID can be left on Auto for all but the most extreme OC manual override voltages (none of which we're talking about).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there is no such thing as negative ADDITIONAL TURBO VOLTAGE.


You cant change the plus singe to negative in that menu?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You cant change the plus singe to negative in that menu?


For offset voltage only. Again, offset is vs the VID, Turbo/adaptive is a total applied voltage which is no less than the VID requested. eg, zero turbo/adaptive = VID, 1.25V turbo/adaptive = 1.25V no matter the VID. You can add or subtract a positive or negative offset to provide a "Total Adaptive" voltage.


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> ah I knew there was something I was forgetting about your hardware
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So ya, pretty good temps for a laptop on Kaby
> lol. r.


Thanks for your help guys but I am good now, I am running at 4.2ghz on all 4 cores on my 7820HK, not breaking 80 celsius, I removed the back panel, it was suffocating the heatsink, cheap plastic back. I am going to re-paste with arctic mx-4 this week, and instead of having the cheap plastic back, I am going to sit my laptop on some 3m sticky stuff on all 4 corners to elevate it half an inch, and then I am going to sit it on this: https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B01FQ7OGQU/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I am also putting DEMCIflex south african dust filter cutouts over the actual intake fans directly on the laptop, and I figure every 3 months I will need to lift laptop up and do a dust can on it just to clean out all the m.2 areas, etc. Not to worried about it really, temps will probably never break 70 celsius even at 4.2ghz once I am all said and done


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Is that your ASUS z170?? You did update to the most recent bios? If yes, look for IA AC and IA DC load line in bios and set these to 0.01. offset to Auto, Turbo to the max voltage you want applied at the highest multiplier you set. SVID can be left on Auto for all but the most extreme OC manual override voltages (none of which we're talking about).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there is no such thing as negative ADDITIONAL TURBO VOLTAGE.


I have the AC DC set to 0.01 also.
Yep z170i board latest bios.

My temps now hit 85c in overwatch. Exactly like before delid.

I'll try AUTO SVID.


----------



## pigr8

*Username:* pigr8
*CPU Model:* i7 7700k
*Base Clock:* 100Mhz
*Core Multiplier:* 51
*Core Frequency:* 5100Mhz
*Cache Frequency:* 4800Mhz
*Vcore in UEFI:* 1.344
*Vcore:* 1.344-1.360
*FCLK:* 1000Mhz
*Cooling Solution:* delidded and naked, Coollaboratory Liquid Pro on Kraken X62, full load 53°, peak 58°, idle 23°, room 21°.
*Stability Test:* Realbench 8h + OCCT ~3h + IBT Maximum 10 run

*Batch Number:* Malaysia, L643G337
*Ram Speed:* XMP 3000 15-17-17-35-2T
*Ram Voltage:* 1.35v
*VCCIO:* 1.152v untouched
*VCCSA:* 1.144v untouched
*Motherboard:* z270 Asus Maximus IX Hero
*LLC Setting:* LLC4
*Misc:* no AVX offset, no overclock on the GPU, no overclock on the RAM.


----------



## EniGma1987

My 7700K seems to be a dud. It will pass all tests including Prime at 4.8GHz with only 1.2v, but then it requires 1.42v just to pass RealBench stable at 5.1GHz. Batch L639F998


----------



## BrainSplatter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> My 7700K seems to be a dud. It will pass all tests including Prime at 4.8GHz with only 1.2v, but then it requires 1.42v just to pass RealBench stable at 5.1GHz. Batch L639F998


1.42v under load? 1.42 in BIOS without much LLC and without delidding is probably about average and not a dud, imho.

What u see here in this thread is above average since many CPUs are delidded, a couple are pre-binned from silicon lottery or people have binned them themselves.

My 7700K seems to be about the same as yours btw. I am using 1.42 in the BIOS for 5.1 Ghz. With low LLC, that will be about a little over 1.4 under load.

My 4770K was a real dud. It would only do 4.4Ghz @ 1.33v delidded


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BrainSplatter*
> 
> 1.42v under load? 1.42 in BIOS without much LLC and without delidding is probably about average and not a dud, imho.
> 
> What u see here in this thread is above average since many CPUs are delidded, a couple are pre-binned from silicon lottery or people have binned them themselves.


1.42v real voltage after LLC measured at the back of the motherboard







After delid with CLU on die and Kryonaut on IHS, and after being lapped, while on big water cooling







Ya its a dud.


----------



## Dry Bonez

ok, one last time, who regrets now purchasing the 7700k? Yes, this is due to the AMD ryzen reveal today. I for one sure do regret it and looking to part my 7700k


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> ok, one last time, who regrets now purchasing the 7700k? Yes, this is due to the AMD ryzen reveal today. I for one sure do regret it and looking to part my 7700k


I dont regret it because of amd .

Im kinda just unhappy with the chip ive got


----------



## Dry Bonez

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I dont regret it because of amd .
> 
> Im kinda just unhappy with the chip ive got


if i may ask, what makes the chip a bad one? Also, lets say you did get a decent one, would you regret it over ryzen?


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> ok, one last time, who regrets now purchasing the 7700k? Yes, this is due to the AMD ryzen reveal today. I for one sure do regret it and looking to part my 7700k


Well, it depends on what applications you usually use or play. I play arma 3 it needs good single core perf. I hope to see ryzen run that game, I wonder if it will be on par with intel or not. I also wonder how ryzen is going to handle high speed ram kits(3600 and above).


----------



## The_Nephilim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Nephilim*
> 
> Hi Overclockers,
> 
> I did as requested and bumped up the VCore to 1.35v and when I ran RealBench Stress test it BSOD in about an hour..Now my OC is at 5.0 with the volts I ust said.. should I bump up the VCore to 1.36 and retest???
> 
> Just curious how high can I go on the vCore withing what Intel recommends??


Well I did this and retested with realbemnch stress test it made it too 100minutes and I shut if off.. I am going to try for a 4 hour test later tonight..


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> if i may ask, what makes the chip a bad one? Also, lets say you did get a decent one, would you regret it over ryzen?


Requires high voltage to overclock it, and for some reason has really high temps even on x62.

No i wont regret anyway. Plus to all that soon optain memory comes out, which i expect to have some good surprises after it


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> ok, one last time, *who regrets now purchasing the 7700k?* Yes, this is due to the AMD ryzen reveal today. I for one sure do regret it and looking to part my 7700k


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> if i may ask, what makes the chip a bad one? Also, *lets say you did get a decent one, would you regret it over ryzen?*


Short answer, absolutely not.

I built this rig specifically for high single threaded performance. Most of what I do with this rig, to include gaming use 4 or less cores. I'm not sure that AMD will have an offering that will come even close to what I'm getting out of my 7700k with regards to single threaded performance. If what I'm doing can't use the extra cores, I want to make sure that the ones that are being used are fast as hell.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> ok, one last time, who regrets now purchasing the 7700k? Yes, this is due to the AMD ryzen reveal today. I for one sure do regret it and looking to part my 7700k


Nope. I mostly game. I aim for the highest minimum framerate. 7700K is better for that. Funny thing is the vast majority of people mostly game, but get lost in the weeds regarding what's best for them. So my question for you is do you mostly game? And if you might do some rendering on the side, do you realize you can wait a little longer to accomplish the same task with lesser cores while you can't do anything to change the single threaded performance that games benefit from? If so, why sell the 7700K?


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> ok, one last time, who regrets now purchasing the 7700k? Yes, this is due to the AMD ryzen reveal today. I for one sure do regret it and looking to part my 7700k


Honestly why do you keep posting? Go sell your 7700K and buy a Ryzen processor if your so sad about it. I got a dud 7700K and was coming from a 6700K and I still dont regret it. The performance is still great and just as good as it was yesterday. New processors didnt suddenly make my current one somehow not get the job done.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Nephilim*
> 
> Well I did this and retested with realbemnch stress test it made it too 100minutes and I shut if off.. I am going to try for a 4 hour test later tonight..


My CPU can usually make it 5-6 hours before the test reports instability and shuts off. Need to do 8 hour tests minimum to really check. I like RealBench because it tests a lot of aspects of the system, including graphics computer a bit, memory somewhat, and significant multitasking. But even still, it isnt the be all end all of tests. I also think a few Heaven, Firestrike, Timespy, and Pi tests are needed to assume 98%+ stability.


----------



## OutlawII

Amd has finally caught up,but look at the scores they barely beat a 6800k with a 8 core chip how is that so great? If anything its underwhelming


----------



## gryphonv

Hello, just joined up here. Love the guide.

I'm currently trying to get my lowest voltage at 4.9 ghz.

I used a different guide first that had my Uncore ratio brought up to 45. With that lowest stable voltage I had was 1.29.

After dropping my Uncore to 44, I was able to bring down the voltage and still be stable. In my current settings I have Uncore at 42.

I am presently stable at 1.25v @4.9ghz, peak temps with x264 is 71c on one core, average peak 69c. I'm about 20 loops currently with this voltage and everything seems fine.

Using a Kraken x62 also, with a pretty conservative fan/pump profile.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> ok, one last time, who regrets now purchasing the 7700k? Yes, this is due to the AMD ryzen reveal today. I for one sure do regret it and looking to part my 7700k


Not one little bit single core clock speed is what matters to me with the applications that i use


----------



## marik123

Is it normal for a 7700k to run hotter than a 6700k (both delid CLU+MX2 on the same cryorig h5 universal cooler) at the same frequency and voltage?

6700k delid CLU+MX2 4.8ghz @ 1.452v = 65-70c load in games
7700k delid CLU+MX2 5.0ghz @ 1.368v = 70-75c load in games
7700k delid CLU+MX2 stock @ 1.35v = 63-65c load in games

Thanks


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marik123*
> 
> Is it normal for a 7700k to run hotter than a 6700k (both delid CLU+MX2 on the same cryorig h5 universal cooler) at the same frequency and voltage?
> 
> 6700k delid CLU+MX2 4.8ghz @ 1.452v = 65-70c load in games
> 7700k delid CLU+MX2 5.0ghz @ 1.368v = 70-75c load in games
> 7700k delid CLU+MX2 stock @ 1.35v = 63-65c load in games
> 
> Thanks


I think yes.

Also what i noticed is when memory is in xps or overclocked it raises cpu temps by 10 for me.


----------



## marik123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I think yes.
> 
> Also what i noticed is when memory is in xps or overclocked it raises cpu temps by 10 for me.


Both my 6700k and 7700k is running at 3600mhz RAM, then still how come 6700k is cooler than 7700k despite a higher voltage?


----------



## marik123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Come on bud. Stock @ 1.35v. That's funny.


That's the stock voltage I have when I leave everything to auto and CPU-Z show as 1.35v under load, so how is that being a troll and funny? I'm just trying to find out why my 7700k runs hotter than my 6700k even with lower voltage.

I already tried to re-seat my heatsink twice, re-applied CLU and MX2 just to make sure I didn't mess anything up.


----------



## Jpmboy

I'm talkin about the repeat ryzen guy.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marik123*
> 
> That's the stock voltage I have when I leave everything to auto and CPU-Z show as 1.35v under load, so how is that being a troll and funny? I'm just trying to find out why my 7700k runs hotter than my 6700k even with lower voltage.
> 
> I already tried to re-seat my heatsink twice, re-applied CLU and MX2 just to make sure I didn't mess anything up.


Your board is setting too much voltage for stock speed. Way too much. It was a common problem at launch and talked about by a lot of reviewers. You have to manually set it lower. The fact that your are running 1.35 @ 4.5 GHz and 1.368v at 5 GHz ( .018v more for 500 MHz) is a sign.


----------



## Malinkadink

So i have a question regarding % performance gained per 100MHz. Would it be safe to assume that there is a 2% performance gain in synthetic benchmarks for every 100MHz you OC? I'm currently on a 4670k @ 4.2ghz and 1.276v. pushing higher requires more voltage than im comfortable with on a 212 evo and non-delid. I know that skylake/kaby is around 9-10% better IPC vs haswell, and i was looking to run a 7700k @ 5ghz after performing a delid. So 10% IPC increase plus 800MHz can i assume to get a 26% performance bump at the most with that setup? Maybe 20% being a more modest assumption.

The upcoming 7740k is something i could even wait for, but its going to be on 2066 which is more $$$, its still a 4C/8T, higher TDP, and no iGPU so that either means Intel is trying to dump some awfully binned chips, or they did something that will let folks get well over 5ghz OC on them (doubtful).

Anyways i digress, i see that chart in the OP has mostly Asus and some gigabyte and asrock boards. I'm somewhat loyal to MSI as i've not had a problem with their boards in all my previous builds and would either go with a Z270 M5 or M7, but if they're for some reason not a great canvas for OCing i could reconsider.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Your board is setting too much voltage for stock speed. Way too much. It was a common problem at launch and talked about by a lot of reviewers. You have to manually set it lower. The fact that your are running 1.35 @ 4.5 GHz and 1.368v at 5 GHz ( .018v more for 500 MHz) is a sign.


He is correct, it is the stock Intel CPU VID set at the factory. The motherboards VRM is dumb it just sets the Stock Vcore according to individual Processor VID at 4.5GHz. All processors have a Different VID and that sends the Voltage commands to the VRM, that control's the voltage and LL.


----------



## marik123

After digging further online, I got my answer below why 7700k run hotter than 6700k.



http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-overclocking-performance-review,4836-2.html

Both CPU is running the same board (same as what I have) where 6700k 4.6ghz 1.3v show 60c load (no delid) and 7700k 4.8ghz 1.3v show 82c load (no delid). I don't think +200mhz at the same voltage will cause a 22c increase.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marik123*
> 
> After digging further online, I got my answer below why 7700k run hotter than 6700k.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-overclocking-performance-review,4836-2.html
> 
> Both CPU is running the same board (same as what I have) where 6700k 4.6ghz 1.3v show 60c load (no delid) and 7700k 4.8ghz 1.3v show 82c load (no delid). I don't think +200mhz at the same voltage will cause a 22c increase.


Even though a 7700K runs hotter at the same voltage level as a 6700K, it also runs higher frequencies at lower voltages than a 6700k, which results in it running cooler than a 6700k for the same frequency.

What you should be doing is trying to find the lowest voltage your 7700k will run stable at stock clocks and from there work out the voltage levels needed for each 100mhz increment. You will then find that your temps will be a lot lower.

My 7700k for example, runs stock clocks stable at 1.10 volts and runs 4.6ghz - 5.0ghz between the voltage range of 1.13-1.21 volts and my temps are lower than what my 6700k was for the same speeds.


----------



## marik123

I just got my 7700k last night and will do more testing to it further. So far I was able to boot into Windows 7 5ghz @ 1.368v (load with LLC = high), played couple games, browse the internet and it was fine without any problems except the higher temperature. I tried to run OCCT 4.42 last night, and it failed within 20 seconds. That's why I'm concerned about the temperature because I would need more voltage to maintain stability at 5ghz. I will try to lower my RAM back down to 3200mhz stock tonight with stock timing and see if that's cause OCCT problems.

Multiplier = 50x
CPU Vcore = 1.375v BIOS (shows 1.368v under load)
LLC = High
Cache = 42x

DRAM = 3600mhz 15-15-15-35 2T 1.4v (RAM is 100% stable tested with memtest86 from my previous 6700k).

VCCIN = 1.2v (same setting I used for my previous 6700k)
VSSA = 1.25v (same setting I used for my previous 6700k)


----------



## The_Nephilim

Well I finally got it stable.. I bumped up the vCore to 1.36 and ran RealBench Stress test at 8gb for 4 hours and it passed this time.. So I do believe it is stable now at 1.36VCore.. here is the screenshot of the test:



Thank you all and these Kaby Lake CPU are pretty quick and good OC's..


----------



## jonathan1107

Few questions:

@1.44v in uefi, I get 1.456v Vcore which is higher than the safe limit I think. How do I prevent the actual VCORE from going beyond 1.45? Using offset
My mobo (asus maximus hero IX z270) has a few settings I'm unsure about: *CPU SVID SUPPORT?* disabled or enabled if I want to reach 5.2ghz+
*Intel Speedstep?* (enabled or disabled) and Turbo mode? (enabled or disabled)
To control the *cache frequency*, I have 3 settings named min. cpu cache ratio, max cpu cache ratio and cpu core/cache current limit max (which is set at auto in the moment) I set the min and max at 4.2ghz for stability while testing my core frequency. Was that the right way to do it? or am I supposed to touch the 3rd setting (core/cache current limit?)
*CPU C-States?* enabled vs disabled? My build uses mayhem pastel liquid with distilled water, I intend to run it pretty much 24/7. But whilst I'm gone working, the PC doesn't need to be running full tilt, with max OC and everything. Knowing this, what settings would you play with?


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jonathan1107*
> 
> I'm trying to overclock my i7 7700k and being that I have a custom waterloop I figured I'd start at around 1.44 UEFI Core voltage and drop down progressively until I lose stability.
> 
> Thing is, at 1.44v in uefi, I get 1.456v Vcore which is higher than the safe limit I think. Now this is probably due to LLC being on "auto" or some other setting
> How do I prevent the actual VCORE from going beyond 1.45? Using offsets?


You are going about it the wrong way. It doesn't matter that you have a custom loop, you never start at the high end of your vcore voltage.

You want to start at the very lowest voltage you can run your 7700K at stock clocks, and then slowly increment your voltage at 0.01 volts at time with each frequency increase, until that frequency becomes stable.

The whole point is to find the lowest stable voltage your cpu will run at a given frequency, and it is safer to work your way up the voltage scale, then starting at the top and overvolting your system and putting your temperatures through the roof.


----------



## jonathan1107

I understand, but the end result is the same, and the temperatures aren't going any higher than 67c
so I'm not that worried. I'd really like to hear your answer to the other questions in my last post though


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jonathan1107*
> 
> I understand, but the end result is the same, and the temperatures aren't going any higher than 67c
> so I'm not that worried. I'd really like to hear your answer to the other questions in my last post though


All your questions and the best way to overclock your setup is in the following guide, written by Asus for Asus boards. It will explain everything you need to know. You will also see that the guide does recommend starting at a lower voltage and working your way up and not at a high voltage level to begin with.

http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


----------



## jasjeet

If the Vcore on adaptive is pulling more than what you set - basically following VID, use a negative offset of -0.001. Thats what fixed it.
I had it on +0.001. SVID AUTO.


----------



## madmeatballs

Does VCCIO affect gpus? It looks like nvlddmkm stops working while running hci to test my ram overclock. I have a Zotac GTX 1070 Amp extreme on stock while running hci.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jonathan1107*
> 
> Few questions:
> 
> @1.44v in uefi, I get 1.456v Vcore which is higher than the safe limit I think. How do I prevent the actual VCORE from going beyond 1.45? Using offset
> My mobo (asus maximus hero IX z270) has a few settings I'm unsure about: *CPU SVID SUPPORT?* disabled or enabled if I want to reach 5.2ghz+
> *Intel Speedstep?* (enabled or disabled) and Turbo mode? (enabled or disabled)
> To control the *cache frequency*, I have 3 settings named min. cpu cache ratio, max cpu cache ratio and cpu core/cache current limit max (which is set at auto in the moment) I set the min and max at 4.2ghz for stability while testing my core frequency. Was that the right way to do it? or am I supposed to touch the 3rd setting (core/cache current limit?)
> *CPU C-States?* enabled vs disabled? My build uses mayhem pastel liquid with distilled water, I intend to run it pretty much 24/7. But whilst I'm gone working, the PC doesn't need to be running full tilt, with max OC and everything. Knowing this, what settings would you play with?


1) are you using straight adaptive? (offset on Auto??) If yes, look for IA AC and IA DC load line, enter 0.001 in each. And.. LLC affects vcore. On that board use LLC 5 or 6. No higher
2) Speedstep enebled, of course you want turbo enabled, else the chip can;t load any turbo multipliers (stock non turbo is what... 35?)
3) min cache to auto, max cxache to the cache multi you want to use (keep this on auto, lock down a stable vcore and then increase cache until the system fails to load windows.. back to bios, drop 2 cache multis and then tune it up with vcore)
4) When using Adaptive, c-states are kinda meaningless - so disable c-states. When using manual override/full manual mode, c-states can let the cores relax a bit by entering a low idle state (parking).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> If the Vcore on adaptive is pulling more than what you set - basically following VID, use a negative offset of -0.001. Thats what fixed it.
> I had it on +0.001. SVID AUTO.


this can work too.. sometimes.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> Does VCCIO affect gpus? It looks like nvlddmkm stops working while running hci to test my ram overclock. I have a Zotac GTX 1070 Amp extreme on stock while running hci.


if you are using bluescreen or who crashed it will only tell you the last thing to fatally fail. With HCi failure is 99% of the time either ram OC/timings and/or cache. VCCIO can help to stabilize high ram freqs, but not really neeed to be anythiong but Auto for day-driver settings (unless you are running 3866 or higher).


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jonathan1107*
> 
> Few questions:
> 
> @1.44v in uefi, I get 1.456v Vcore which is higher than the safe limit I think. How do I prevent the actual VCORE from going beyond 1.45? Using offset
> My mobo (asus maximus hero IX z270) has a few settings I'm unsure about: *CPU SVID SUPPORT?* disabled or enabled if I want to reach 5.2ghz+
> *Intel Speedstep?* (enabled or disabled) and Turbo mode? (enabled or disabled)
> To control the *cache frequency*, I have 3 settings named min. cpu cache ratio, max cpu cache ratio and cpu core/cache current limit max (which is set at auto in the moment) I set the min and max at 4.2ghz for stability while testing my core frequency. Was that the right way to do it? or am I supposed to touch the 3rd setting (core/cache current limit?)
> *CPU C-States?* enabled vs disabled? My build uses mayhem pastel liquid with distilled water, I intend to run it pretty much 24/7. But whilst I'm gone working, the PC doesn't need to be running full tilt, with max OC and everything. Knowing this, what settings would you play with?


I like Intel speedstep so I leave it enabled to save from wear and tear. Turbo boost needs to be enabled to overclock. I would change the Cache ratio to match clock speed after getting a stable core clock and just try to increase the Cache speed without any other changes. Cstates I just run on AUTO to save from wear and tear.


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you are using bluescreen or who crashed it will only tell you the last thing to fatally fail. With HCi failure is 99% of the time either ram OC/timings and/or cache. VCCIO can help to stabilize high ram freqs, but not really neeed to be anythiong but Auto for day-driver settings (unless you are running 3866 or higher).


I'm trying to make my 3866 kit work with my 5ghz oc. Well, it wasn't a bsod. Screen just turns black and returns back, when I check event viewer it will show that nvlddmkm stopped working. I think when my VCCIO is high it does that.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> I'm trying to make my 3866 kit work with my 5ghz oc. Well, it wasn't a bsod. Screen just turns black and returns back, when I check event viewer it will show that nvlddmkm stopped working. I think when my VCCIO is high it does that.


ah - thats' very different. That blackout is the driver and recovery (I'd bet). First thing I would try is to clean the video driver base with DDU and reinstall. If it still happens, turn bclk spread spectrum off, and for sure, avoid unnecessarily high VCCIO.








if you want help with the ram, post *here* and post up bios screenies of your voltage screen and all ram bios screens (eg, scroll and hit F12 again). Put a usb stick in any port, enter bios and hit F12 on the bios screen(s). Esc to windows and zip the pic files on the stick, post 'em up.


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> ok, one last time, who regrets now purchasing the 7700k? Yes, this is due to the AMD ryzen reveal today. I for one sure do regret it and looking to part my 7700k


NOW I might be a little PO'd if I just purchased Kabylake








Core i7 7700K Up For $299, Core i5 7600K For $199, Core i5 6600K For $179 *Source* ...
BUT in the long run, this is ALLL GOOD for the enthusiast!








NOW hoping AMD also comes strong at Nvidia ...


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ah - thats' very different. That blackout is the driver and recovery (I'd bet). First thing I would try is to clean the video driver base with DDU and reinstall. If it still happens, turn bclk spread spectrum off, and for sure, avoid unnecessarily high VCCIO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if you want help with the ram, post *here* and post up bios screenies of your voltage screen and all ram bios screens (eg, scroll and hit F12 again). Put a usb stick in any port, enter bios and hit F12 on the bios screen(s). Esc to windows and zip the pic files on the stick, post 'em up.


Yea it is the blackout and recovery, I already tried ddu and different drivers. Looks like a higher dram voltage solved it I guess. 1.45v dram right now. HWiNFO reporting 1.256v vccsa / 1.2 vccio. HCI on 530% now, no blackouts so far. I already posted on that thread although no screenshots. I'll probably try a more aggressive overclock on my cpu once I finally find out stable setting so I can just go back tot his one if I fail.


----------



## OutlawII

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> NOW I might be a little PO'd if I just purchased Kabylake
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Core i7 7700K Up For $299, Core i5 7600K For $199, Core i5 6600K For $179 *Source* ...
> BUT in the long run, this is ALLL GOOD for the enthusiast!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NOW hoping AMD also comes strong at Nvidia ...


Why be PO'd its what the price was at the time we bought? I dont know how much stuff you guys buy but it happens with everything buy it today goes on sale tomorrow big deal! Nobody forced us to buy


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> Yea it is the blackout and recovery, I already tried ddu and different drivers. Looks like a higher dram voltage solved it I guess. 1.45v dram right now. HWiNFO reporting 1.256v vccsa / 1.2 vccio. HCI on 530% now, no blackouts so far. I already posted on that thread although no screenshots. I'll probably try a more aggressive overclock on my cpu once I finally find out stable setting so I can just go back tot his one if I fail.


Great! looks like you sorted it out.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Why be PO'd its what the price was at the time we bought? I dont know how much stuff you guys buy but it happens with everything buy it today goes on sale tomorrow big deal! Nobody forced us to buy


*^^ THIS !!*


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Great! looks like you sorted it out.


I'll probably try to tighten the timings if I decide to stick with my cpu oc.

edit:

Well, it failed again because of the nvlddmkm. I'll try turning bclk spread spectrum off.

Update:
Well for some reason any setting I try for 3866 now shows qcode 55 just like almost everyone with the kit. lol. I turned it down to 3733mhz now will see further if this will work. Really weird out of no where my almost stable setting now shows qcode 55.

Also do you think the Apex would give better results? I've been trying to get my hands on one locally.


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> NOW I might be a little PO'd if I just purchased Kabylake
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Core i7 7700K Up For $299, Core i5 7600K For $199, Core i5 6600K For $179 *Source* ...
> BUT in the long run, this is ALLL GOOD for the enthusiast!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NOW hoping AMD also comes strong at Nvidia ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why be PO'd its what the price was at the time we bought? I dont know how much stuff you guys buy but it happens with everything buy it today goes on sale tomorrow big deal! Nobody forced us to buy
Click to expand...

I'm just the messenger ... your response/interpretation says it all ... Don't think ALL that follow these kind of threads trying to make a decision on their new investment would not find that info helpful?


----------



## OutlawII

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> I'm just the messenger ... your response/interpretation says it all ... Don't think ALL that follow these kind of threads trying to make a decision on their new investment would not find that info helpful?


Your response makes no sense at all,good information about pricing yes it is. But my response was to being PO'd about my purchase go troll elsewhere please


----------



## MaKeN

I just cant understand it ....

Switched from x62 to a custome loop temps are same 90c in prime 95 ... how come idkn , and its delidded...


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I just cant understand it ....
> 
> Switched from x62 to a custome loop temps are same 90c in prime 95 ... how come idkn , and its delidded...


Possible causes :

1) Bad mounting of cpu block - pull apart and remount
2) Is your delidded cpu's IHS resealed back on or just sitting on top and secured with the socket lid ? Could also be your cpu delid needs to be redone, as in redoing the TIM.
Also what TIM did you use on the cpu die, a liquid metal or a non conductive one ?


----------



## olivete

Does liquid metal is way better than a, lets say, Noctua NH1 (non conductive)?

My temps went from 94 91 86 88 to 80 80 80 80 (4x80 lol), using NH1, and I also got here a MX2.

Too bad this is only a 4.9ghz. I am waiting my new water pump to come, my 5yo does not seems to be doing good, besides some noise/vibration, hope it helps to improve a bit.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> I'll probably try to tighten the timings if I decide to stick with my cpu oc.
> 
> edit:
> 
> Well, it failed again because of the nvlddmkm. I'll try turning bclk spread spectrum off.
> 
> Update:
> Well for some reason any setting I try for 3866 now shows qcode 55 just like almost everyone with the kit. lol. I turned it down to 3733mhz now will see further if this will work. Really weird out of no where my almost stable setting now shows qcode 55.
> 
> Also do you think the Apex would give better results? I've been trying to get my hands on one locally.


for 3866 on a 4 slot board, you need to set these 4 3rd timings to the same value as CAS:

should work to boot 3866.

The Apex should do better if it's not limited by the cpu and ram samples.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olivete*
> 
> Does liquid metal is way better than a, lets say, Noctua NH1 (non conductive)?
> 
> My temps went from 94 91 86 88 to 80 80 80 80 (4x80 lol), using NH1, and I also got here a MX2.
> 
> Too bad this is only a 4.9ghz. I am waiting my new water pump to come, my 5yo does not seems to be doing good, besides some noise/vibration, hope it helps to improve a bit.


if you put Nt-H1 under the IHS, I'm not surprised by the poor temperatures. Use a LM or there really is no value in delidding (8-10C to void the warranty? You should see a 20C+ drop in temps.
Also, check your block mount... believe it or not, some folks left the protective plastic on the block face.


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> for 3866 on a 4 slot board, you need to set these 4 3rd timings to the same value as CAS:
> 
> should work to boot 3866.
> 
> The Apex should do better if it's not limited by the cpu and ram samples.


So I just have to put 12 on the 3rd times for those 4 right? I'll try those next. I really hope retailers here would accept a special order for the apex.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madmeatballs*
> 
> So I just have to put 12 on the 3rd times for those 4 right? I'll try those next. I really hope retailers here would accept a special order for the apex.


nope.. you need to set these to the same value as CAS. so if you are running 3866c17, these need to be 17.


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nope.. you need to set these to the same value as CAS. so if you are running 3866c17, these need to be 17.


Oh, now I get it! I'll try it and keep you posted on what happens.


----------



## olivete

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you put Nt-H1 under the IHS, I'm not surprised by the poor temperatures. Use a LM or there really is no value in delidding (8-10C to void the warranty? You should see a 20C+ drop in temps.
> Also, check your block mount... believe it or not, some folks left the protective plastic on the block face.


So it does make that much of difference uh? Cool! The worst part was the delid, now that its done, I will get some LM









Thank you very much!!!

PS: That Plastic thing you said is the cover that comes with the motherboard? Jesus peepz really did that?!?!?!?!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olivete*
> 
> So it does make that much of difference uh? Cool! The worst part was the delid, now that its done, I will get some LM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you very much!!!
> 
> PS: That Plastic thing you said is the cover that comes with the motherboard? Jesus peepz really did that?!?!?!?!


no.. the clear plastic protection film on the bottom of the cooler block.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Possible causes :
> 
> 1) Bad mounting of cpu block - pull apart and remount
> 2) Is your delidded cpu's IHS resealed back on or just sitting on top and secured with the socket lid ? Could also be your cpu delid needs to be redone, as in redoing the TIM.
> Also what TIM did you use on the cpu die, a liquid metal or a non conductive one ?


The cpu block sits perfect i think...
I've used CLPunder the IHS and mx4 between block and IHS . No i did not resealed back the IHS , i heard its not needed. Its something wrong with the chip or settings in bios ....


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olivete*
> 
> So it does make that much of difference uh? Cool! The worst part was the delid, now that its done, I will get some LM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you very much!!!
> 
> PS: That Plastic thing you said is the cover that comes with the motherboard? Jesus peepz really did that?!?!?!?!


Indeed ! Nh1 or mx4 under IHS gave me like 5 c drop only... not worth at all.


----------



## olivete

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Indeed ! Nh1 or mx4 under IHS gave me like 5 c drop only... not worth at all.


Damnn!!! Ok.. already bought it... just gotta wait it arrives









Thanks for the advice guys!


----------



## MaKeN

So , i have found an awesome thing for my self , i hope it can help others also.
I even have made a video of it.

So my concern and my blaming on i7 7700k chip was mainly the temps i get with it....
till i made some tests with " cpu pll oc voltage"
Switching it down from "auto" made terrific change in temps drop.
Video:
https://youtu.be/CPbx7xXqCu4

So as you see there is a 20c drop in prime 95 ( about 25 drop in RB , and about 28c drop in gaming.)

Lowest i would go is 1.050 on PLL. system would boot but will freeze on prime 95.

My matherboard is msi z270 gaming m7

Question ?:
Why would temps depend so much on pll voltage?
What tweaks can i do to lower it more then 1.070 and not get system freeze? ( i mean maybe it works together with some other setting in bios)?


----------



## Alberello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> So , i have found an awesome thing for my self , i hope it can help others also.
> I even have made a video of it.
> 
> So my concern and my blaming on i7 7700k chip was mainly the temps i get with it....
> till i made some tests with " cpu pll oc voltage"
> Switching it down from "auto" made terrific change in temps drop.
> Video:
> https://youtu.be/CPbx7xXqCu4
> 
> So as you see there is a 20c drop in prime 95 ( about 25 drop in RB , and about 28c drop in gaming.)
> 
> Lowest i would go is 1.050 on PLL. system would boot but will freeze on prime 95.
> 
> My matherboard is msi z270 gaming m7
> 
> Question ?:
> Why would temps depend so much on pll voltage?
> What tweaks can i do to lower it more then 1.070 and not get system freeze? ( i mean maybe it works together with some other setting in bios)?


What is the default PLL voltage?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alberello*
> 
> What is the default PLL voltage?


On my motherboard default is 1.200 but on 1.200 i see a 5-10 c temps increase over 1.070

I guess on auto the mb sets it at like 1.3000-1.4000


----------



## ducegt

I have noticed that PLL voltage increases vcore indirectly on my z270 asrock k6. The lowest I can do 1.1 and that is what I run daily despite I run my vcore higher than most with similar chips; batch numbers/oc potential. It does indeed effect temps significantly. I have considered modyifing the BIOS to allow lower PLL, but this may be in vain if the temp differnce is directly related to vcore.


----------



## cwilliam85

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> So , i have found an awesome thing for my self , i hope it can help others also.
> I even have made a video of it.
> 
> So my concern and my blaming on i7 7700k chip was mainly the temps i get with it....
> till i made some tests with " cpu pll oc voltage"
> Switching it down from "auto" made terrific change in temps drop.
> Video:
> https://youtu.be/CPbx7xXqCu4
> 
> So as you see there is a 20c drop in prime 95 ( about 25 drop in RB , and about 28c drop in gaming.)
> 
> Lowest i would go is 1.050 on PLL. system would boot but will freeze on prime 95.
> 
> My matherboard is msi z270 gaming m7
> 
> Question ?:
> Why would temps depend so much on pll voltage?
> What tweaks can i do to lower it more then 1.070 and not get system freeze? ( i mean maybe it works together with some other setting in bios)?


I noticed the same thing on my MSI z270 m7 .. the results baffle me as the mins drop bellow room temp. Im wondering if anyone else has tested the cpu like with an independent thermometer ... Im still sceptical if the results are real... but yes mine drops like 10c as well. Im on 1.100v on CPU PLL OC


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cwilliam85*
> 
> I noticed the same thing on my MSI z270 m7 .. the results baffle me as the mins drop bellow room temp. Im wondering if anyone else has tested the cpu like with an independent thermometer ... Im still sceptical if the results are real... but yes mine drops like 10c as well. Im on 1.100v on CPU PLL OC


Did you try to get lower PLL then 1.100?


----------



## Alberello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> On my motherboard default is 1.200 but on 1.200 i see a 5-10 c temps increase over 1.070
> 
> I guess on auto the mb sets it at like 1.3000-1.4000


From what I see you have already lowered this voltage and archived a stable system at lower temperature, fine tuning is about that. But every CPU and system have a limit like you already know.
Every voltage change can made the temperatures lower, so you just have to stop when your system become unstable because this mean you have already reach your environment limit.
Don't ask always for more and more and more.... LOL


----------



## cwilliam85

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Did you try to get lower PLL then 1.100?


Yea I had it at one stage at 1.060v for 4.8ghz but kept bumping it a bit after doing 2 hour realbench and it crashed randomly. But it passed at 1.100v. But when I had it at 1.060v it was even cooler. But still got me wondering about the min temps as Im just not sure how it can be lower than room ambient temperature. Which makes me think its wrong or incorrect. One person recons it is skewering the temp sensor so its not correct. The only way would be to put a temp sensor on the cpu to get a independent result to see if its correct I guess.


----------



## MaKeN

Yep . Makes me also think of that.....



Thats at 1050

2 cores at +9 sounds weird

What kind of sensor can be connected to cpu ? And in what part of it?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Yep . Makes me also think of that.....
> 
> 
> 
> Thats at 1050
> 
> 2 cores at +9 sounds weird
> 
> What kind of sensor can be connected to cpu ? And in what part of it?


you guys are under volting the SIO... and causing the dts to misreport. (this can result in running higher temperatures than you think).


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cwilliam85*
> 
> Yea I had it at one stage at 1.060v for 4.8ghz but kept bumping it a bit after doing 2 hour realbench and it crashed randomly. But it passed at 1.100v. But when I had it at 1.060v it was even cooler. But still got me wondering about the min temps as Im just not sure how it can be lower than room ambient temperature. Which makes me think its wrong or incorrect. One person recons it is skewering the temp sensor so its not correct. The only way would be to put a temp sensor on the cpu to get a independent result to see if its correct I guess.


I came home and tried to view the temps with not as acurate for this job thermometer , but here are the resoults:
With undervolted ( PLL at 1.070)





May be a coincidence also....

Ill rayse the PLL to auto now and see if i get same numbers...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I came home and tried to view the temps with not as acurate for this job thermometer , but here are the resoults:
> With undervolted ( PLL at 1.070)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> May be a coincidence also....
> 
> Ill rayse the PLL to auto now and see if i get same numbers...


unfortunately we can't shoot the processor cores. What ever is 61C in your IRT is not the processor core.


----------



## cwilliam85

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you guys are under volting the SIO... and causing the dts to misreport. (this can result in running higher temperatures than you think).


Whats the SIO? So you are saying that the temp drop is defiantly not correct?

Nice idea MaKeN but yeh probably not accurate to the core temp. Not sure how to get another reading of it :S

So im confused if thats all the dropping PLL OC volts does it make it inaccurate whats the point of it? Usally any drop in volts is good if its stable. Got me baffled as to if its accurate and what the hell it does lol.

Should I then put it manually on default which is 1.20 or Auto. If Auto is that accurate or manually putting 1.20 which is default on board still inaccurate lol ?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cwilliam85*
> 
> Whats the SIO? So you are saying that the temp drop is defiantly not correct?
> 
> Nice idea MaKeN but yeh probably not accurate to the core temp. Not sure how to get another reading of it :S
> 
> So im confused if thats all the dropping PLL OC volts does it make it inaccurate whats the point of it? Usally any drop in volts is good if its stable. Got me baffled as to if its accurate and what the hell it does lol.
> 
> Should I then put it manually on default which is 1.20 or Auto. If Auto is that accurate or manually putting 1.20 which is default on board still inaccurate lol ?


Auto will work fine.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cwilliam85*
> 
> Whats the SIO? So you are saying that the temp drop is defiantly not correct?
> 
> Nice idea MaKeN but yeh probably not accurate to the core temp. Not sure how to get another reading of it :S
> 
> So im confused if thats all the dropping PLL OC volts does it make it inaccurate whats the point of it? Usally any drop in volts is good if its stable. Got me baffled as to if its accurate and *what the hell it does* lol.
> 
> Should I then put it manually on default which is 1.20 or Auto. If Auto is that accurate or manually putting 1.20 which is default on board still inaccurate lol ?


it aligns signals from several domains on the cpu so they work together. what you see with the DTS is not a temperature drop, it's signal degradation. SIO.. serial IO


----------



## bobcatchris

Username: bobcatchris
CPU Model: 7600K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 51
Core Frequency: 5100
Cache Frequency: 4600
Vcore in UEFI: 1.35v and adaptive offset +0.03
Vcore: 1.365v
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Not delidded, H100i, 2 stock fans and 2 ml120 push and pull
Stability Test: Realbench 8 hours. x264 16T for 20 Loops(close 4 hours?)
Batch Number: L644H089
Ram Speed: 3000MHz XMP 2 Profile 16-18-18-36-2T
Ram Voltage: 1.35v
VCCIO:
VCCSA:
Motherboard: Z170 MSI Tomahawk AC
LLC Setting: No option
Misc Comments: AVX 0

overclock.jpg 1203k .jpg file


----------



## redone13

Here's an updated overclock. I don't foresee me being able to push much further. Much credit to my NH-D15. I am now using LLC 5 instead of 4, I clocked my RAM to 4000MHz from 3200MHz and my cache frequency is 4900MHz up from 4800MHz.

Username: redone13
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 51
Core Frequency: 5100MHz
Cache Frequency: 4900MHz
Vcore in UEFI: Adaptive 1.431
Vcore: 1.440
FCLK: 1000MHz
Cooling Solution: delid + IHS reseal, Noctua NH-D15
Stability Test: x264 16T 8 hours

Batch Number: Malaysia, Batch# L639G050
Ram Speed: 4000MHz 18-19-19-39 2T
Ram Voltage: 1.385 UEFI, 1.376 HWinfo
VCCIO: 1.20000 UEFI, 1.224 HWinfo
VCCSA: 1.22500 UEFI, 1.248 HWinfo
Motherboard: z270, Asus Maximus IX Hero
LLC Setting: Level 5
Misc Comments: IA AC Load Line .01, IA DC Load Line .01, No AVX Offset used


----------



## ducegt

@redone13. Nice OC. Looks perfectly stable at a peak load of 155w.


----------



## redone13

Thanks man. I see you with dat 5.2 though


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> Thanks man. I see you with dat 5.2 though


Luck of the draw. On hwbot forum there are several significantly better chips. What's your PLL voltage at? If it's auto, it's likely 1.2 and you can try 1.1 to push for 5.2. Regardless, It's only a 2℅ difference.


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Luck of the draw. On hwbot forum there are several significantly better chips. What's your PLL voltage at? If it's auto, it's likely 1.2 and you can try 1.1 to push for 5.2. Regardless, It's only a 2℅ difference.


Oh, I believe it. And yea, my PLL is on auto. I will definitely take that into consideration when I get the urge for 5.2 which will probably be in the not so distant future. My ring clock is sucking up a lot of extra voltage. It might be possible backing off of ring clock and upping core clock. I usually run a 4.8 ring clock with LLC 5 1.407 bios / 1.408 HWinfo for every day. I am going to give her a thermal vacation for now.


----------



## Gamingboy

Is it really easy to reach 5.0+GHz on the Kabylake processor?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gamingboy*
> 
> Is it really easy to reach 5.0+GHz on the Kabylake processor?


Yes if you delid. 5ghz without delid.


----------



## bobcatchris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gamingboy*
> 
> Is it really easy to reach 5.0+GHz on the Kabylake processor?


Depends on your luck, it seems everyone who did delid got more have gotten more 5ghz. Some did not have too. seems like very few.


----------



## JoeUbi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dry Bonez*
> 
> ok, one last time, who regrets now purchasing the 7700k? Yes, this is due to the AMD ryzen reveal today. I for one sure do regret it and looking to part my 7700k


My liquid temp goes up 5-10 C when I put my side panels on, should I get a new case, new fans or both?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JoeUbi*
> 
> My liquid temp goes up 5-10 C when I put my side panels on, should I get a new case, new fans or both?


On correct setup of your intake / exhaust you may see like max of 2-3 temp increase with side panels vs no side panels... ( from my expirience...) . Mb you did it right and still have that problem...

A foto of your rig would help a lot i guess...


----------



## JoeUbi

Fans are pulling air from front and out the rear. There's a serious lack of fans in this case... I didn't really think ahead when buying it. Probably should have went a little more premium.


----------



## Dry Bonez

Can someone please help me figure out why my 7700k temps are still high? I have it at 5.1 paired with a swiftech h220x2 cooler and the chip is delidded, and i was playing sonic last night and saw the temps at 75ish, is that normal? So i uploaded pics of my bios to see if anyone spots anything i can tweak to make sure it runs not as hot maybe?


----------



## ROKUGAN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I like Intel speedstep so I leave it enabled to save from wear and tear. Turbo boost needs to be enabled to overclock. I would change the Cache ratio to match clock speed after getting a stable core clock and just try to increase the Cache speed without any other changes. Cstates I just run on AUTO to save from wear and tear.


Not in my Gigabyte board, Turbo boost is disabled and have OC both 6700K/7700K. See video below from current OC world record holder (9:30):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYJoJF24-qI

Also:

https://us.hardware.info/reviews/6513/7/how-to-overclock-skylake-processors-bios-settings-and-software


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JoeUbi*
> 
> Fans are pulling air from front and out the rear. There's a serious lack of fans in this case... I didn't really think ahead when buying it. Probably should have went a little more premium.
> [IMG
> ALT=""]http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2973611/width/350/height/700[/IMG]


liquid temps go up when stress testing or even at idle when you close the case?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JoeUbi*
> 
> Fans are pulling air from front and out the rear. There's a serious lack of fans in this case... I didn't really think ahead when buying it. Probably should have went a little more premium


Can you move the rad up more, giving a more clear path to the back and avoiding creating a vortex?

If it is aesthetically, remove those PCI slot space holders so that AIO can move air in and out of the case faster.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JoeUbi*
> 
> Fans are pulling air from front and out the rear. There's a serious lack of fans in this case... I didn't really think ahead when buying it. Probably should have went a little more premium.


You could just get those Noctua iPPC 2000rpm fans and increase your airflow a lot. They are a bit audible but not too noisy unless you plan to actually have your tower right next to your monitor like that.

Id say most of your problem is GPU related. With the side panel on the GPU will be recycling a lot of air around and around near itself because it pulls air in from below the card and spits it out the side of the card. With side panel off, that air goes out and things stay cool. With side panel on, that air hit the panel and goes back down to the GPU and up to the CPU. The fans on the card are keeping a lot of the air from being able to escape out those unused PCI slot area leading to a buildup of heat in the case.


----------



## madmeatballs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> You could just get those Noctua iPPC 2000rpm fans and increase your airflow a lot. They are a bit audible but not too noisy unless you plan to actually have your tower right next to your monitor like that.
> 
> Id say most of your problem is GPU related. With the side panel on the GPU will be recycling a lot of air around and around near itself because it pulls air in from below the card and spits it out the side of the card. With side panel off, that air goes out and things stay cool. With side panel on, that air hit the panel and goes back down to the GPU and up to the CPU. The fans on the card are keeping a lot of the air from being able to escape out those unused PCI slot area leading to a buildup of heat in the case.


yea the ippcs are great. I got the 3000rpm version. I set my max speed to 80% so it wouldn't be too loud but it barely even has to reach that on regular use. I only max out my fans on benchs and stress tests you also get a long warranty lol.

Reason I went with the ippcs, I got sick of fans having to fail after awhile. I tried a lot of different fans even Yates, Gentle typhoons and many others. Ended up with these Noctuas.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ROKUGAN*
> 
> Not in my Gigabyte board, Turbo boost is disabled and have OC both 6700K/7700K. See video below from current OC world record holder (9:30):
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYJoJF24-qI
> 
> Also:
> 
> https://us.hardware.info/reviews/6513/7/how-to-overclock-skylake-processors-bios-settings-and-software


When folks overclock past Intel's turbo frequency on the Gigabyte, it does not mater if you have turbo enabled or disabled it still overclock's the same.


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobcatchris*
> 
> Depends on your luck, it seems everyone who did delid got more have gotten more 5ghz. Some did not have too. seems like very few.


I didn't. 5ghz 1.36v not enough, and I delidded.


----------



## bobcatchris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> I didn't. 5ghz 1.36v not enough, and I delidded.


Sorry to hear. Is it a 7700k? It seems sometimes they need more than 1.36v.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobcatchris*
> 
> Sorry to hear. Is it a 7700k? It seems sometimes they need more than 1.36v.


Same thing here .... need 1.37 for 4.9

And about 1.44 for 5ghz . 7700k delidded


----------



## benjamen50

I got pretty lucky, 1.32V for 5.0 (7700K)


----------



## jasjeet

Did some quick overclock on a friends z270g strix and 7700k.
4.8ghz 1.23v prime blend stable.
5ghz 1.30v, crashing just opening programs in windows.

I thought after 4.8, that 5 would be a given.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobcatchris*
> 
> Sorry to hear. Is it a 7700k? It seems sometimes they need more than 1.36v.


Yes it's my 7700k.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Did some quick overclock on a friends z270g strix and 7700k.
> 4.8ghz 1.23v prime blend stable.
> 5ghz 1.30v, crashing just opening programs in windows.
> 
> I thought after 4.8, that 5 would be a given.
> Yes it's my 7700k.


figure 10-15mV per 100MHz per core. so going from 4.8 to 5.0 may be in the range of +80mV to +120mV vcore. eg, from [email protected], you should try up to [email protected]


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> figure 10-15mV per 100MHz per core. so going from 4.8 to 5.0 may be in the range of +80mV to +120mV vcore. eg, from [email protected], you should try up to [email protected]


Yeah wasn't worth it when it's not my system. I woul have if it was mine lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Yeah wasn't worth it when it's not my system. I woul have if it was mine lol.


good man... some people take that as a license to go higher.


----------



## Spiriva

Hey guys, im looking to upgrade my old 4790k/z97 with the new 7700k/z270. But before i pull the trigger i figured i would ask here first, what motherboard and ddr4 should i be looking at ?
Any motherboard who is abit better for overclocking ? Im gonna use my custom loop with the new system as well.

Is it possible to run nvidia sli and a m.2 drive with z270 all at full speed, or will it have to few lines ?


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Spiriva*
> 
> Hey guys, im looking to upgrade my old 4790k/z97 with the new 7700k/z270. But before i pull the trigger i figured i would ask here first, what motherboard and ddr4 should i be looking at ?
> Any motherboard who is abit better for overclocking ? Im gonna use my custom loop with the new system as well.
> 
> Is it possible to run nvidia sli and a m.2 drive with z270 all at full speed, or will it have to few lines ?


It's honestly not worth it if you're gaming. All the Ryzen benchmarks show the 4790k just under the 6700k which is just under the 7700k. If you are doing it for pure synthetic benchmarking, you should go with Ryzen.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Spiriva*
> 
> Hey guys, im looking to upgrade my old 4790k/z97 with the new 7700k/z270. But before i pull the trigger i figured i would ask here first, what motherboard and ddr4 should i be looking at ?
> Any motherboard who is abit better for overclocking ? Im gonna use my custom loop with the new system as well.
> 
> Is it possible to run nvidia sli and a m.2 drive with z270 all at full speed, or will it have to few lines ?


With Intel any Z270 ATX motherboard will clock to 5.2GHz. I like Gigabyte for overclocking ease.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Spiriva*
> 
> Hey guys, im looking to upgrade my old 4790k/z97 with the new 7700k/z270. But before i pull the trigger i figured i would ask here first, what motherboard and ddr4 should i be looking at ?
> Any motherboard who is abit better for overclocking ? Im gonna use my custom loop with the new system as well.
> 
> Is it possible to run nvidia sli and a m.2 drive with z270 all at full speed, or will it have to few lines ?


Motherboard wise pretty much any Z270 board will overclock the same, yes you can run SLI and M.2 at full speed no problems (Z270 chipset has 24 lanes Kaby Lake CPU has 20 direct lanes but 4 are exclusive for DMI 3 and can't be used for anything else, all lanes are PCIE 3.0, M.2 uses 4 PCIE 3.0 lanes from the chipset so M.2 drive can be used as a boot drive), if you are water cooling perhaps a Asus ROG board might be the way to go since some of their boards have a water block for the VRM, EK will soon have a monoblock for the Hero board depending on your budget, Gigabyte offer boards with VRM blocks too but personally I have had no end of UEFI issues with Gigabyte in the recent past. Memory wise DDR4 Corsair or G.Skill you cant really go wrong sweet spot speed wise vs price 3200Mhz or 3600Mhz though faster RAM will be available soon from more vendors other than just G.Skill but I don't know what sort of price range they will be.


----------



## realistic01

Hey guys I was hoping someone could give me a hand...

I just upgraded from an i5 4670k/z87/corsair h55 AIO to a 7700k, Z270 Asrock Ex 4, same water cooler/PSU/Case.

Basically my issue is with temps, at stock the bios reads 48 degrees, delta of about 20-25 above ambient. On stock load this can reach high 70s with Intel burn test confirmed in MSI afterburner/real temp/HW info.

I'm not too familiar with ASrock UEFI but at 4.8 ghz at 1.3 vccore, LLC at level 4 Intel burn test temps reach 90-100 degrees, and very quickly - within first cycle of test









I've remounted backplate and cooler three times re-pasting each time, confirmed that pump and CPU fan is at 100%, and the h55 was working fine the day before where it was keeping my 4670k at a frosty 70 degrees under load at 4.5 ghz.

I've run the Intel cpu checker off their site which reports no problems.

Is this a bum chip? Is there some other bios setting I'm meant to change? Am I just screwing up applying the cooler? The only difference is I don't have double sided tape to use on the backplate but the orientation is correct.

Thanks for any suggestions!


----------



## Spiriva

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Motherboard wise pretty much any Z270 board will overclock the same, yes you can run SLI and M.2 at full speed no problems (Z270 chipset has 24 lanes Kaby Lake CPU has 20 direct lanes but 4 are exclusive for DMI 3 and can't be used for anything else, all lanes are PCIE 3.0, M.2 uses 4 PCIE 3.0 lanes from the chipset so M.2 drive can be used as a boot drive), if you are water cooling perhaps a Asus ROG board might be the way to go since some of their boards have a water block for the VRM, EK will soon have a monoblock for the Hero board depending on your budget, Gigabyte offer boards with VRM blocks too but personally I have had no end of UEFI issues with Gigabyte in the recent past. Memory wise DDR4 Corsair or G.Skill you cant really go wrong sweet spot speed wise vs price 3200Mhz or 3600Mhz though faster RAM will be available soon from more vendors other than just G.Skill but I don't know what sort of price range they will be.


Thank you. I ended up with these parts after i read your input:










8438kr ~ $929, €884, £758

Im gonna use the other parts from my computer in the sign, the EK cpu waterblock should from what I understand fit an z270 motherboard too.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Spiriva*
> 
> Thank you. I ended up with these parts after i read your input:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8438kr ~ $929, €884, £758
> 
> Im gonna use the other parts from my computer in the sign, the EK cpu waterblock should from what I understand fit an z270 motherboard too.


Nice pick







the EK monoblock I mentioned has just been announced for the Z270 Hero and may not be available yet?


----------



## markov

I got managed to change my i7 7700k to 4,8 GHz with avx -2 and vcore on bios 1.304 v
but I cant get any accepted temp when trying to set avx value to 0 , it need huge vcore
trying to push to 5Ghz , its demanding more than 1.4 v

is there any value that I need to config to make it higher than my current clock ?

my pc setup

corsair air 240
i7 7700k with asus z270G strix
corsair H100i v2 with default corsair fan (push pull) , right side using H100i v2 fans and left side using corsair air 240 fan
room temp 31 C (very hot , yeah I know)

theres 2 exhaust fan using noctua 120mm and 140mm


----------



## Spiriva

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Nice pick
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the EK monoblock I mentioned has just been announced for the Z270 Hero and may not be available yet?


Ah yes i found it on EK´s home page, thanks for the tip. Im gonna order one of these and use it for the cpu/vrm


















Looks rather good too i think


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realistic01*
> 
> Hey guys I was hoping someone could give me a hand...


Your cooling isn't enough for a AVX workload like IBT, but don't worry because IBT is likely meaningless for you. Best advice is to forget IBT. Stress with Asus Realbench and if it's stable with that, games will be stable and probably run a food 20C cooler on that H55. Again...forget IBT...I say that as someone who held onto it for too long myself.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *markov*
> 
> I got managed to change my i7 7700k to 4,8 GHz with avx -2 and vcore on bios 1.304 v
> but I cant get any accepted temp when trying to set avx value to 0 , it need huge vcore
> trying to push to 5Ghz , its demanding more than 1.4 v
> 
> is there any value that I need to config to make it higher than my current clock ?
> 
> my pc setup
> 
> corsair air 240
> i7 7700k with asus z270G strix
> corsair H100i v2 with default corsair fan (push pull) , right side using H100i v2 fans and left side using corsair air 240 fan
> room temp 31 C (very hot , yeah I know)
> 
> theres 2 exhaust fan using noctua 120mm and 140mm


See my reply above. Forget AVX. It's unlike most other work loads. After you let go of that, looks like you might be able to successfully do 5ghz under 1.4. You will need higher voltage than most of us because your room temperature is very high, but seems you have a good chip. Could you post some good pictures of your cases cooling showing which direction the airflow is going? You've got a challenge with those temps. My favorite hobby apart from computers is indoor gardening and I've learned a few things about how to control temperatures in contained environments.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Spiriva*
> 
> Ah yes i found it on EK´s home page, thanks for the tip. Im gonna order one of these and use it for the cpu/vrm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks rather good too i think


Yep thats what i was thinking it does look really good and EK stuff is of high quality.


----------



## markov

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> See my reply above. Forget AVX. It's unlike most other work loads. After you let go of that, looks like you might be able to successfully do 5ghz under 1.4. You will need higher voltage than most of us because your room temperature is very high, but seems you have a good chip. Could you post some good pictures of your cases cooling showing which direction the airflow is going? You've got a challenge with those temps. My favorite hobby apart from computers is indoor gardening and I've learned a few things about how to control temperatures in contained environments.




airflow pushing to radiator and pull by that 2 noctuas
theres aditional fan after my vga, but it seem didnt had any effect

HWinfo read my vcore min 1.304 V and max 1.310 V

if I tried to change avx value to 0 then I cant passed prime95 and occt , but it still ok by realbench


----------



## ducegt

Yikes. Is that the Carbide 240? Is it possible to mount 2 120s on the bottom? I did research that case a little, but Im confused about where a 120 side fan could be placed. That PCI blower fan is getting in the way of thr video card blower for sure. First thing to change is that and leave the slots open without space holders.


----------



## markov

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Yikes. Is that the Carbide 240? Is it possible to mount 2 120s on the bottom? I did research that case a little, but Im confused about where a 120 side fan could be placed. That PCI blower fan is getting in the way of thr video card blower for sure. First thing to change is that and leave the slots open without space holders.


for the right sides, yes you can normaly put 2 x 120mm fan , but I used 140mm fan and 120mm on it. its very tight fit for 140mm

for that pci blower, little bit helping to do exhaust but it seems I wll remove it

so back to OC things, I'm very happy with my current setup but only stuck at 4.8 Mhz and 4.6 Mhz for avx with 4.5 Mhz cache and 1.304 V vcore

I just need to remove that avx because sometimes I saw my cpu speed drop to 4.6 Mhz when I browsing or watching movie , but when running realbech its back to 4.8 Mhz

so this is my current bios setup

Ai overclock tuner - XMP
XMP - XMP DDR4-3000
BLCK - 100.00
AVX Core ratio negative offset - 2
CPU Core Ratio - Sync All cores
Core ratio limit - 48
CPU Core/Cache Limit Max - 255.55
Min CPU Cache Ratio - 45
Max CPU Cache Ratio - 45
CPU Core/Cache Voltage - Adaptive mode
Additional CPU core/cache voltage - 1.304 V
DRAM Voltage - 1.3530 V
CPU VCCIO Voltage - 1.12500
CPU System Agent Voltage - 1.23750

but I cant just adjust my Core ratio limit or setting avx core ratio negative offset to 0 and CPU core/cache voltages


----------



## SweWiking

Watercooling the 7700k with an EK block, how high volt do i dare to run the cpu on ?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *markov*
> 
> for the right sides, yes you can normaly put 2 x 120mm fan , but I used 140mm fan and 120mm on it. its very tight fit for 140mm


I meant can you put fans on the opposite side. Left of the video card in the pic.

Why would down clocking when watching a video or surfing the net even be a problem? It wont down clock in games or significantly affecf those tasks.

Set AVX -4. Increase vcore until you can RealBench 4.9 or 5. It may take up to 1.4v.


----------



## markov

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I meant can you put fans on the opposite side. Left of the video card in the pic.
> 
> Why would down clocking when watching a video or surfing the net even be a problem? It wont down clock in games or significantly affecf those tasks.
> 
> Set AVX -4. Increase vcore until you can RealBench 4.9 or 5. It may take up to 1.4v.


ah, on the left side its possible if you used smaller mobo, mini ITX or maybe smaller fans

yes, I'll try to push to 4.9 or 5.0 with keeping avx on 4.6


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*





> Originally Posted by *pigr8*





> Originally Posted by *bobcatchris*





> Originally Posted by *redone13*


Charted.


Sample Size25  Average OC5.07Median OC5.10Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.37


----------



## realistic01

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Your cooling isn't enough for a AVX workload like IBT, but don't worry because IBT is likely meaningless for you. Best advice is to forget IBT. Stress with Asus Realbench and if it's stable with that, games will be stable and probably run a food 20C cooler on that H55. Again...forget IBT...I say that as someone who held onto it for too long myself.


Thanks for the reply mate (repped)!

Have tried asus realbench, get much better numbers. Pushed OC to 4.8 ghz on 1.3 Vcore with LLC level 3 (second lowest) with the H55, temps hitting 89 degrees after an hour.

I have a silverstone raven case (Rv05) so an air cooler is probably gonna do better, limited mounting options for an h100 etc. Might end up grabbing a noctua DH15, but the clean look of an AIO CLC is hard to pass up!


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I meant can you put fans on the opposite side. Left of the video card in the pic.
> 
> Why would down clocking when watching a video or surfing the net even be a problem? It wont down clock in games or significantly affecf those tasks.
> 
> Set AVX -4. Increase vcore until you can RealBench 4.9 or 5. It may take up to 1.4v.


Sry for my question, im still a noob in overclocking .
Why would it be better to run 1.4v /5ghz and avx -2

Then 1.32 v / 4.8 ghz with no avx ?

As i understand avx would downclock the core to 4.8 anyway , but you still stay at 1.4v instead of 1.32 .

Also benchmarks will count 5ghz avx- 2 as 5ghz or as 4.8? I mean the cpu score .

Thx


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realistic01*
> 
> Thanks for the reply mate (repped)!
> 
> Have tried asus realbench, get much better numbers. Pushed OC to 4.8 ghz on 1.3 Vcore with LLC level 3 (second lowest) with the H55, temps hitting 89 degrees after an hour.
> 
> I have a silverstone raven case (Rv05) so an air cooler is probably gonna do better, limited mounting options for an h100 etc. Might end up grabbing a noctua DH15, but the clean look of an AIO CLC is hard to pass up!


You're welcome. Unless you want to buy a cooler as a future investment, delidding that chip with your current parts might be more cost effective while getting you the best results. 4.8 is only like 4℅ shy of 5ghz so not bad at all!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Sry for my question, im still a noob in overclocking .
> Why would it be better to run 1.4v /5ghz and avx -2
> 
> Then 1.32 v / 4.8 ghz with no avx ?
> 
> As i understand avx would downclock the core to 4.8 anyway , but you still stay at 1.4v instead of 1.32 .
> 
> Also benchmarks will count 5ghz avx- 2 as 5ghz or as 4.8? I mean the cpu score .
> 
> Thx


Do you know what AVX is? Running stress tests for something you don't use doesn't make too much sense. If you only care about AVX benchmarks for some reason, those 2 options will get you the same result, but you'll gain 200mhz for everything else. Everything else being almost everything you likely do. Most benchmarks will detect 5ghz with -2 AVX as a chip running 4.8. I repeat, forget AVX and enjoy optimizing your chip for what you will actually use it for.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> You're welcome. Unless you want to buy a cooler as a future investment, delidding that chip with your current parts might be more cost effective while getting you the best results. 4.8 is only like 4℅ shy of 5ghz so not bad at all!
> Do you know what AVX is? Running stress tests for something you don't use doesn't make too much sense. If you only care about AVX benchmarks for some reason, those 2 options will get you the same result, but you'll gain 200mhz for everything else. Everything else being almost everything you likely do. Most benchmarks will detect 5ghz with -2 AVX as a chip running 4.8. I repeat, forget AVX and enjoy optimizing your chip for what you will actually use it for.


So if not eunning benchmarks and stress tests , i can leave avx off?
In this case i need avx just to run some test like r15 to see if its stable?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> So if not eunning benchmarks and stress tests , i can leave avx off?
> In this case i need avx just to run some test like r15 to see if its stable?


You can increase the offset to like 6. You can't turn it off. CB R15 doesn't use AVX instructions, but it isn't a good stress tester. Use RealBench, it uses no to very little AVX. With 6 offset you will score lower in benchmarks like XTU and AIDA64, but it won't change any 3dmark scores or any gaming benchmarks. Do you understand AVX is an instruction set used for compiling code and advanced computing that isn't related to gaming?


----------



## markov

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> You can increase the offset to like 6. You can't turn it off. CB R15 doesn't use AVX instructions, but it isn't a good stress tester. Use RealBench, it uses no to very little AVX. With 6 offset you will score lower in benchmarks like XTU and AIDA64, but it won't change any 3dmark scores or any gaming benchmarks. Do you understand AVX is an instruction set used for compiling code and advanced computing that isn't related to gaming?


for me , actually I'm not using my pc for gaming, but some vmware and also compiling
so, it seems avx need more vcore if I'm not used avx negative offset


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *markov*
> 
> for me , actually I'm not using my pc for gaming, but some vmware and also compiling
> so, it seems avx need more vcore if I'm not used avx negative offset


Oh ok. Bad assumption on my part. AVX draws more vcore and gives lots of heat. I had better luck clocking AVX benches higher with 0 offset on my ASRock z270 k6. If you can't do 49 0 offset do 5 and 4.8.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Sry for my question, im still a noob in overclocking .
> Why would it be better to run 1.4v /5ghz and avx -2
> 
> Then 1.32 v / 4.8 ghz with no avx ?
> 
> *As i understand avx would downclock the core to 4.8 anyway , but you still stay at 1.4v instead of 1.32 .*
> 
> Also benchmarks will count 5ghz avx- 2 as 5ghz or as 4.8? I mean the cpu score .
> 
> Thx


if you have an ASUS z270 board, the thermal control module will allow you to down volt and down clock when the temperature hits a value you set. Allows for a light load high freq/voltage, and a heavy load downclock and downvolt. It's a good alternative to AVX offset (avx offset has been a feature on server chips for a few generations now, specifically to address the over-current effect of the AVX instruction set when implemented essentially as a TDP virus.. like p95. With E-class chips it kicked in mainly with heavy compute tasks).


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you have an ASUS z270 board, the thermal control module will allow you to down volt and down clock when the temperature hits a value you set. Allows for a light load high freq/voltage, and a heavy load downclock and downvolt. It's a good alternative to AVX offset (avx offset has been a feature on server chips for a few generations now, specifically to address the over-current effect of the AVX instruction set when implemented essentially as a TDP virus.. like p95. With E-class chips it kicked in mainly with heavy compute tasks).


Im on msi 270 gaming m7 just because i got 2 m.2 ssds and this board has 3 slots . So optain has a slot to fit in








Thx for info


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Im on msi 270 gaming m7 just because i got 2 m.2 ssds and this board has 3 slots . So optain has a slot to fit in
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thx for info


nice! I just set up a M.2 NVMe raid0 on this Apex. Runs pretty quick compared to teh "bargin" nvme drives it's built with.


----------



## bobcatchris

maxed out at 5.1, even with 1.45v i could not get it stable. Heat wasn't a issue. I should not go passed that voltage correct?


----------



## markov

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Oh ok. Bad assumption on my part. AVX draws more vcore and gives lots of heat. I had better luck clocking AVX benches higher with 0 offset on my ASRock z270 k6. If you can't do 49 0 offset do 5 and 4.8.


little bit weird on my pc ,
if I adding more vcore for example 1.314 with avx -1 (4.7 Mhz) it detect around max 1.336 V when testing with occt and prime95
but if I'm back to avx -2 (4.6 Mhz) with vcore 1.304 V , it detect around max 1.309 V
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you have an ASUS z270 board, the thermal control module will allow you to down volt and down clock when the temperature hits a value you set. Allows for a light load high freq/voltage, and a heavy load downclock and downvolt. It's a good alternative to AVX offset (avx offset has been a feature on server chips for a few generations now, specifically to address the over-current effect of the AVX instruction set when implemented essentially as a TDP virus.. like p95. With E-class chips it kicked in mainly with heavy compute tasks).


thermal control tools on asus bios little bit delay, already tried it. so when you testing with avx type tools, it will fail at first run because still using vcore and clock before reaching it threshold but its good for second run


----------



## BoredErica

Wait wut.

All the x264 test is is just x264. You want an overclock that can't even do that? That's not some contrived Linpack stuff we're dealing with here. My bar's not that high.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *markov*
> 
> little bit weird on my pc ,
> if I adding more vcore for example 1.314 with avx -1 (4.7 Mhz) it detect around max 1.336 V when testing with occt and prime95
> but if I'm back to avx -2 (4.6 Mhz) with vcore 1.304 V , it detect around max 1.309 V
> *thermal control tools on asus bios little bit delay*, already tried it. so when you testing with avx type tools, it will fail at first run because still using vcore and clock before reaching it threshold but its good for second run


you just need to set the temp window correctly...not.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nice! I just set up a M.2 NVMe raid0 on this Apex. Runs pretty quick compared to teh "bargin" nvme drives it's built with.


They are different sizes and brands .....


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> They are different sizes and brands .....


? I used identical 128GB NVMe drives $59 each.


----------



## becks

I have bought everything! and got ready for my Kaby Lake...Gelid Gc-3 Extreme....Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut LM...Rockit 88 delid tool..Lab Pharmaceutical Grade Isopropyl Alcohol etc etc..
But recently I started thinking about buying a 5.2 from SL...any word of advice ?


----------



## OutlawII

Hey why cant we be like the Ryzen OC thread,they dont even have to list a stability test or even do one to make it on the list lol


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Hey why cant we be like the Ryzen OC thread,they dont even have to list a stability test or even do one to make it on the list lol


Lol because they arent stable above 4.1Ghz


----------



## FrostyAMD

@JpMboy
Can I pm you in reference to ASRock FATAL1TY Z170 PROFESSIONAL GAMING I7 bios settings using bios 7.3 and gskill F4-3400C16D-16GTZ


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I have bought everything! and got ready for my Kaby Lake...Gelid Gc-3 Extreme....Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut LM...Rockit 88 delid tool..Lab Pharmaceutical Grade Isopropyl Alcohol etc etc..
> But recently I started thinking about buying a 5.2 from SL...any word of advice ?


Buy it from Silicon Lottery always have looked after me with all the CPU's that I have bought from them, even supplied me this time around with the "Golden Batch" L639F977 purely by luck though.
They do a nice job of the reseal and at least offer some warranty


----------



## QuickShot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I have bought everything! and got ready for my Kaby Lake...Gelid Gc-3 Extreme....Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut LM...Rockit 88 delid tool..Lab Pharmaceutical Grade Isopropyl Alcohol etc etc..
> But recently I started thinking about buying a 5.2 from SL...any word of advice ?


I guess it depends on how much "Guaranteed 5.2Ghz" is worth to you.
Especially when you can get a 7700k for $310 from Newegg's store on Ebay

Bought mine from Microcenter for $300 a few days ago. Running 5.1Ghz @ 1.35v now, waiting for my delid tool to come in before I try for 5.2/5.3


----------



## becks

@scracy

Thanks for info..









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuickShot*
> 
> I guess it depends on how much "Guaranteed 5.2Ghz" is worth to you.
> Especially when you can get a 7700k for $310 from Newegg's store on Ebay
> 
> Bought mine from Microcenter for $300 a few days ago. Running 4.1Ghz @ 1.35v now, waiting for my delid tool to come in before I try for 5.2/5.3


+5 Ghz would be such a nice thing for me as I have pursuit-ed it on many platforms during past years..
At the end of the day..you have to take a big decision..if I do the mat with shipment and everything a 5.2 Ghz would be about 500 Gbp here...which is 180 over the stock price.. And if I go with a stock CPU I lose warranty anyhow the second I delid it + I might not hit 5.2, maybe not even 5...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> @scracy
> 
> Thanks for info..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +5 Ghz would be such a nice thing for me as I have pursuit-ed it on many platforms during past years..
> At the end of the day..you have to take a big decision..if I do the mat with shipment and everything a 5.2 Ghz would be about 500 Gbp here...which is 180 over the stock price.. And if I go with a stock CPU I lose warranty anyhow the second I delid it + I might not hit 5.2, maybe not even 5...


No problem, also keep in mind the hassle of binning your own chips and initial outlay for those chips which really means selling the "duds" as used which is net loss combined with potential ebay seller fees (if you use ebay) personally unless you have a lot of spare time and cash and potential headaches it really is just not worth it in my opinion, Silicon Lottery prices are fairly reasonable when you factor in all the potential issues. But then again you might get a really good chip first up if your lucky


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuickShot*
> 
> I guess it depends on how much "Guaranteed 5.2Ghz" is worth to you.
> Especially when you can get a 7700k for $310 from Newegg's store on Ebay
> 
> Bought mine from Microcenter for $300 a few days ago. Running 4.1Ghz @ 1.35v now, waiting for my delid tool to come in before I try for 5.2/5.3


4.1 at 1.35 ? Or its 5.1 at 1.35?


----------



## FrostyAMD

Bought 2 chips 1 from Amazon and 1 from MicroCenter thru ebay both will do 5.2 w/ less than 1.42 volts using h100i after I delided and glued IHS using rocket kit. Unfortunately only have one MB. Thinking either sell one or get a another board and memory


----------



## caenlen

i7-7820HK overclocked to 4.2ghz on my laptop, kaby lake, here is my cinebench score and temps. thoughts? looks ok to me... but I may go down to 4.0ghz to get some extra breathing room on those temps.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuickShot*
> 
> I guess it depends on how much "Guaranteed 5.2Ghz" is worth to you.
> Especially when you can get a 7700k for $310 from Newegg's store on Ebay
> 
> Bought mine from Microcenter for $300 a few days ago. Running 4.1Ghz @ 1.35v now, waiting for my delid tool to come in before I try for 5.2/5.3


you may want to check the scalability of the chip before delidding... eg, what voltage is required for 4.8 or 4.9? if this is high, delidding will buy little and cost you the warranty.


----------



## QuickShot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you may want to check the scalability of the chip before delidding... eg, what voltage is required for 4.8 or 4.9? if this is high, delidding will buy little and cost you the warranty.


Oops, I fat fingered the 4 instead of the 5. 5.1Ghz @ 1.35v


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuickShot*
> 
> Oops, I fat fingered the 4 instead of the 5. 5.1Ghz @ 1.35v


yep - a good candidate for delidding. use a delid kit, fat-fingering a razor blade can do more than nick the chip.


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuickShot*
> 
> I guess it depends on how much "Guaranteed 5.2Ghz" is worth to you.
> Especially when you can get a 7700k for $310 from Newegg's store on Ebay
> 
> Bought mine from Microcenter for $300 a few days ago. Running 5.1Ghz @ 1.35v now, waiting for my delid tool to come in before I try for 5.2/5.3


Also takes into account the skill level of the user. Its hard to guage if some of these hard to get stable 5ghz chips are being properly tweaked. Looking at the user it, negating the questionable ones, it seems all of these can do 5ghz easily if not more with proper cooling.
My advise would be to batch bin a chip, if possible over paying an add on of $200 or more. If you dont have a brick and mortar close by, SL is the way to go.


----------



## QuickShot

For delidding, is there a significant advantage to using liquid metal compared to say a regular thermal paste? Has anyone compared the two?


----------



## LesPaulLover

So are these 7700k chips basically worthless to buy unless you're gonna take the risk of delidding them?

I feel like I shouldn't be forced to pay extra money AND void the warranty of my brand new $350 CPU.

I have a Noctua NH-D14 cooler ... my 4670k (4.0ghz @ 1.200vcore) never exceeds 41c during hours of stress testing (and this with CPU cooler fans running devolted AND at minimum speeds)


----------



## originxt

Hi, sorry for the short post but still running my stress test so on mobile.

Cpu:7700k, did not delid
Mobo: asus z270 tuf
Ram: gskill trident Z 3200
Cooler: noctua nh-d14

Ran the x264 custom stress test as recommended on the front page for 8ish hours.

Multiplier at 50 so 5ghz
Vcore set in bios at 1.335 but actual usage is 1.296.
Llc: level 4
Cpu Temps are at 72-78ish

Using Hwinfo.

Ram is at mobo stock at 2333?

I just had a few questions:

1. No crashes so far, does that mean my overclock is stable? If so, how does it compare to average?

2. I've read after finding a stable overclock, you should set it to adaptive. Is there anything I need to set numbers wise in particular?

3. My ram is good to 3200, should I just use xmp settings? Will that affect my cpu overclock?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuickShot*
> 
> For delidding, is there a significant advantage to using liquid metal compared to say a regular thermal paste? Has anyone compared the two?


Yes. A few degrees difference if your lucky with normal pastes.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuickShot*
> 
> For delidding, is there a significant advantage to using liquid metal compared to say a regular thermal paste? Has anyone compared the two?


frankly, there's little reason to delid the chip if you are only going to use another tim paste. IMO, either use a LM or keep the warranty.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LesPaulLover*
> 
> So are these 7700k chips basically worthless to buy unless you're gonna take the risk of delidding them?
> 
> I feel like I shouldn't be forced to pay extra money AND void the warranty of my brand new $350 CPU.
> 
> I have a Noctua NH-D14 cooler ... my 4670k (4.0ghz @ 1.200vcore) never exceeds 41c during hours of stress testing (and this with CPU cooler fans running devolted AND at minimum speeds)


buy a delided chip from SL. they warranty their delids too.


----------



## LesPaulLover

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> frankly, there's little reason to delid the chip if you are only going to use another tim paste. IMO, either use a LM or keep the warranty.
> buy a delided chip from SL. they warranty their delids too.


Problem is they charge another $50 premium for that apparently. Should I perhaps just go with a Skylane 6700k?


----------



## eminded1

Liquid metal is the way to go. iv tried both but the liquid metal seems to be better, fills in the gaps if there is one


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LesPaulLover*
> 
> Problem is they charge another $50 premium for that apparently. Should I perhaps just go with a Skylane 6700k?


Delidding has always been optional. Dropping 15c is not going to change your world when it comes to clocks. A 5.1 chip is tested without delid for example. Maybe you can delid and try 5.15.

Rounding up slightly it's 4.7/5.1 for Skylake/Kaby Lake. Consider price of secondhand 6700k if you are open to that. You also know the price of a 7700k from a regular store or that of a binned chip. The information is all available, but you still have to decide according to your situation.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QuickShot*
> 
> For delidding, is there a significant advantage to using liquid metal compared to say a regular thermal paste? Has anyone compared the two?


It has been debated on this forum and on the [Official] Delidded Club / Guide greatly.. if you use TIM instead of LM is like not deliding at all.. the gain is minimal if any.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LesPaulLover*
> 
> So are these 7700k chips basically worthless to buy unless you're gonna take the risk of delidding them?
> 
> I feel like I shouldn't be forced to pay extra money AND void the warranty of my brand new $350 CPU.
> 
> I have a Noctua NH-D14 cooler ... my 4670k (4.0ghz @ 1.200vcore) never exceeds 41c during hours of stress testing (and this with CPU cooler fans running devolted AND at minimum speeds)


Depends what you want out of your chip...You can still hit 4.8 / 5 without deliding...but with a very good chip and a lot of tweaking in bios.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LesPaulLover*
> 
> Problem is they charge another $50 premium for that apparently. Should I perhaps just go with a Skylane 6700k?


If i understood right, please correct me if not, the chips from SL are tested without deliding...and are delided on request.
So you can buy a 5.1 / 5.2 guaranteed without paying the $50 and delid it yourself.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> If i understood right, please correct me if not, the chips from SL are tested without deliding...and are delided on request.
> So you can buy a 5.1 / 5.2 guaranteed without paying the $50 and delid it yourself.


Yeah, that's right. It says on the page and it makes no sense for a chip to be tested for clocks while delidded when the product shipped isn't even delidded.

Just check SL. 13%/7% 7600k/7700k hit 5.2ghz. 5.0ghz seem more like 50/50 moreso than my 5.1 guess. The higher the percentage of people on the chart who bought binned the more skewed the chart medians will get.

Keep in mind SL tests 1 hr Realbench. It's not quite 8hr.


----------



## becks

@Darkwizzie

Yes, but how much more difference would it make..
It passes RB 1 h un-delidded which I am assuming is 85-95 Celsius...
and presumably you delid it and drop the temp by 15 Celsius ( Some reported more or less drop )... so at same voltages it should pass RB 8 hours at about 75-85 Celsius... and topping round 65-70 Celsius in day to day use..

At least that's my logic.. might be +- off


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> It has been debated on this forum and on the [Official] Delidded Club / Guide greatly.*. if you use TIM instead of LM is like not deliding at all.. the gain is minimal if any.*
> Depends what you want out of your chip...You can still hit 4.8 / 5 without deliding...but with a very good chip and a lot of tweaking in bios.


...and the loss for an average user is considerable. Voids the warranty. An SL delid will be replaced if the cpu fails. I delid myself (going back to hitting it with a hammer!) and assume the risk.
My experience has been much more than 15C. Stock this CPU would hit 80+C running xtu benchmark at 52, using CLP on both the die and underside of the IHS max is 63C. It's actually hard to get it to go above 70C since the heat flux is vastly improved by LM.

Not a wizzie criteria, but not easy to pass error free. really shows solid ram OC:


----------



## Jaad

Finally made the 5Ghz club =')

CPU-Z Validation


----------



## hotrod717

http://overclocking.guide/thermal-paste-roundup-2015-47-products-tested-with-air-cooling-and-liquid-nitrogen-ln2/6/

Actually a fair number of pastes or tim are within 2-3 degrees of a LM compound. I've used CLU 1 time. Frankly 2-3 degrees isn't worth the extra worries. Cant go wrong with Gelid or Kryonaut or the other 16 tims that fall into the 2-3 degree difference range. The only truly notable difference between many tim's is when going cold or subzero. Gelid and Kryonaut do both exceedingly well. The viscosity of kryonaut helps stretch it longer than Gelid if you swap or reseat often. I'm on the fifth swap of die, ihs, and pot/cooler pasting with a single 3.9 gram syringe of Kryo.

@ eminded1 - All thermal compounds are made to " fill in the gaps if there is one" .


----------



## Jaad

im planning on a delidding venture to help reduce temps. while the 5ghz seems stable for now the temps are a bit high for my liking


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaad*
> 
> Finally made the 5Ghz club =')
> 
> CPU-Z Validation











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> http://overclocking.guide/thermal-paste-roundup-2015-47-products-tested-with-air-cooling-and-liquid-nitrogen-ln2/6/
> 
> Actually a fair number of pastes or tim are within 2-3 degrees of a LM compound. I've used CLU 1 time. Frankly 2-3 degrees isn't worth the extra worries. Cant go wrong with Gelid or Kryonaut or the other 16 tims that fall into the 2-3 degree difference range. The only truly notable difference between many tim's is when going cold or subzero. Gelid and Kryonaut do both exceedingly well. The viscosity of kryonaut helps stretch it longer than Gelid if you swap or reseat often. I'm on the fifth swap of die, ihs, and pot/cooler pasting with a single 3.9 gram syringe of Kryo.
> 
> @ eminded1 - All thermal compounds are made to " fill in the gaps if there is one" .


yeah - that's all true for the IHS-to-cooler interface, but not for the die to IHS interface for several reasons, principal one being that the contact forces are very different. I've tried both with ambient cooling using koolance waterblocks on my delidded 6700Ks. the difference in die-to-ihs application is much higher than that tim comparo would lead you to think.

If the die-to-ihs heat flux is the limiting factor, it doesn't matter what you do on top.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> http://overclocking.guide/thermal-paste-roundup-2015-47-products-tested-with-air-cooling-and-liquid-nitrogen-ln2/6/
> 
> Actually a fair number of pastes or tim are within 2-3 degrees of a LM compound. I've used CLU 1 time. Frankly 2-3 degrees isn't worth the extra worries. Cant go wrong with Gelid or Kryonaut or the other 16 tims that fall into the 2-3 degree difference range. The only truly notable difference between many tim's is when going cold or subzero. Gelid and Kryonaut do both exceedingly well. The viscosity of kryonaut helps stretch it longer than Gelid if you swap or reseat often. I'm on the fifth swap of die, ihs, and pot/cooler pasting with a single 3.9 gram syringe of Kryo.
> 
> @ eminded1 - All thermal compounds are made to " fill in the gaps if there is one" .


But only LM does keep for a long time... as i read

I have personally tried mx4 and nh1 under IHs i have seen -5/7 c improvement, then i did the CLP and boom 20c down just right away...


----------



## MaKeN

Question for those that did delid:

Is it worth/any change if you aply that thin layer of black silicone after delidding ? Would there be diff resoults in temps if ts just clamped down on the MB?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Question for those that did delid:
> 
> Is it worth/any change if you aply that thin layer of black silicone after delidding ? Would there be diff resoults in tempa if just clamp it down on the MB?


none... if you do not plan to remove the chip anytime soon. a toothpick dap of silicon adhesive at the four corners will hold it well, and allow for easy delid again if ever needed. but check that the latching mech does not cause the IHS to slide forward when you clamp it down.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> none... if you do not plan to remove the chip anytime soon. a toothpick dap of silicon adhesive at the four corners will hold it well, and allow for easy delid again if ever needed. but check that the latching mech does not cause the IHS to slide forward when you clamp it down.


With mx4 and nh1 the latching mech would really make it slide forward , with LM it stays there as i put it.
I asked that because i did see that little gap in between that balck silicone between ihs , like a some sort of a breathing point ....
was thinking mb doing same after delidding would do the same if its needed


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> With mx4 and nh1 the latching mech would really make it slide forward , with LM it stays there as i put it.
> I asked that because i did see that little gap in between that balck silicone between ihs , like a some sort of a breathing point ....
> was thinking mb doing same after delidding would do the same if its needed


that's exactly what that bondline gap is for... can get some fast and high temperature variations under that IHS. Tho the pressure cyclicing effect is really more likely belts and suspenders.


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - that's all true for the IHS-to-cooler interface, but not for the die to IHS interface for several reasons, principal one being that the contact forces are very different. I've tried both with ambient cooling using koolance waterblocks on my delidded 6700Ks. the difference in die-to-ihs application is much higher than that tim comparo would lead you to think.
> 
> If the die-to-ihs heat flux is the limiting factor, it doesn't matter what you do on top.


I can only speak from my experience on Ivy and Haswell, as that tube of LM only lasted a few apps. I believe the interface differences between ihs and die have more of an impact then tim. It wasnt until skylake, that the distance between die and ihs, seemed to become a concern. Shimming and leaving the glue on/off became relevant.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> But only LM does keep for a long time... as i read
> 
> I have personally tried mx4 and nh1 under IHs i have seen -5/7 c improvement, then i did the CLP and boom 20c down just right away...


Use rules the day. If you plan on settiing and forgetting for a year or more...... There are many variables between users and methodology. Do you spread or plop a ball the size of a grain of / Thumb tight or locked down hard/ naked or with an ihs. So many variants.


----------



## eminded1

i tried using AS5 after delid but didnt work right, it was leaving a bare spot and core 2 was 10+c over core 1, so i used Cool Laboratory Liquid Pro and it filled in the gap so i recommend the liquid metal for just the delid and as5 on the top, but i did just get some Thermal Grizzly and ill be trying that on my next build in about a week i heard good reviews, iv been a arctic silver 5 fan for the past 10 years but im going to try this new tim see how it works. ill let you know


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> I can only speak from my experience on Ivy and Haswell, as that tube of LM only lasted a few apps. I believe the interface differences between ihs and die have more of an impact then tim. It wasnt until skylake, that the distance between die and ihs, seemed to become a concern. Shimming and leaving the glue on/off became relevant.
> Use rules the day. If you plan on settiing and forgetting for a year or more...... There are many variables between users and methodology. Do you spread or plop a ball the size of a grain of / Thumb tight or locked down hard/ naked or with an ihs. So many variants.


For you LN2 guys, other characteristics are more important than whether one sees a 10 or 20C drop difference at +80C.


----------



## Hiikeri

Against condension:











[email protected] CineBench R15 (CPU L643G242)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hiikeri*
> 
> Against condension:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [email protected] CineBench R15 (CPU L643G242)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!




don;t need LN2 for that.


----------



## BoredErica

Might get some new thermal paste... Because the one I used for Kaby was the free small tube from Hyper 212 Evo. Ran out of Noctua paste. Get some Grizzly. The 11.1 gram tube. Little worried about long term storage of the paste.


----------



## cwilliam85

Anyone else have the experience with lowering the CPU OC PLL voltage and getting massive temp drops on z270 board? Default on msi is 1.2v but can go as low as 1.100v stable for massive temp drops.


----------



## kl6mk6

Got my 7700K the other day, been having so much fun playing with it.

I did a preliminary overclock before delidding and I was able to get 5.0GHz at 1.350v stable and hit 78C within 15 min. I booted 5.1GHz, but it was extremely unstable (1 min of Realbench)

After delidding I was able to *drop my voltage by 0.020v* for 5.0GHz to 1.330v and my max temp was 70C. That's at least an *8C improvement*. I was also able to get 5.1GHz at 1.400v stable for 6 hours of Realbench before a reboot.



I delided using the "vice only" method while warming it with a heat gun. I took my time and made sure to watch for any pcb warping. I used Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut and a generic EK Gelid tube I had for the outside. I did not use silicone to reattach the IHS, only the socket clamp to hold it in place.



Username: kl6mk6
CPU Model: 7700k
Bclk: 100.0MHz
Core Multiplier: 50x
Core Frequency: 5,000.0MHz
Cache Frequency: 4,500.0MHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.330v
Vcore: 1.328v
FCLK: 1,000.0MHz
Solution: AIO Arctic Liquid Freezer 240 + Delid with Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut and generic EK Gelid
Stability Test: Realbench 8H

Batch Number: Malaysia, L652C201
Ram Speed: 3,600MHz-16-16-16-36-1T
Ram Voltage: 1.350v
VCCIO: 1.100v
VCCSA: 1.100v
Motherboard: Z270I Asus ROG Strix Gaming mITX
LLC Setting: Level 5
Misc Comments: Didn't read the HWinfo requirement and of course my CPUz shows idle clocks and voltage, at least my realtemp shows that it is 5.0GHz


----------



## becks

@scracy

@Darkwizzie

@ReCkLeZz

Any update / news on your SL chips ?
How are they doing day to day...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> @scracy
> 
> @Darkwizzie
> 
> @ReCkLeZz
> 
> Any update / news on your SL chips ?
> How are they doing day to day...


No issues with mine if I use fixed voltage but having issues with adaptive voltage at 5.2Ghz simply due to the beta status of my uefi, Asus hasn't made publicly available yet uefi 3201 for m8f thought most of their Z170 boards already have been updated to 3201 which is frustrating since m8f is a premium board in their range. Chip itself still going strong very happy with SL service.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cwilliam85*
> 
> Anyone else have the experience with lowering the CPU OC PLL voltage and getting massive temp drops on z270 board? Default on msi is 1.2v but can go as low as 1.100v stable for massive temp drops.


Yep. Huge temp deops after setting it to 1.1v , but anything lower then 1.1v would drop temps so much that they dont look real anymore , I stopped at 1.1v


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cwilliam85*
> 
> Anyone else have the experience with lowering the CPU OC PLL voltage and getting massive temp drops on z270 board? Default on msi is 1.2v but can go as low as 1.100v stable for massive temp drops.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Yep. Huge temp deops after setting it to 1.1v , but anything lower then 1.1v would drop temps so much that they dont look real anymore , I stopped at 1.1v


^^This. it is possible that even the initial temp effect is due to dts signal issues and not actual temperatures.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ^^This. it is possible that even the initial temp effect is due to dts signal issues and not actual temperatures.


I noticed that with any multiplier up to 52, CPU PLL OC defaults to .059v. As soon as I select 53, it jumps from .059v to just a hair over 1.3v.

I found it odd that it didn't increase in some smaller increments along the way so I tested temps in RealBench with multipliers 50 - 53 while leaving CPU PLL OC (CPU PLL Bandwidth in BIOS) on auto.

From 50 to 52 all was good, but at 53 (1.3x volts on CPU PLL OC) temp disparity between cores increased dramatically and max temp rose a bit higher than predicted. I then set it manually to the .059v default for the lower multipliers. Temps still scaled higher than 52, but the cores evened out and max temps weren't quite as high.

I'm not sure if I'm choking the DTS or actually putting things back into alignment since the CPU PLL OC voltage seems out of whack when left on auto.

I'm also confident that this is the particular voltage that took out the DTS on my first good chip.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I noticed that with any multiplier up to 52, CPU PLL OC defaults to .059v. As soon as I select 53, it jumps from .059v to just a hair over 1.3v.
> 
> I found it odd that it didn't increase in some smaller increments along the way so I tested temps in RealBench with multipliers 50 - 53 while leaving CPU PLL OC (CPU PLL Bandwidth in BIOS) on auto.
> 
> From 50 to 52 all was good, but at 53 (1.3x volts on CPU PLL OC) temp disparity between cores increased dramatically and max temp rose a bit higher than predicted. I then set it manually to the .059v default for the lower multipliers. Temps still scaled higher than 52, but the cores evened out and max temps weren't quite as high.
> 
> I'm not sure if I'm choking the DTS or actually putting things back into alignment since the CPU PLL OC voltage seems out of whack when left on auto.
> 
> I'm also confident that this is the particular voltage that took out the DTS on my first good chip.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1619957/asus-z270-motherboards-north-america-q-a-thread/560_20#post_25894443

up 'till this week, i was on the MOCF... just now on the ASUS z270 APEX.


----------



## MaKeN

As i read on other forums also and found out that many users would set it to 1.1 rest would leave it on outo.... depends on the board i guess. On msi z270 i beleve its a must to set it manually and not auto.
Simply because before that temps are a mess


----------



## ducegt

On my ASRock K6 z270 PLL voltage seems it adds to vcore like 12mv from 1.1 to 1.2.


----------



## spddmn24

How accurate is hwinfo for cpu power usage? My chip runs 5.2 chip @ 1.4 ghz and I don't want to really disk degradation over the next few years. It's a purely gaming rig and according to hwinfo it pulled 117w peak in realbench, and bf1 it does 100w peak. If it's accurate that should be well below the 100 amp threshold. Temps are good, low 61's @ 5.1 ghz, upper 60's peak @ 5.2 ghz gaming.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Yep. Huge temp deops after setting it to 1.1v , but anything lower then 1.1v would drop temps so much that they dont look real anymore , I stopped at 1.1v


I set mine to 1.0 since my bios said 1.0 is default (maximus ix hero). Max temps dropped around 5c over 1.2v on auto, but idle temps stayed the same which is just above my water temp so I think its accurate. My old msi z170a krait gaming had incorrect temp readings at default. It would idle around 10c lower on 2 cores than the others, same at max temp. Put 3 processors that were on that motherboard into different asus boards and the temps magically evened out across all 4 cores.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1619957/asus-z270-motherboards-north-america-q-a-thread/560_20#post_25894443
> 
> up 'till this week, i was on the MOCF... just now on the ASUS z270 APEX.


Yep, same thing on my IX Formula. CPU Stand By (VTT in HWinfo) skyrocketed to 1.6v when I went to 53 mult with CPU Stand By left on auto. CRAZINESS!! Thanks for keeping this issue alive.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> How accurate is hwinfo for cpu power usage? My chip runs 5.2 chip @ 1.4 ghz and I don't want to really disk degradation over the next few years. It's a purely gaming rig and according to hwinfo it pulled 117w peak in realbench, and bf1 it does 100w peak. If it's accurate that should be well below the 100 amp threshold. Temps are good, low 61's @ 5.1 ghz, upper 60's peak @ 5.2 ghz gaming.


as a general rule, if you can keep the temperature _well below_ Tc (i'd suggest <70C) then running long term 1.2X the TDP is reasonable (some say as much as 2x TDP) But to be clear, running any CPU higher than the TDP for long durations of time will loosen-up the chip, how much this costs in Hz/mV over time is very sample dependent in this range.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Yep, same thing on my IX Formula. CPU Stand By (VTT in HWinfo) skyrocketed to 1.6v when I went to 53 mult with CPU Stand By left on auto. CRAZINESS!! Thanks for keeping this issue alive.


The bios engineer knows of the issue, but considering that it supposed to be a rule that kicks in ONLY in LN2 mode when above 5.2, and that the number of cpu samples that will be running >5.2 at ambient, it's kinda low(er) priority. Bottom line.. if you're lucky enough to happen to get a cpu that does >5.2 as a 24/7 setting, better set this rail manually.








I'm just glad I didn't cook my 7700K finding this out for myself.


----------



## ReCkLeZz

@beck

My CPU is doing great day to day. The only issue i have is that it doesnt like ram above 3866 Mhz. So prob a weak IMC or maybe just the board. But cant complain when it over clocks like it does.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> as a general rule, if you can keep the temperature _well below_ Tc (i'd suggest <70C) then running long term 1.2X the TDP is reasonable (some say as much as 2x TDP) But to be clear, running any CPU higher than the TDP for long durations of time will loosen-up the chip, how much this costs in Hz/mV over time is very sample dependent in this range.
> The bios engineer knows of the issue, but considering that it supposed to be a rule that kicks in ONLY in LN2 mode when above 5.2, and that the number of cpu samples that will be running >5.2 at ambient, it's kinda low(er) priority. Bottom line.. if you're lucky enough to happen to get a cpu that does >5.2 as a 24/7 setting, better set this rail manually.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just glad I didn't cook my 7700K finding this out for myself.


This same issue was discussed on the second page of this thread. Kind of bad for Asus to drop the ball like that. I would say a good handful of chjip would be able to at least benchmark or boot above 5.2 on ambient. There's no reason they should set "LN2" voltages at such a low frequency. 6.0 sounds like a better number for that.


----------



## becks

@ReCkLeZz

Awesome stuff








What mobo you have ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> This same issue was discussed on the second page of this thread. Kind of bad for Asus to drop the ball like that. I would say a good handful of chjip would be able to at least benchmark or boot above 5.2 on ambient. There's no reason they should set "LN2" voltages at such a low frequency. 6.0 sounds like a better number for that.


Yeah, I know - you can see my posts then. It could not have been discussed for z270 boards back then. Either way, 170 bios updates fixed it for my M8 Impact at the time.


----------



## ReCkLeZz

@becks

ASUS z270 Maximus ix Code


----------



## Lobuttomize

Username: Lobuttomize
CPU Model: i7 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5.0
Cache Frequency: 4.6
Vcore in UEFI: 1.405
Vcore: 1.36
FCLK: 1
Cooling Solution: Delidded Scythe Mugen 5
Stability Test: x264 16T 8hr
Batch Number: Malaysia L640F769
Ram Speed: 3000 14-14-14-34
Ram Voltage: 1.35
Motherboard: Asus Prime Z270-A
LLC Setting: 4
Misc: 4.9GHz bin from Silicon Lottery


----------



## becks

@ReCkLeZz

Looking at your board digital power controller and chokes there isn't a big difference to Maximus Viii Impact ( I want to buy this board







) so I *might* be good...


----------



## MaKeN

If only asus boards or asrock had 3 m.2 portss, i would go for it also....

How come only msi managed to make 3 of them....

I mean , we all know thats soon optane memory comes out... and wireless hdd setup is awesome isnt it...


----------



## ReCkLeZz

@becks

The code is a good choice, but if you are looking for more stable oc's i think that the apex would be a better choice.The apex didnt come out for awhile after launch so i went with the code.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Whats the default CPU PLL, mines defaulting to 1.25v on Auto with a 9 Hero.

I followed raja's guide as well as the little LLC changes by @Jpmboy, got a little OC, [email protected], temps max out at 69/70c with an hour of Realbench, so I'll leave it there until I delid.

Was having this little laggy dragging Windows until I upped the vcore, but this was at 4.5Ghz manually set on all cores with auto voltage..


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> @scracy
> 
> @Darkwizzie
> 
> @ReCkLeZz
> 
> Any update / news on your SL chips ?
> How are they doing day to day...


Not much to update. Haven't had any CPU crashes. Then again, if I managed to degrade the chip in 2 months then I might as well shut down my thread and ban myself from forums lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Whats the default CPU PLL, mines defaulting to 1.25v on Auto with a 9 Hero.
> 
> I followed raja's guide as well as the little LLC changes by @Jpmboy, got a little OC, [email protected], temps max out at 69/70c with an hour of Realbench, so I'll leave it there until I delid.
> 
> Was having this little laggy dragging Windows until I upped the vcore, but this was at 4.5Ghz manually set on all cores with auto voltage..


is that with adaptive or manual override? you mean Core PLL? (post up a snip of the turboVcore screen.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Is this normal just moving a window, cause this is what mine is doing?




Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> is that with adaptive or manual override?


It was with a Auto XMP, it's stopped when using adaptive offset, but the problem in the video is strange to me.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Is this normal just moving a window, cause this is what mine is doing?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was with a Auto XMP, it's stopped when using adaptive offset, but the problem in the video is strange to me.


fresh windows install - right?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> fresh windows install - right?


Yep, and tweaked to turn of all the rubbish.
Oh and balanced power profile, C-States off.

I found a thread about it over on the ROG forums, many people with the hero board have found similar things, even just in the web browser.

I think Raja hit the nail on the head (over at the ROG forum), it's the high DPi mouse causing the clock spikes, it jumps every time I move it.


----------



## ducegt

High DPI or the polling rate? I remember hearing about similar problems many years ago related to tweaking the USB polling rate for mice and cpu utilization. What mouse?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> High DPI or the polling rate? I remember hearing about similar problems many years ago related to tweaking the USB polling rate for mice and cpu utilization. What mouse?


Corsair Vengeance M65.
I didn't see it on the x99 system, but this has 1/2 the cores of a 6900k


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Corsair Vengeance M65.
> I didn't see it on the x99 system, but this has 1/2 the cores of a 6900k


I have a steelseries and a couple of logitech G700s here. Haven't seen that yet.. .but I'm not sure what to look for.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Corsair Vengeance M65.
> I didn't see it on the x99 system, but this has 1/2 the cores of a 6900k


It's likely not related to cores. I'm just making an educated guess it's related to USB. Is the mouse at 1000hz in corsairs software? You can try 500hz to see if it solves the issue. 1ms difference shouldn't matter unless your a hardcore FPS gamer and even then not such a big deal.


----------



## Spiriva

Soon ill join the club too, just waiting for my new EK monoblock for the Maximus IX Hero motherboard, hopefully i will be rebuilding my computer in the weekend


















Did a fast test to see that it boots and load up the bios before im doing all ther watercooling work, and it seems fine. Updated the bios as well, as the old one on the motherboard was from december 2016


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> It's likely not related to cores. I'm just making an educated guess it's related to USB. Is the mouse at 1000hz in corsairs software? You can try 500hz to see if it solves the issue. 1ms difference shouldn't matter unless your a hardcore FPS gamer and even then not such a big deal.


Yeah I tried all the settings, this thing goes from 2400Dpi to 8000Dpi, with 1,2,4,8ms settings, none seem to stop the sudden core jump while moving quickly.
My Logitech G9x does the same thing, but my wife's el-cheapo Cougar doesn't (came with a mock mechanical keyboard..lol)
Doesn't matter if it's in the USB 2 or USB 3 ports.

@Jpmboy You just have to move to mouse around a a lot and watch the core frequency, it will go to full clocks, when you stop it will go back to idle clocks.


----------



## ducegt

Just throwing out ideas... Change USB legacy support in BIOS and see if there are any power management options related to USB...USB controller drivers...hub drivers...device manager uninstall all devices including hidden devices. If that all fails, close hwinfo lol


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Just throwing out ideas... Change USB legacy support in BIOS and see if there are any power management options related to USB...USB controller drivers...hub drivers...device manager uninstall all devices including hidden devices. If that all fails, close hwinfo lol


Done. done and done.
Was just playing around then.

I don't bother with that Corsair software, I set my mouse up ages ago and saved my profile to it, Idid reinstall it to test polling rates, but when that didn't work it was uninstalled.
It's a fresh Windows 10 install, so there hasn't been any crap installed so far.
I've disabled Legacy support and it didn't make any difference.

I've only got the mouse plugged in, no other USB device (even unplugged the Kraken's internal connector), still the same.

Core 3 get's 55%-60% usage depending on how much you move the mouse.

Well disabling HPET timer stopped it from boosting all the way to 4.7Ghz every time, clocks do go up still, but depending on how much you move at worst it'll boost to 4Ghz on one or 2 cores for a second.
It still boosts to 4.7Ghz on heavy loads though (gaming, Cinebench etc..).


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Done. done and done.
> Was just playing around then.
> 
> I don't bother with that Corsair software, I set my mouse up ages ago and saved my profile to it, Idid reinstall it to test polling rates, but when that didn't work it was uninstalled.
> It's a fresh Windows 10 install, so there hasn't been any crap installed so far.
> I've disabled Legacy support and it didn't make any difference.
> 
> I've only got the mouse plugged in, no other USB device (even unplugged the Kraken's internal connector), still the same.
> 
> Core 3 get's 55%-60% usage depending on how much you move the mouse.
> 
> Well disabling HPET timer stopped it from boosting all the way to 4.7Ghz every time, clocks do go up still, but depending on how much you move at worst it'll boost to 4Ghz on one or 2 cores for a second.
> It still boosts to 4.7Ghz on heavy loads though (gaming, Cinebench etc..).


Donno if it helps or not , ill just share some words about almost same situation ....

I play lineage 2 game , so after an update that they did , the game with simply lag as hell when moving the mouse... i did many tests and found out that this is the dps from my mouse cousing that.
Now i have a little power meater thing that works as an outlet but it will show on mini screen the wats usage of my pc... so when mooving the mouse fast the power suplied to the pc would simply drop as hell, therefore the isnt enought power for GPU to keep up the load from the game and couse lag.

How i solved it? I simply droped the polling rate to 250 ( its max rate for no power loss in that particular game)
260 rate would lag it again ....

I had to use special program to do it , as my mouse wont have that setting to lower the rate

Thats the cideo i made for the forum i play on...

.https://youtu.be/SbvkxMCNeYA

You will see under the monitor the volt meeter ...

Again , its just something maybe related to what you have , sry if its completely wrong









All regular mouses have 125 polling rateas i know...


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Donno if it helps or not , ill just share some words about almost same situation ....
> 
> I play lineage 2 game , so after an update that they did , the game with simply lag as hell when moving the mouse... i did many tests and found out that this is the dps from my mouse cousing that.
> Now i have a little power meater thing that works as an outlet but it will show on mini screen the wats usage of my pc... so when mooving the mouse fast the power suplied to the pc would simply drop as hell, therefore the isnt enought power for GPU to keep up the load from the game and couse lag.
> 
> How i solved it? I simply droped the polling rate to 250 ( its max rate for no power loss in that particular game)
> 260 rate would lag it again ....
> 
> I had to use special program to do it , as my mouse wont have that setting to lower the rate
> 
> Thats the cideo i made for the forum i play on...
> 
> .https://youtu.be/SbvkxMCNeYA
> 
> You will see under the monitor the volt meeter ...
> 
> Again , its just something maybe related to what you have , sry if its completely wrong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All regular mouses have 125 polling rateas i know..
> 
> 
> .


Well disabling HPET did something, I've got no latency issues, the cpu isn't maxing out when I move the mouse and my Metro Last Light benchmarks went from a average of 54fps to 91fps.
Not to mention that GPU usage was only 56% during the LL Benchmark, it is now 99%.

I re-enabled HPET to test, and all the issues came back.

Good for running x265 Benchmark, bad for everyday use after your OC is stable.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Well disabling HPET did something, I've got no latency issues, the cpu isn't maxing out when I move the mouse and my Metro Last Light benchmarks went from a average of 54fps to 91fps.
> Not to mention that GPU usage was only 56% during the LL Benchmark, it is now 99%.
> 
> I re-enabled HPET to test, and all the issues came back.
> 
> Good for running x265 Benchmark, bad for everyday use after your OC is stable.


My Apex is running win8.1 so it's probably not relevant to this. I tried moving the wiondowsaround.. clock goes to 1300, but no stutter or jitter or anything.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> My Apex is running win8.1 so it's probably not relevant to this. I tried moving the wiondowsaround.. clock goes to 1300, but no stutter or jitter or anything.


Since disabling the HPET everything is back to normal (no stutters, jitters or high clocks), didn't do it on the x99 though, but it is different architecture.

All my frame rates in games are better besides Shadow Warrior 2, which dropped 5fps.









I'm actually interesting to find out why on Windows 10 it causes this, could explain the reasoning behind the 7700k stuttering some reviewers get (Joker is one).
If they've overclocked and used x265 to stress test you're going to have to enable HPET, which causes latency in other area's.

Even my Chrome was experiencing lagging, Firefox didn't, but now it's all fine.

But trust me to find another Windows 10/platform quirk, I'm good at that


----------



## godboy

About to start overclocking my 7700K as I just finished the delid. Can someone give me an opinion on temps? My 7700K after delid on stock clocks caps out around 52-54C in Aida64 Stress Test after 4 hours.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *godboy*
> 
> About to start overclocking my 7700K as I just finished the delid. Can someone give me an opinion on temps? My 7700K after delid on stock clocks caps out around 52-54C in Aida64 Stress Test after 4 hours.


Better than mine at stock under a Kraken x61, with stock clocks mine will hit 62c - 65c.
This is why I'm wanting to delid soon too


----------



## godboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Better than mine at stock under a Kraken x61, with stock clocks mine will hit 62c - 65c.
> This is why I'm wanting to delid soon too


Interesting. It's worth noting that I'm in a SFF case using a Noctua C14 with gentle typhoons on air. (Ncase build) I think if I was on a AIO setup Id be looking at at least 5C more..


----------



## ritchiedrama

Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but I'm assuming so.

I got a 7700K today. I had it stable (for gaming/general use) at 5 GHz / 1.304 vCore. Crashed when I did x264 though on first loop.

So I lowered to 4.8GHz because if my vCore went higher temps were too high (I think).

My Cooler is Corsair H100i V2 set to Performance w/ the pre-applied thermal paste & H440 case.

So right now in BIOS (Z270 MSI Gaming Carbon Pro) I have (these are the ONLY things I have changed, if there should be more, tell me!):

Clock: 4.8 GHz
vCore: 1.25 V
CPU SA Voltage: 1.250 (on Auto it was set wayyy too high, I think? it was at 1.37)
CPU IO Voltage: 1.200 (Also on auto was a lot higher than this.
EIST Disabled
XMP Enabled for my 3200mhz corsair ram

I just need some guidance as I'm not sure if there is cause for concern so if someone more knowledgeable could help me out.

At 5GHz with 1.304 vCore after gaming my temps had hit 79-80 but it was only temporary, i usually saw them around 60-72 (it jumps around, a lot, compared to my old 2500K). Was this too much? Could I have bumped the vCore up higher at this point to maybe fix the x264 instability?

Now I'm at 4.8GHz 1.25 vCore I just ran one loop of x264 (16 threads, normal). Temps hit 76 - were moving around 64-76 on all cores. Would it have been bad if i set this to run all night at those temps?

My idle is 32 right now, although probably not relevant.

My main concern (but not sure if it IS a concern):

In HWMonitor I have under Motherboard:

"TMPIN3" - when my CPU goes under load, this goes from idle 31-32 degrees and upto around 68-75 (highest I've seen it so far). - What is this, and is it a problem? I've seen mixed results from my searching, some people saying its not important, others saying it is.

I can provide anymore info if anyone can help.. going to bed now.

Thank you.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but I'm assuming so.
> 
> I got a 7700K today. I had it stable (for gaming/general use) at 5 GHz / 1.304 vCore. Crashed when I did x264 though on first loop.
> 
> So I lowered to 4.8GHz because if my vCore went higher temps were too high (I think).
> 
> My Cooler is Corsair H100i V2 set to Performance w/ the pre-applied thermal paste & H440 case.
> 
> So right now in BIOS (Z270 MSI Gaming Carbon Pro) I have:
> 
> Clock: 4.8 GHz
> vCore: 1.25 V
> CPU SA Voltage: 1.250 (on Auto it was set wayyy too high, I think? it was at 1.37)
> CPU IO Voltage: 1.200 (Also on auto was a lot higher than this.
> EIST Disabled
> XMP Enabled for my 3200mhz corsair ram
> 
> I just need some guidance as I'm not sure if there is cause for concern so if someone more knowledgeable could help me out.
> 
> At 5GHz with 1.304 vCore after gaming my temps had hit 79-80 but it was only temporary, i usually saw them around 60-72 (it jumps around, a lot, compared to my old 2500K). Was this too much? Could I have bumped the vCore up higher at this point to maybe fix the x264 instability?
> 
> Now I'm at 4.8GHz 1.25 vCore I just ran one loop of x264 (16 threads, normal). Temps hit 76 - were moving around 64-76 on all cores. Would it have been bad if i set this to run all night at those temps?
> 
> My idle is 32 right now, although probably not relevant.
> 
> My main concern (but not sure if it IS a concern):
> 
> In HWMonitor I have under Motherboard:
> 
> "TMPIN3" - when my CPU goes under load, this goes from idle 31-32 degrees and upto around 68-75 (highest I've seen it so far). - What is this, and is it a problem? I've seen mixed results from my searching, some people saying its not important, others saying it is.
> 
> I can provide anymore info if anyone can help.. going to bed now.
> 
> Thank you.


It is safe to run up to ~90c, it will throttle at 100c.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> It is safe to run up to ~90c it will throttle at 100c.


Yeah, maybe 'safe' but for longevity?

A few hours of gaming at 80-85c can't be good for it, surely?

I've also tried to get speedstep to work but for some reason it wont, I think its because I've manually set voltage and coreclock.. it worked when I first set the PC up, when everything was auto.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Yeah, maybe 'safe' but for longevity?
> 
> A few hours of gaming at 80-85c can't be good for it, surely?
> 
> I've also tried to get speedstep to work but for some reason it wont, I think its because I've manually set voltage and coreclock.. it worked when I first set the PC up, when everything was auto.


Intel specialist from Intel forum state you can safely run the CPU at 90c for as long as you want to, check out the forum https://communities.intel.com/community/tech/processors .


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel specialist from Intel forum state you can safely run the CPU at 90c for as long as you want to, check out the forum https://communities.intel.com/community/tech/processors .


Cool, thanks for the information.

I believe I shouldn't be going over 1.35v either? Or is that wrong too..









Edit: CAn you link me to any specific thread where an Intel specialist has said this?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Cool, thanks for the information.
> 
> I believe I shouldn't be going over 1.35v either? Or is that wrong too..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: CAn you link me to any specific thread where an Intel specialist has said this?


TCC activation is 100c that is the limit for i7 7700k . Here is the link from Intel page 102 http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html

Vcore can go up to 1.44v 24/7


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> TCC activation is 100c that is the limit for i7 7700k . Here is the link from Intel page 102 http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html
> 
> Vcore can go up to 1.44v 24/7


I'm not saying you're wrong (obviously, as I know little, thats why I'm trying to learn)

But just because TCC is at 100 doesn't mean 85c constantly is not harming our CPU/making it have a shorter life?

In my original post I wrote about TMPIN3 - do you know what this is?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> I'm not saying you're wrong (obviously, as I know little, thats why I'm trying to learn)
> 
> But just because TCC is at 100 doesn't mean 85c constantly is not harming our CPU/making it have a shorter life?
> 
> In my original post I wrote about TMPIN3 - do you know what this is?


TCC is like the cooling fan on a automobile it keeps the processor at 100c 24/7 3 year warranty.

People with laptops need to run at 90-100c all the time.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> TCC is like the cooling fan on a automobile it keeps the processor at 100c 24/7 3 year warranty.
> 
> People with laptops need to run at 90-100c all the time.


Fair enough thanks again! I just ran x264 @ 5ghz with 1.325 vCore (Hwmonitor said it maxed at 1.336 - only did one loop, but it didn't crash like last time.

Temps hit 88 but mostly were 78-83 only a 1 second spike to 87 then back down, etc.

Still not sure what TMPIN3 is though, it gets hotter when CPU gets hotter, so it has to be something to do with that..

If anyone else has any opinions on my first post too, please share


----------



## schoolofmonkey

This look about right for 4.8Ghz (voltages/temp wise).


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> This look about right for 4.8Ghz (voltages/temp wise).


Those temps look decent what had you been doing?

Also I really can't figure out how I can drop.my voltage and core speed. I have a different motherboard (MSI pro carbon) but do you know what specific settings I'm looking for?

Also interested in what cooling you're using and what case?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Cool, thanks for the information.
> 
> I believe I shouldn't be going over 1.35v either? Or is that wrong too..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: CAn you link me to any specific thread where an Intel specialist has said this?


be aware that the temperature and voltage limits (Max... anything) in the intel spec sheet can be coupled to other conditions in the spec sheet. So.. and max T of 90-100C (just short of tripping prochot) is the limit with other criteria met... eg, not exceeding TDP, not exceeding ICC max etc. They really should not be used in isolation.
So... bouncing off the TJmax and causing any number of fail-safe situations IS a recommendation you should think about, carefully







. voltage and current (load .. "TDP in watts"), temperature and duration.It's a balance
Stay below 1.5X TDP during stress testing, and if possible keep the temps below 80, lower is better... note the package temp, not cores. Package report the hottest sensor on the die.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> be aware that the temperature and voltage limits (Max... anything) in the intel spec sheet can be coupled to other conditions in the spec sheet. So.. and max T of 90-100C (just short of tripping prochot) is the limit with other criteria met... eg, not exceeding TDP, not exceeding ICC max etc. They really should not be used in isolation.
> So... bouncing off the TJmax and causing any number of fail-safe situations IS a recommendation you should think about, carefully
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . voltage and current (load .. "TDP in watts"), temperature and duration.It's a balance
> Stay below 1.5X TDP during stress testing, and if possible keep the temps below 80, lower is better... note the package temp, not cores. Package report the hottest sensor on the die.


I'm at 1.32 vCore now, 5ghz, gaming it hits 80, but it only jumps there for a second and back down to 65-69 area, but if i run aida64 or x264 it hits 85-88 briefly too.

Not sure what to do.

My h100iv2 is at the top of the case the fans below the radiator blowing into the radiator, h440 case.

Could changing any of these variables help?

thanks


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> be aware that the temperature and voltage limits (Max... anything) in the intel spec sheet can be coupled to other conditions in the spec sheet. So.. and max T of 90-100C (just short of tripping prochot) is the limit with other criteria met... eg, not exceeding TDP, not exceeding ICC max etc. They really should not be used in isolation.
> So... bouncing off the TJmax and causing any number of fail-safe situations IS a recommendation you should think about, carefully
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . voltage and current (load .. "TDP in watts"), temperature and duration.It's a balance
> Stay below 1.5X TDP during stress testing, and if possible keep the temps below 80, lower is better... note the package temp, not cores. Package report the hottest sensor on the die.


Also, here is a video of my temps running AIDA64 (it had only been running a short while though) but its stll running now and max temps are the same still as you can see it only hits the 80s for a brief second and back down again.. max tdp is 84? as far as i can see

this temp jump is the same thing that happens in gaming, briefly hits high 70s then back down.

Is anything wrong?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVQFRSRzjZI


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> I'm at 1.32 vCore now, 5ghz, gaming it hits 80, but it only jumps there for a second and back down to 65-69 area, but if i run aida64 or x264 it hits 85-88 briefly too.
> 
> Not sure what to do.
> 
> My h100iv2 is at the top of the case the fans below the radiator blowing into the radiator, h440 case.
> 
> Could changing any of these variables help?
> 
> thanks


How's that air flow? air from in the case out? That should be okay if you have clean air to the rads (not warmed by the other components first). Have you tried remounting the waterbloock - use a top TIM like Gelid extreme, NT-H1 or Grizzly kyronaut?


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> How's that air flow? air from in the case out? That should be okay if you have clean air to the rads (not warmed by the other components first). Have you tried remounting the waterbloock - use a top TIM like Gelid extreme, NT-H1 or Grizzly kyronaut?


The H440 doesn't have great airflow in itself, minor ventilation a back fan that exhausts air out the back and three front fans that fire air through the case to the back i assume? But thats why I put the fans facing upwards into the radiator to try exhaust any hot air?

I've not remounted the waterblock and currently using the pre-applied Corsair h100 thermalpaste.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Fair enough thanks again! I just ran x264 @ 5ghz with 1.325 vCore (Hwmonitor said it maxed at 1.336 - only did one loop, but it didn't crash like last time.
> 
> Temps hit 88 but mostly were 78-83 only a 1 second spike to 87 then back down, etc.
> 
> Still not sure what TMPIN3 is though, it gets hotter when CPU gets hotter, so it has to be something to do with that..
> 
> If anyone else has any opinions on my first post too, please share


If you are on msi board , lower the pll oc voltage to 1.1 , will help you with temps , on outo it goes way to high

Tmpin3 idkn it also , it goes high temp on my board also... are these capacitators temp? By the logic that should be the motherboard cpu temp sensor


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> If you are on mai board , lower the pll oc voltage to 1.1 , will help you with temps , on outo it goes way to high


http://i.imgur.com/3W2CL4z.jpg

How is this looking?

Thank you.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/3W2CL4z.jpg
> 
> How is this looking?
> 
> Thank you.


My temps have just dropped 20c, lol.

Holy crap, thanks.

Running prime95, usually jumps to 80 instantly, hasnt gone over 65 now, lol.


----------



## MaKeN

I told you









What are core temps at idle , all 4 cores. If its to unreal then raze the pll oc volts to default of 1.2, your board is a bit diff then mine
For exemple on my msi gaming m7 the sweet spot is 1.1 anything lower makes the core temps lower then room temps and thats unreal. Play with your pll voltage till you hit real temps at idle


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> My temps have just dropped 20c, lol.
> 
> Holy crap, thanks.
> 
> Running prime95, usually jumps to 80 instantly, hasnt gone over 65 now, lol.


Awesome. 1.1 helped me as well. I'm not sure if it actually lowers temps or makes the sensors only read lower, which allows higher performance without throttling...or both. It does seem to benefit some of us. I wish I could try lower than 1.1, but my BIOS doesn't support it.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Awesome. 1.1 helped me as well. I'm not sure if it actually lowers temps or makes the sensors only read lower, which allows higher performance without throttling...or both. It does seem to benefit some of us. I wish I could try lower than 1.1, but my BIOS doesn't support it.


Makes no sense that it would change the sensor reading imo.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Makes no sense that it would change the sensor reading imo.


Many are saying it's only a signal voltage and may be related to DTS sensors? How it really works is beyond me and not of too much interest, and I studied electrical engineering.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I told you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are core temps at idle , all 4 cores. If its to unreal then raze the pll oc volts to default of 1.2, your board is a bit diff then mine
> For exemple on my msi gaming m7 the sweet spot is 1.1 anything lower makes the core temps lower then room temps and thats unreal. Play with your pll voltage till you hit real temps at idle


At idle they are 17-28c around there, jumping about. with Corsair h100i v2

core 0: 26
core 1: 25
core 2: 17
core 3: 22
package: 33


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> At idle they are 17-28c around there, jumping about. with Corsair h100i v2
> 
> core 0: 26
> core 1: 25
> core 2: 17
> core 3: 22
> package: 33


Looks ok for 4.8 in my opinion...well depends on your room temps.


----------



## Caos

Hi, on a motherboard asus z270 code maximus what is cpu pll OC voltage? Thank you


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Awesome. 1.1 helped me as well. I'm not sure if it actually lowers temps or makes the sensors only read lower, which allows higher performance without throttling...or both. It does seem to benefit some of us. I wish I could try lower than 1.1, but my BIOS doesn't support it.


I beleve it does lower the temps.
When running at auto voltage and prime 95 touch your capacitators around the cpu , the will be way much more hot at the touch then when you set pll on 1.1v .
Well at least on my board it is ...

My board allows for 0.650v on pll , but it wont boot if its set to anything lower then 1.050


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Looks ok for 4.8 in my opinion...well depends on your room temps.


I'm at 5ghz 1.33 V right now. with 1.1 on the setting you said to change.

Running X264 ive hit max temps of 73 degrees.

Idle temps one of the cores dropped to 16 lowest.

My board says the default is 1.2, and it can go from 0.06 to 1.50

So can this really be giving me false temps now?

I'd like to try get to the bottom of this, i dont want false temps and my cpu burning out obviously


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*


Go for a lower OC...much lower OC...
Go in windows ...and set you "monitoring software" to start on screen with windows...
Shut of PC....
Remove heat sink or water block or whatever from the CPU
Turn the Baby on and measure the temp on the chip with a laser thermometer and see if it matches the on screen reads..

If it goes over the top, the PC should shut itself down with no damage... there might be some better ideas out there but this is the only one that came to my head without further research


----------



## MaKeN

Set it on 1.150 see if it gets real







if not then do the default 1.2


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Set it on 1.150 see if it gets real
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if not then do the default 1.2


Just crashed on my third run of x264 at 1.1 - so gonna try 1.150 - not sure if its the PLL thats unstable or the actual clock.


----------



## FrostyAMD

@MaKeN
What's your ambient temp in room with your cooling you probably shout see idel temps 5-8 degrees above ambient


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Go for a lower OC...much lower OC...
> Go in windows ...and set you "monitoring software" to start on screen with windows...
> Shut of PC....
> Remove heat sink or water block or whatever from the CPU
> Turn the Baby on and measure the temp on the chip with a laser thermometer and see if it matches the on screen reads..
> 
> If it goes over the top, the PC should shut itself down with no damage... there might be some better ideas out there but this is the only one that came to my head without further research


Hah good idea , ill definitely do it next time i undo my water block


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FrostyAMD*
> 
> @MaKeN
> What's your ambient temp in room with your cooling you probably shout see idel temps 5-8 degrees above ambient


Room temps 23...
With custom loop ( 2 rads) i get 27 -29 idle


----------



## FrostyAMD

@Maken
That looks goodso I would not change votage just put it at default and if you achieve same temps then dial in default so it does not change while overclocking.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Room temps 23...
> With custom loop ( 2 rads) i get 27 -29 idle


I just ran 13 loops of x264

5ghz
1.33 vCore
1.150 PLL

Hottest temp was 78, mostly around 66-74 though the entire time.

seems safe and good? there was no crash, it was on for over an hour (i know i should leave overnight but as long as it doesnt crash while im gaming etc im good).

Real Temp idles: 29 29 25 27 - seems more legit?


----------



## Lobuttomize

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lobuttomize*
> 
> Username: Lobuttomize
> CPU Model: i7 7700k
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5.0
> Cache Frequency: 4.6
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.405
> Vcore: 1.36
> FCLK: 1
> Cooling Solution: Delidded Scythe Mugen 5
> Stability Test: x264 16T 8hr
> Batch Number: Malaysia L640F769
> Ram Speed: 3000 14-14-14-34
> Ram Voltage: 1.35
> Motherboard: Asus Prime Z270-A
> LLC Setting: 4
> Misc: 4.9GHz bin from Silicon Lottery



Here is my picture, the vcore in hwmonitor doesn't seem to be accurate and it is as listed in hwinfo.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> I just ran 13 loops of x264
> 
> 5ghz
> 1.33 vCore
> 1.150 PLL
> 
> Hottest temp was 78, mostly around 66-74 though the entire time.
> 
> seems safe and good? there was no crash, it was on for over an hour (i know i should leave overnight but as long as it doesnt crash while im gaming etc im good).
> 
> Real Temp idles: 29 29 25 27 - seems more legit?


Yep! So 1.150 for your board then








See if 1.140 or 1.130 wont crash and if temps are legit as well


----------



## kl6mk6

My 7700k 5.0GHz/1.330v OC will not post after adding my new EVGA 1070 Black edition, but works just fine with default BIOS settings. Is there a setting for the pcie power delivery I need to increase, or does my Asus Strix z270i mITX mobo just not have enough oomph to handle both the OC and powering the card? Im using a 600w ups fyi.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Yep! So 1.150 for your board then
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See if 1.140 or 1.130 wont crash and if temps are legit as well


Well, it's simply too hard to tell if it's legit. But, I don't see how the sensors can change anyway - it has to be correct, it is a voltage setting, afterall.

Maybe you can test if it works correctly







i have no way of doing so!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Makes no sense that it would change the sensor reading imo.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Just crashed on my third run of x264 at 1.1 - so gonna try 1.150 - not sure if its the PLL thats unstable or the actual clock.


PLL (phase lock loop) voltage.. phases and aligns various signals including the dts report. Undervolting it can result in a skewed report. So, just keep an eye on package temp and total watts (TDP) when doing p95. Frankly, I would not ask the question about a false temp report while running p95. use something else that's less prone to cook your cpu until you get a sense of what's going on with this voltage rail.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> PLL (phase lock loop) voltage.. phases and aligns various signals including the dts report. Undervolting it can result in a skewed report. So, just keep an eye on package temp and total watts (TDP) when doing p95. Frankly, I would not ask the question about a false temp report while running p95. use something else that's less prone to cook your cpu until you get a sense of what's going on with this voltage rail.


Tdp has never gone over 120, usually around 84 during all stress testing of x264 and p95 temps haven't hit 80 in x264 and haven't used p95 since


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> PLL (phase lock loop) voltage.. phases and aligns various signals including the dts report. Undervolting it can result in a skewed report. So, just keep an eye on package temp and total watts (TDP) when doing p95. Frankly, I would not ask the question about a false temp report while running p95. use something else that's less prone to cook your cpu until you get a sense of what's going on with this voltage rail.


Is there anything else you suggest I do? My temps ingame since I changed to 1.150 PLL don't go past 62 now really.


----------



## FrostyAMD

Set your Pll voltage to default then check your temps. We should not change voltages without some knowledge of consequences.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Is there anything else you suggest I do? My temps ingame since I changed to 1.150 PLL don't go past 62 now really.


Air that comes out of the case is it hot? Same as when you had 80c?

Pump full speed fans at 50%?


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Air that comes out of the case is it hot? Same as when you had 80c?
> 
> Pump full speed fans at 50%?


The air that comes out is cool / warm at the most, definitely not what would be described as hot. I assume this is good?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FrostyAMD*
> 
> Set your Pll voltage to default then check your temps. We should not change voltages without some knowledge of consequences.


Knowledge of consquence? I'm well within a range which my motherboard says is possible. Why would I be concerned? Auto was too hot. Default is 1.2, I've set 1.150 - I see no issue with this. As long as I'm not OVER vaulting.

My PC has not crashed.. yet. I've played games all day, ran x264 loop test for over an hour so things are looking "ok" right now.

I doubt I'll run anymore tests that stress my CPU, as I don't use it for anything other than light browsing and heavy gaming -- so if it doesn't crash for those things, it won't be an issue?


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Air that comes out of the case is it hot? Same as when you had 80c?
> 
> Pump full speed fans at 50%?


This is after an hour of CSGO - not the most intensive game, but the only game that actually made my CPU crash yesterday.



My Corsair H100i v2 is set to 'performance'

Edit: I'd like to say thanks to everyone that has been helping me, and apologise for the 'noobish' questions. Just trying to soak up as much information/knowledge as I can.

I will type up a post later of my last issue that I'm trying to fix. Providing this overclock is stable.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*


Your too blinded by the hype and performance gain








Everyone is just saying that you should take this with a grain of salt and cautious...
There have been users on this forum who fried their chips before messing with these voltages..

You are right saying that those are voltages recommended by the MB manufacturers ... *But with CPU at stock!* not OC'ed
With no external reading of the temperature on the CPU to see if it matches the reading on the screen you might just get a lower faulted read...meaning your chip is running way way more hot..
And even if you do not fry it per-say.. you might end up shortening its lifespan or have performance degradation in time.

Whenever you OC you do it at your own risk, and should research whats behind a knob or switch.. Don't be the Dee Dee


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Your too blinded by the hype and performance gain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone is just saying that you should take this with a grain of salt and cautious...
> There have been users on this forum who fried their chips before messing with these voltages..
> 
> You are right saying that those are voltages recommended by the MB manufacturers ... *But with CPU at stock!* not OC'ed
> With no external reading of the temperature on the CPU to see if it matches the reading on the screen you might just get a lower faulted read...meaning your chip is running way way more hot..
> And even if you do not fry it per-say.. you might end up shortening its lifespan or have performance degradation in time.
> 
> Whenever you OC you do it at your own risk, and should research whats behind a knob or switch.. Don't be the Dee Dee


Clearly I am listening to the advice. However, the temperatures were 'ok' even with it set to 'Auto' which was higher voltage than I have now, so lowering the voltage is not going to damage the CPU, lets be realistic.

I may be 'noobish' but I still had a 4.8ghz overclocked 2500K since 2011, lol.

The motherboard was setting voltages higher, I lowered them - how is this going to shorten its life span...

The only thing we/others are unsure about is if the PLL voltage is actually lowering the temps like it says, but if my case is blowing cold air out the vent, I'm going to assume the temps are ok.

edit: The voltages are recommended fullstop, nothing to do with 'stock' as I said the auto ones were HIGHER, so lowering them isn't going to damage anything.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*


Were' still talking about PLL voltage right ? If yes.. PLL voltage has nothing to do with the CPU voltage but rather with the temperature sensor in this case...so yes, you lower the temperature on a sensor and it faults it...giving you a false sense of safeness.. when temps might actually be on top of the roof

Not to mention...if you indeed faulted the sensor...and your proc doesn't shut down till 135(real) Celsius..instead of 100 normal...what would happen ?
Got the point ? if Yes.. I said enough


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Were' still talking about PLL voltage right ? If yes.. PLL voltage has nothing to do with the CPU voltage but rather with the temperature sensor in this case...so yes, you lower the temperature on a sensor and it faults it...giving you a false sense of safeness.. when temps might actually be on top of the roof
> 
> Not to mention...if you indeed faulted the sensor...and your proc doesn't shut down till 135(real) Celsius..instead of 100 normal...what would happen ?
> Got the point ? if Yes.. I said enough


Well, if it is called CPU PLL OC Voltage, why would it be nothing to do with the CPU voltage then? Care to explain?

I'm all for people saying things, but you can't just claim something and have no evidence of it.

Do you have evidence that lowering the **CPU PLL OC Voltage** is dangerous and makes the sensor read inaccurately?

I've yet to find ANY on the internet, from anyone, or anywhere.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Awesome. 1.1 helped me as well. I'm not sure if it actually lowers temps or makes the sensors only read lower, which allows higher performance without throttling...or both. It does seem to benefit some of us. I wish I could try lower than 1.1, but my BIOS doesn't support it.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Many are saying it's only a signal voltage and may be related to DTS sensors? How it really works is beyond me and not of too much interest, and I studied electrical engineering.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> be aware that the temperature and voltage limits (Max... anything) in the intel spec sheet can be coupled to other conditions in the spec sheet. So.. and max T of 90-100C (just short of tripping prochot) is the limit with other criteria met... eg, not exceeding TDP, not exceeding ICC max etc. They really should not be used in isolation.
> So... bouncing off the TJmax and causing any number of fail-safe situations IS a recommendation you should think about, carefully
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . voltage and current (load .. "TDP in watts"), temperature and duration.It's a balance
> Stay below 1.5X TDP during stress testing, and if possible keep the temps below 80, lower is better... note the package temp, not cores. Package report the hottest sensor on the die.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> PLL (phase lock loop) voltage.. phases and aligns various signals *including the dts* report. Undervolting it can result in a *skewed report*. So, just keep an eye on package temp and total watts (TDP) when doing p95. Frankly, I would not ask the question about a false temp report while running p95. use something else that's *less prone to cook your cpu* until you get a sense of what's going on with this voltage rail.


You've been warned before.... I am not a specialist like others here with much greater experience than me, but I do read carefully


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> You've been warned before.... I am not a specialist like others here with much greater experience than me, but I do read carefully


Lol, but you just claimed it had nothing to do with the CPU, yet that is absolutely false, so you are obviously not great at reading:

"CPU PLL Voltage Override (Overvoltage): What the Heck does it do?
So I asked that question to an Intel Overclocking Engineer his explanation was roughly: We went through the BIOS settings trying to find setting that if changed could help overclock our CPUs further. We came across this setting. Think of the CPU PLL voltage as a voltage that is provided to the CPU, but then "clipped" down to an approximate voltage. No matter what that input is whether 1.3v or 1.9v it is clipped (hypothetically let's say 800mv after clipping (he didn't say how much)) that way other devices can use the PLL voltage and clip to what they need. The CPU PLL Overvoltage allows for less clipping of that voltage. It can also reduce the lifespan of the CPU, but nothing noticeable."

"CPU PLL Voltage: Sets the voltage for the internal phase locked loop. The role of the PLL is to ensure that the output clock of the internal processor frequency synthesizers maintains phase coherency with the reference clock signal (supplied from a clock generator located within the PCH). "

So you're still going to tell me it has nothing to do with the CPU?


----------



## becks

I think you lost the plot, I started these "be careful" post in regards to the PLL voltage faulting the temp reading.
I said enough..Don't have anymore to add to the subject.


----------



## Divver

With regard to PLL, some people are posting snippets of truth and the majority of people are posting absolute nonsense.

Manufacturers often use different wording when it comes to settings, it's happened before and it will continue to happen for years to come, unless somehow they all end up using a unified BIOS solution.
Quote:


> CPU PLL Voltage: Sets the voltage for the internal phase locked loop. The role of the PLL is to ensure that the output clock of the internal processor frequency synthesizers maintains phase coherency with the reference clock signal (supplied from a clock generator located within the PCH).


The CPU PLL Voltage setting sets the voltage for the [Internal] [P]hase [L]ocked [L]oop. The CPU PLL Voltage setting is actually setting the Internal PLL voltage.

The mass confusion in this thread is being caused by people confusing PLL Voltage for PLL Overvoltage.

CPU PLL Voltage and Internal PLL Voltage are the same.
CPU PLL Overvoltage and Internal PLL Overvoltage are the same.
Quote:


> So I asked that question to an Intel Overclocking Engineer his explanation was roughly: We went through the BIOS settings trying to find setting that if changed could help overclock our CPUs further. We came across this setting. Think of the CPU PLL voltage as a voltage that is provided to the CPU, but then "clipped" down to an approximate voltage. No matter what that input is whether 1.3v or 1.9v it is clipped (hypothetically let's say 800mv after clipping (he didn't say how much)) that way other devices can use the PLL voltage and clip to what they need. The CPU PLL Overvoltage allows for less clipping of that voltage. It can also reduce the lifespan of the CPU, but nothing noticeable.


I used the following metaphor to describe this to a friend.

I have five friends (devices) come round to watch the football. I want to order some pizzas (voltage) from the local pizza shop.
I order ten pizzas. (e.g. 1.2V), they arrive and I supply them to my five friends (devices). They all take however much pizza they want (voltage clipping). One of my friends (devices) has been partying for 7 days straight and he doesn't want to eat. If he has it his way (PLL Overvoltage DISABLED), he's likely to pass out and crash the whole party (instability/bsod/crashes).
We decide to force feed the idiot so he doesn't ruin the night (PLL Overvoltage ENABLED). He eats more pizza (voltage) than he wanted to but he hasn't crashed the party. (Hooray!)
Plot twist: My mate decided not to tell us he'd been hitting the drugs hard all week. We gave him too much pizza (voltage). He **** himself. The party died (CPU dead/endoftheworldstuff).

Basically, if you don't know what you're doing or you're unsure, leave stuff the **** alone. Go on Google, do some research. Speak to the community about it.
If you don't know what you're talking about, don't further dilute the unknown with more useless information.

In my honest opinion I have absolutely no knowledge as to what the PLL is actually supplying power to within the CPU.
I also find it highly unlikely that changing this setting by as much as 0.1v would cause the internal temp sensors to report temperatures 15 degrees lower than what they were previously.
If such a setting ****ed with temperatures and negated thermal throttling I'm sure there would be more documentation and warning regarding PLL voltage and overvoltage.

My common sense has indicated to me that it's highly likely reducing the PLL would result in lower temperatures. If your CPU can run stable with a reduced PLL, I don't see why you shouldn't. My common sense also indicates to me that if you're extreme overclocking and find your system is unstable and the common voltage settings aren't improving stability. Increasing the PLL in the tiniest available increments and enabling PLL overvoltage may improve stability.

In terms of people arguing about PLL adjusting the actual temperatures the CPU is reporting. I'm not too sure about the newer boards but the ASUS H87M-PLUS system I'm posting off now has a motherboard sensor section in HWiNFO64. This reports a CPU and CPU (PECI) temperature from the motherboard Nuvoton NCT6791D.
I imagine if lowering the PLL voltage caused the core temps to lie as people have stated, then it wouldn't make the motherboard sensors lie too. I've already checked a Z270 board with a 7700K on and the CPU (PECI) temp does change with the core temps therefore I would say the PLL voltage IS directly effecting the temperatures and not causing them to report falsely.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I think you lost the plot, I started these "be careful" post in regards to the PLL voltage faulting the temp reading.
> I said enough..Don't have anymore to add to the subject.


And yet you have ZERO proof that this makes the readings report falsely.


----------



## ducegt

I've shared this before, but maybe someone else will be curious to see for themselves. Compare load voltage of PLL 1.1 and 1.2 or higher. I swear I saw an increase of PLL increase my load voltage by 12mV.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sin0822*
> 
> *CPU PLL Voltage Override (Overvoltage): What the Heck does it do?*
> So I asked that question to an Intel Overclocking Engineer his explanation was roughly: We went through the BIOS settings trying to find setting that if changed could help overclock our CPUs further. We came across this setting. Think of the CPU PLL voltage as a voltage that is provided to the CPU, but then "clipped" down to an approximate voltage. No matter what that input is whether 1.3v or 1.9v it is clipped (hypothetically let's say 800mv after clipping (he didn't say how much)) that way other devices can use the PLL voltage and clip to what they need. The CPU PLL Overvoltage allows for less clipping of that voltage. It can also reduce the lifespan of the CPU, but nothing noticeable.
> So those of you who think that increasing your PLL voltage will help with that setting, it really doesn't. But with SBe I have found that increased CPU PLL can help stabilize higher frequency overclocks. That wasn't the case with SB.


Nice read from 2011
You just know enough to be dangerous..
Till you take some dmm readings or CPU external temps ( not the ones from software ) i will keep to what I said in regards to temperature.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Nice read from 2011
> You just know enough to be dangerous..
> Till you take some dmm readings or CPU external temps ( not the ones from software ) i will keep to what I said in regards to temperature.


You have still, zero evidence for your claims. Stop being ridiculous.


----------



## MaKeN

There isnt really that much about pll voltage on google ( i mean on forums) , when i was digging to find more info about it , thing like " lowering pll oc voltage causes strange temps/lower temps/false temps" there are almost no threads from users about this. Google would give me instead, threads where guys did ( older platforms ) increase it and asking each other whats the max safe pll voltage they can use. So it means now with newer boards things changed and somehow all this became comfusing , we now benefit from not increasing but lowering it


----------



## Divver

@becks
I've already seen readings from Infrared Thermometers thanks, it's irrelevant that the PLL overvoltage read is from 2011. It's still the same ******* thing you moron.

@MaKeN
The key thing here is that it is still voltage. Less voltage will result in lower temperatures, more voltage will result in higher temperatures.
Certain people who have unstable clocks MAY benefit from increasing it. People who have stable clocks may benefit from decreasing it to lower temperatures if they remain stable.

I don't understand why people are trying to turn PLL voltage into something that it isn't. It does exactly what it says on the tin.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Is there anything else you suggest I do? My temps ingame since I changed to 1.150 PLL don't go past 62 now really.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Well, if it is called CPU PLL OC Voltage, why would it be nothing to do with the CPU voltage then? Care to explain?
> 
> I'm all for people saying things, but you can't just claim something and have no evidence of it.
> 
> Do you have evidence that lowering the **CPU PLL OC Voltage** is dangerous and makes the sensor read inaccurately?
> 
> I've yet to find ANY on the internet, from anyone, or anywhere.


never said CPU PLL has nothing to do with ..voltages on the CPU, and yes nearly all voltages we "set" are stepped down internally, but as you have seen, voltages we set DO impact the current available for the chip to do work with (that's why ya get heat). As you found out, CPU PLL aligns (and phases) signals on the die so that the various substructures/domains can comm "on the same wave length". Sooo the SIO (serial IO) which carries the DTS signal is aligned with the IO domain to provide a "distance to TJmax value". When you alter this on-die comm, the readouts you get in the OS _can be_ borked.
Bottom line is, if you are satisfied with how the rig is performing - then enjoy! (you have a K-class cpu, it's meant to be overclocked... but check out the INtel Performance Tuning PLan, just in case







)


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> never said CPU PLL has nothing to do with ..voltages on the CPU, and yes nearly all voltages we "set" are stepped down internally, but as you have seen, voltages we set DO impact the current available for the chip to do work with (that's why ya get heat). As you found out, CPU PLL aligns (and phases) signals on the die so that the various substructures/domains can comm "on the same wave length". *Sooo the SIO (serial IO) which carries the DTS signal is aligned with the IO domain to provide a "distance to TJmax value". When you alter this on-die comm, the readouts you get in the OS can be borked.*
> Bottom line is, if you are satisfied with how the rig is performing - then enjoy! (you have a K-class cpu, it's meant to be overclocked... but check out the INtel Performance Tuning PLan, just in case
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Ok so where is the proof?

My motherboard when I'm in bios also decreased temperatures, since I lowered the CPU PLL.


----------



## MaKeN

I guess ill send msi support a message about pll voltage and the temps readings after its lowerd , just because im curious what will they say
I know that on msi titan board and its the high end one from them , they wont include pll oc voltage in bios , and people dis discover some soldering thing to the board to get access to that voltage ... damn misterious


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Ok so where is the proof?
> 
> My motherboard when I'm in bios also decreased temperatures, since I lowered the CPU PLL.


I think you are generating it yourself.








no reason to go postal... if the rig is working the way you like - enjoy the damn thing already. Could simply be that board overvolts it to start.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I think you are generating it yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no reason to go postal... if the rig is working the way you like - enjoy the damn thing already. Could simply be that board overvolts it to start.


I'm not trying to be awkward.

It's just if we didn't question anything without evidence to support claims, that'd be terrible.

You claimed lowering PLL CPU voltage ''can'' b0rked temperatures in OS.

Where is the proof? That's all I'm asking.

Why can't anyone provide any?

Btw, I have a unicorn horn and I deadlift 600kg, but you'll just have to believe me.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I guess ill send msi support a message about pll voltage and the temps readings after its lowerd , just because im curious what will they say
> I know that on msi titan board and its the high end one from them , they wont include pll oc voltage in bios , and people dis discover some soldering thing to the board to get access to that voltage ... damn misterious


Let us know what MSI say about CPU PLL!!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> I'm not trying to be awkward.
> 
> It's just if we didn't question anything without evidence to support claims, that'd be terrible.
> 
> You claimed lowering PLL CPU voltage ''can'' b0rked temperatures in OS.
> 
> Where is the proof? That's all I'm asking.
> 
> Why can't anyone provide any?
> 
> Btw, I have a unicorn horn and I deadlift 600kg, but you'll just have to believe me.


Again... could simply be that the bios on that MSI board is overvolting it on Auto (which is not unusual). And it would seem that the board must be waaay off if CPU PLL is causing that much heat generation. (I do not see the same on 3 different "z" boards here 2x170 and 1x270) I provided the reason misaligned internal com signals (freq and synch) leads to degraded comm. THere's no more to explain here... and why would you think you are not generating your own proof of an effect in support of either or both??


----------



## ritchiedrama

Well if you read my post here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/5yin1d/7700k_confusion_about_temperatures_detailed_inside/

You will see that the BIOS over volted every setting and I had to manually change them. So it isn't unrealistic that CPU PLL was over volted either. It's just for some reason the AUTO setting on PLL didn't tell me what value it was actually running at. The others did.


----------



## QuickShot

Username:QuickShot
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 51
Core Frequency: 5.1
Cache Frequency:4.2
Vcore in UEFI: 1.35
Vcore: 1.36
FCLK: Reminder: 1
Cooling Solution: Delidded, Kraken X61
Stability Test: x264 9 hour

Batch Number: Malaysia L637G303
Ram Speed: 3333 16-18-18-38
Ram Voltage: 1.35
VCCIO:
VCCSA:
Motherboard: Z270 Maximus IX Hero
LLC Setting: 6


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Divver*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*


Funny how you 2 specialists have barely joined and are already trowing insults around.








Makes me see your real level clearer.

I stand for what I said regardless (the temperature and the reading to TJmax ). Either accept that I have a different opinion or go offline for couple of hours and discharge your anger somewhere else.
I don't want to be tough by you and I'm not trying to teach you either, tried to worn you about something but graved up couple of posts back if you didn't realized ..."you cant have a real argument with a fool cause hes mind is rested and will beat you"

Lets keep it to the topic lads


----------



## skingun

Hi. My CPU package temp has recently been wayyyy off the chart! Any ideas what could be causing this?





It usually only happens after my system has been idle. When I wake the computer I notice these peculiar readings.


----------



## Spiriva

Build have started =)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skingun*
> 
> Hi. My CPU package temp has recently been wayyyy off the chart! Any ideas what could be causing this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It usually only happens after my system has been idle. When I wake the computer I notice these peculiar readings.


eh, that's just a sensor glitch. If you had both HWi and AID open at the same time, it could simply be a sensor polling clash. I wouldn't worry, there no corresponding peak in watts or any thing else that would parallel that reading.


----------



## skingun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> eh, that's just a sensor glitch. If you had both HWi and AID open at the same time, it could simply be a sensor polling clash. I wouldn't worry, there no corresponding peak in watts or any thing else that would parallel that reading.


It also happens when only one is open. Good to know it's just a glitch. Seemed way out of wack, too much to be true.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skingun*
> 
> It also happens when only one is open. Good to know it's just a glitch. Seemed way out of wack, too much to be true.


yeah, you'd see other temps at the same level. Package basically reports the hottest sensor, cores, IA, GT etc. So, one of those wold also be that high. Since it happens when coming out of an S state, it's not real.


----------



## Jpmboy

1 hour realbench, [email protected]/5.0 1.325V adaptive. 3866 16-16-16-40-1T 1.425V (3600c15 2x8GB G.skill kit). Once understood a bit, the Apex is an amazing board!


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 1 hour realbench, [email protected]/5.0 1.325V
> adaptive. 3866 16-16-16-40-1T 1.425V (3600c15 2x8GB G.skill kit). Once understood a bit, the Apex is an amazing board!


That is impressive Jpmboy is that the L639F977 chip you charted with?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> That is impressive Jpmboy is that the L639F977 chip you charted with?


yes. it was in an Asrock MOCF z170 before. I made an "oops" .. I set it to 32GB of ram, there's only 16 installed.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes. it was in an Asrock MOCF z170 before. I made an "oops" .. I set it to 32GB of ram, there's only 16 installed.


Good stuff hopefully I can push mine a bit harder once my uefi issues are sorted or perhaps consider another board like the apex, would love to buy the just announced extreme but won't fit in my case.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 1 hour realbench, [email protected]/5.0 1.325V adaptive. 3866 16-16-16-40-1T 1.425V (3600c15 2x8GB G.skill kit). Once understood a bit, the Apex is an amazing board!


Very nice bud. I'm pretty sure you have the best chip they made. If there is another better, it's sitting in someone's pre-built and he has no idea of what he has.

I'm a bit jealous of those temps! Cool water is in my future. I just need to figure out how I'm piping it up from the basement so that the noise stays down there.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Very nice bud. I'm pretty sure you have the best chip they made. If there is another better, it's sitting in someone's pre-built and he has no idea of what he has.
> 
> I'm a bit jealous of those temps! Cool water is in my future. I just need to figure out how I'm piping it up from the basement so that the noise stays down there.


Eh, I'm sure there are others - and sure you'l find them.








I initially had this small aquarium chiller in the basement and put koolance QDCs in the floor using a floor electrical box, required a second boost pump to flow properly.. but moving it around as much as I do, I gave up. Now with the Koolance EXC-800 and it's stupidly strong pump (be sure to use real hose clamps







) I'm thinking of putting it down there. It is much louder than an aquarium chiller.


----------



## ducegt

There are some people who use "chiller boxes" to control temperatures with indoor gardens to tame some high thermal loads along with southern climates. If anyone wants to do some creative research...


----------



## SpeedyIV

Why not just use an external water cooling system like the AquaComputer 720XT Mark V

http://shop.aquacomputer.de/product_info.php?products_id=2991

They aren't cheap but I would think it's easier than running cold water up from your basement. They say it has a max heat dissipation of 1400 watts which is 4,781 btu/hr. This thing must beat the pants off of any combination of in-case radiators and pumps. It is about $750 (US) but has a lot of really nice features. Anyone every played with one of these things?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Why not just use an external water cooling system like the AquaComputer 720XT Mark V
> 
> http://shop.aquacomputer.de/product_info.php?products_id=2991
> 
> They aren't cheap but I would think it's easier than running cold water up from your basement. They say it has a max heat dissipation of 1400 watts which is 4,781 btu/hr. This thing must beat the pants off of any combination of in-case radiators and pumps. It is about $750 (US) but has a lot of really nice features. Anyone every played with one of these things?


That's not a water chiller bud. That is setup can get down to ambient temperature at best, but will usually be higher. We are talking about water chillers that cool water to below ambient temps. Thanks though.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Why not just use an external water cooling system like the AquaComputer 720XT Mark V
> 
> http://shop.aquacomputer.de/product_info.php?products_id=2991
> 
> They aren't cheap but I would think it's easier than running cold water up from your basement. They say it has a max heat dissipation of 1400 watts which is 4,781 btu/hr. This thing must beat the pants off of any combination of in-case radiators and pumps. It is about $750 (US) but has a lot of really nice features. Anyone every played with one of these things?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> That's not a water chiller bud. That is setup can get down to ambient temperature at best, but will usually be higher. We are talking about water chillers that cool water to below ambient temps. Thanks though.


The 720XT is a great rad system... mine's been running for 5 years now, 24/7/365. only down time is a yearly (well, mostly yearly







) flush and refill. But as 'done points out, it's 2x360 rads not a chiller. It's currently cooling a 4960X/R295x2/R4BE


----------



## SpeedyIV

Yes you are correct. That cooler is limited to ambient temperature. Thanks for the clarification. To go below ambient, you have to have an "active" cooling system involving phase change. Is that correct? Are there other methods besides phase change based cooling?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Yes you are correct. That cooler is limited to ambient temperature. Thanks for the clarification. To go below ambient, you have to have an "active" cooling system involving phase change. Is that correct? Are there other methods besides phase change based cooling?




or a simple aquarium chiller.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Ha! I would not call that monster a "simple aquarium chiller". And it's $1400 (US) - YIKES !!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Ha! I would not call that monster a "simple aquarium chiller". And it's $1400 (US) - YIKES !!


lol, okay, this:



the little guy on the lower left (like $200 or less on ebay)


----------



## Spiriva

So far so good









It seems to max out at around 60-62c (i live in the north of Sweden, EK mono waterblock) these 7700k seem to run abit more hot then my old 4790k @ 5ghz 1.4V



batch on the cpu is: L652C199


----------



## koji

Yo guys, just dropping in to say hi, put my Kaby rig together last Friday, been out of the loop for quite some time now but looking forward to OC'ing my 7700k. So far it hasn't been spectacular though, waiting for my delid kit which is stuck in customs atm...

Testing 4.8ghz atm @ 1.270 vcore bios / 1.2960 reported in windows on a MSI Gaming M7.

I'm really digging my Corsair 570x, shame that I had to take out the stock fans, way too noisy for my taste.


----------



## mimosky

I would like to go back to PLL OC voltage issues. I'm an owner of MSI Z270 M5 mainboard and 7700k CPU. I started a new thread some time ago (http://www.overclock.net/t/1621111/i7-7700k-temps-vs-ram-speed-on-z270-mainboard) concerning this matter.

Anyway, now my CPU is working at 4.7Ghz with 1.25/1.26 core voltage, 3200Mhz memory (dual sticks, 1.344V), some manually set voltages, including PLL OC set at 1.17V.
It's completely stable, realbench doesn't go over 80/81 degrees.

I'm only sure that PLL OC voltage doesn't affect the CPU performance. The question is, as many stated, if the temperature sensors show fake readings.
I asked MSI if it's possible, describing my problem really precisely, after many days of waiting they responded and sent me an UEFI screenshot showing where I can change the value of PLL OC voltage. I don't even know what to think about it. My dog would be probably more helpful than their support guys.

Today I tried to analyze the temps issue. Someone pointed out that even if PLL OC voltage is able to broke the CPU sensors readings, mainboard CPU temp sensor should be independent. Of course it's only our guess, nobody knows for sure.

I've checked CPU cores temps & MB CPU temp for PLL OC voltage 1.13, 1.17 (my setting), 1.2 (default), 1.25 and 1.3 (it's auto value if memory is OCed to 3200Mhz) in load and idle scenarios (using prime95 26.6 small FFT).

Here's the load scenario chart:



and here's the idle scenario:



As you can see the temps really increased with higher PLL OC voltage value and you can see that the hottest core temperature lines up with mainboard "whole CPU" reading.
But do you see the pattern here? The lower the PLL OC voltage the higher is the difference in separate cores temperatures.

Check this out:



With 1.13V the difference between the coldest and hottest core is from 10 to 16 degrees (depending on load/idle scenario). The difference is getting smaller for higher PLL OC voltage. With 1.3V the difference is 2 degrees on load and 1 degree on idle. ***?

For me it looks like lowering the PLL OC voltage can really break the readings, but not for the whole package. Or it's possible that the lower package temperature with lower PLL OC just results from lower core temps. Anyway, again, it's just guessing.

What do you think about it?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> I would like to go back to PLL OC voltage issues. I'm an owner of MSI Z270 M5 mainboard and 7700k CPU. I started a new thread some time ago (http://www.overclock.net/t/1621111/i7-7700k-temps-vs-ram-speed-on-z270-mainboard) concerning this matter.
> 
> Anyway, now my CPU is working at 4.7Ghz with 1.25/1.26 core voltage, 3200Mhz memory (dual sticks, 1.344V), some manually set voltages, including PLL OC set at 1.17V.
> It's completely stable, realbench doesn't go over 80/81 degrees.
> 
> I'm only sure that PLL OC voltage doesn't affect the CPU performance. The question is, as many stated, if the temperature sensors show fake readings.
> I asked MSI if it's possible, describing my problem really precisely, after many days of waiting they responded and sent me an UEFI screenshot showing where I can change the value of PLL OC voltage. I don't even know what to think about it. My dog would be probably more helpful than their support guys.
> 
> Today I tried to analyze the temps issue. Someone pointed out that even if PLL OC voltage is able to broke the CPU sensors readings, mainboard CPU temp sensor should be independent. Of course it's only our guess, nobody knows for sure.
> 
> I've checked CPU cores temps & MB CPU temp for PLL OC voltage 1.13, 1.17 (my setting), 1.2 (default), 1.25 and 1.3 (it's auto value if memory is OCed to 3200Mhz) in load and idle scenarios (using prime95 26.6 small FFT).
> 
> Here's the load scenario chart:
> 
> 
> 
> and here's the idle scenario:
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see the temps really increased with higher PLL OC voltage value and you can see that the hottest core temperature lines up with mainboard "whole CPU" reading.
> But do you see the pattern here? The lower the PLL OC voltage the higher is the difference in separate cores temperatures.
> 
> Check this out:
> 
> 
> 
> With 1.13V the difference between the coldest and hottest core is from 10 to 16 degrees (depending on load/idle scenario). The difference is getting smaller for higher PLL OC voltage. With 1.3V the difference is 2 degrees on load and 1 degree on idle. ***?
> 
> For me it looks like lowering the PLL OC voltage can really break the readings, but not for the whole package. Or it's possible that the lower package temperature with lower PLL OC just results from lower core temps. Anyway, again, it's just guessing.
> 
> What do you think about it?


well done! Excellent data. +5


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*


+1 for effort very nice!


----------



## eminded1

i got my new i7 7700k in the mail the other day. i immediately delid and cleaned an applied Cool Laboratory Liquid Metal and put the thermaltake water 3.0 360mm water cooler on it with 6 xspc static pressure fans and i used the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut on the cpu and clocked my Gskill 4000 at CL 17, the CPU at 5000mhz and ran stress doesnt get above 65C under heavy stress (55c max with realbench) 65c max with small FFT Prime 95. The chip requiers about 1.34 to stay stable at 5ghz and the ram was stock at cl 19 but i lowerd to cl 17 and its stable. Passed realbench for couple hours. 1.2 VCCIO and 1.27 VCCSA with 1.45 DRAM core voltage and 1.34 CPU VCORE. 1.3 DMI VOLTAGE LEVEL 6 LLC, 140% CPU VRM and the asus ROG maximus IX can handle it very well. Here is a picture of my build

20170310_185321.jpg 4702k .jpg file


Ill have some temp and voltage setting screenshots soon.

here are the specs
i7 7700k @ 5.0ghz at 1.34 - LVL6 LLC, 140% VRM - BATCH # - L639G050
GSkill 4000MHZ DDR4 @ 17 19 19 39 @ 1.45 Volts - VCCIO - 1.2, VCCSA - 1.27 DMI - 1.3
ASUS MAXIMUS HERO IX z270

i7 at 5GHZ idle temp - 19c - load temp - 60c
An impressive build ill have more one i get more testing done.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> I would like to go back to PLL OC voltage issues. I'm an owner of MSI Z270 M5 mainboard and 7700k CPU. I started a new thread some time ago (http://www.overclock.net/t/1621111/i7-7700k-temps-vs-ram-speed-on-z270-mainboard) concerning this matter.
> 
> Anyway, now my CPU is working at 4.7Ghz with 1.25/1.26 core voltage, 3200Mhz memory (dual sticks, 1.344V), some manually set voltages, including PLL OC set at 1.17V.
> It's completely stable, realbench doesn't go over 80/81 degrees.
> 
> I'm only sure that PLL OC voltage doesn't affect the CPU performance. The question is, as many stated, if the temperature sensors show fake readings.
> I asked MSI if it's possible, describing my problem really precisely, after many days of waiting they responded and sent me an UEFI screenshot showing where I can change the value of PLL OC voltage. I don't even know what to think about it. My dog would be probably more helpful than their support guys.
> 
> Today I tried to analyze the temps issue. Someone pointed out that even if PLL OC voltage is able to broke the CPU sensors readings, mainboard CPU temp sensor should be independent. Of course it's only our guess, nobody knows for sure.
> 
> I've checked CPU cores temps & MB CPU temp for PLL OC voltage 1.13, 1.17 (my setting), 1.2 (default), 1.25 and 1.3 (it's auto value if memory is OCed to 3200Mhz) in load and idle scenarios (using prime95 26.6 small FFT).
> 
> Here's the load scenario chart:
> 
> 
> 
> and here's the idle scenario:
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see the temps really increased with higher PLL OC voltage value and you can see that the hottest core temperature lines up with mainboard "whole CPU" reading.
> But do you see the pattern here? The lower the PLL OC voltage the higher is the difference in separate cores temperatures.
> 
> Check this out:
> 
> 
> 
> With 1.13V the difference between the coldest and hottest core is from 10 to 16 degrees (depending on load/idle scenario). The difference is getting smaller for higher PLL OC voltage. With 1.3V the difference is 2 degrees on load and 1 degree on idle. ***?
> 
> For me it looks like lowering the PLL OC voltage can really break the readings, but not for the whole package. Or it's possible that the lower package temperature with lower PLL OC just results from lower core temps. Anyway, again, it's just guessing.
> 
> What do you think about it?


How would temp react to changing pll oc voltage in windows under load using msi command center:

https://youtu.be/nioRVSqjFg0


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eminded1*
> 
> i got my new i7 7700k in the mail the other day. i immediately delid and cleaned an applied Cool Laboratory Liquid Metal and put the thermaltake water 3.0 360mm water cooler on it with 6 xspc static pressure fans and i used the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut on the cpu and clocked my Gskill 4000 at CL 17, the CPU at 5000mhz and ran stress doesnt get above 65C under heavy stress (55c max with realbench) 65c max with small FFT Prime 95. The chip requiers about 1.34 to stay stable at 5ghz and the ram was stock at cl 19 but i lowerd to cl 17 and its stable. Passed realbench for couple hours. 1.2 VCCIO and 1.27 VCCSA with 1.45 DRAM core voltage and 1.34 CPU VCORE. 1.3 DMI VOLTAGE LEVEL 6 LLC, 140% CPU VRM and the asus ROG maximus IX can handle it very well. Here is a picture of my build
> 
> 20170310_185321.jpg 4702k .jpg file
> 
> 
> Ill have some temp and voltage setting screenshots soon.
> 
> here are the specs
> i7 7700k @ 5.0ghz at 1.34 - LVL6 LLC, 140% VRM - BATCH # - L639G050
> GSkill 4000MHZ DDR4 @ 17 19 19 39 @ 1.45 Volts - VCCIO - 1.2, VCCSA - 1.27 DMI - 1.3
> ASUS MAXIMUS HERO IX z270
> 
> i7 at 5GHZ idle temp - 19c - load temp - 60c
> An impressive build ill have more one i get more testing done.


How could you get 19c idle? Room temps are like 12-15c?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> How would temp react to changing pll oc voltage in windows under load using msi command center:
> 
> https://youtu.be/nioRVSqjFg0


In general, changing phasing and alignment voltages after POST (power on self test) is not advisable if the intent is to have dependent signals "train" correctly. just my


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> In general, changing phasing and alignment voltages after POST (power on self test) is not advisable if the intent is to have dependent signals "train" correctly. just my


Right! Its not
But resoults would be identical as if i would do it from bios ... before Post

Idkn , im not in to argue or prove things... im trying to understand this thing ...

Ant thx to all here that participated and are exposing their opinions!

Look how wierd things are







well fore me)

At auto or 1.3 v on pll , temps would go to 90c , and thats on delidded cpu with custome water loop . Kinda sounds unreal right?
Seems in this case that sensor is fooled to show inaccurate high temps
After getting the pll volt down to 1.2 ( default ) it would somehow become real in temps reading.
Doing 1.1 also would make it real.
Under 1.1 it looks like its not real at idle.

So its like overvolting pll does show high temps , downvolting it shows way to low temps.
Question what voltage wont make that damn sensor be fooled


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Right! Its not
> But resoults would be identical as if i would do it from bios ... before Post
> 
> Idkn , im not in to argue or prove things... im trying to understand this thing ...
> 
> Ant thx to all here that participated and are exposing their opinions!
> 
> Look how wierd things are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> well fore me)
> 
> At auto or 1.3 v on pll , temps would go to 90c , and thats on delidded cpu with custome water loop . Kinda sounds unreal right?
> Seems in this case that sensor is fooled to show inaccurate high temps
> After getting the pll volt down to 1.2 ( default ) it would somehow become real in temps reading.
> Doing 1.1 also would make it real.
> Under 1.1 it looks like its not real at idle.
> 
> So its like overvolting pll does show high temps , downvolting it shows way to low temps.
> Question what voltage wont make that damn sensor be fooled


With PLL voltage change you are changing the output voltage for reading Core temperature.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> How could you get 19c idle? Room temps are like 12-15c?


My old msi board would read temps 5-10c below ambient at stock settings fwiw. Could it just be a common thing with them?


----------



## eminded1

id suggest checking your delid and make sure you use liquid metal and scrub the ihs with the brillo pad and make sure you put liquid metal on both surfaces the cpu silicon and the ihs and use a very small amount of thermal paste on the top of the ihs so that air doesnt get traped and cause heat also scrub the bottom of the copper water block to make sure it gets good contact with the thermal paste and ihs. i get about 19c idle and i can put the cpu pll all the way up to 1.3 and the vcore up to 1.4 and run prime 95 small fft and the chips average temp at load is 53c w peaks to 65c. just make sure you have alot of air flow and use static pressure fans on the rad so you get the most heat transfer. Get some XSPC static pressure fans i use them they are great.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Comparing 1.3V CPU PLL to 1.1V is obviously going to be a huge jump, that's not a small gap, it's a huge voltage change.

If the CPU PLL changed the tempps and gave fake readings, you'd never have accurate readings on ANY setting.

Also, every other thing in the bios was over-volted, so why wouldn't CPU PLL be over volted?

And as I said, if that is the case, then there is no reason to believe the AUTO setting is giving real temperatures.


----------



## mimosky

MaKeN, yes, the results are the same (UEFI vs Command Center).

My situation is like yours. I just want to understand, cause I don't want to burn my CPU There's something wrong, I just feel that it shouldn't work like that.
The temps on 1.3V PLL OC are just ridiculous. And... why should I believe that AUTO setting would give me true readings? Why 1.3 and not 1.28? It's just surreal.

By the way, PLL voltage is something different than PLL OC voltage. Some people mix these two up.

To be honest, I think that someone from MSI (or Intel?) should look at it. We need only one answer - does PLL OC voltage influences our sensors readings or not

PS. Thanks for warm words and reps


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> I would like to go back to PLL OC voltage issues. I'm an owner of MSI Z270 M5 mainboard and 7700k CPU. I started a new thread some time ago (http://www.overclock.net/t/1621111/i7-7700k-temps-vs-ram-speed-on-z270-mainboard) concerning this matter.
> 
> Anyway, now my CPU is working at 4.7Ghz with 1.25/1.26 core voltage, 3200Mhz memory (dual sticks, 1.344V), some manually set voltages, including PLL OC set at 1.17V.
> It's completely stable, realbench doesn't go over 80/81 degrees.
> 
> I'm only sure that PLL OC voltage doesn't affect the CPU performance. The question is, as many stated, if the temperature sensors show fake readings.
> I asked MSI if it's possible, describing my problem really precisely, after many days of waiting they responded and sent me an UEFI screenshot showing where I can change the value of PLL OC voltage. I don't even know what to think about it. My dog would be probably more helpful than their support guys.
> 
> Today I tried to analyze the temps issue. Someone pointed out that even if PLL OC voltage is able to broke the CPU sensors readings, mainboard CPU temp sensor should be independent. Of course it's only our guess, nobody knows for sure.
> 
> I've checked CPU cores temps & MB CPU temp for PLL OC voltage 1.13, 1.17 (my setting), 1.2 (default), 1.25 and 1.3 (it's auto value if memory is OCed to 3200Mhz) in load and idle scenarios (using prime95 26.6 small FFT).
> 
> Here's the load scenario chart:
> 
> 
> 
> and here's the idle scenario:
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see the temps really increased with higher PLL OC voltage value and you can see that the hottest core temperature lines up with mainboard "whole CPU" reading.
> But do you see the pattern here? The lower the PLL OC voltage the higher is the difference in separate cores temperatures.
> 
> Check this out:
> 
> 
> 
> With 1.13V the difference between the coldest and hottest core is from 10 to 16 degrees (depending on load/idle scenario). The difference is getting smaller for higher PLL OC voltage. With 1.3V the difference is 2 degrees on load and 1 degree on idle. ***?
> 
> For me it looks like lowering the PLL OC voltage can really break the readings, but not for the whole package. Or it's possible that the lower package temperature with lower PLL OC just results from lower core temps. Anyway, again, it's just guessing.
> 
> What do you think about it?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> MaKeN, yes, the results are the same (UEFI vs Command Center).
> 
> My situation is like yours. I just want to understand, cause I don't want to burn my CPU There's something wrong, I just feel that it shouldn't work like that.
> The temps on 1.3V PLL OC are just ridiculous. And... why should I believe that AUTO setting would give me true readings? Why 1.3 and not 1.28? It's just surreal.
> 
> By the way, PLL voltage is something different than PLL OC voltage. Some people mix these two up.
> 
> To be honest, I think that someone from MSI (or Intel?) should look at it. We need only one answer - does PLL OC voltage influences our sensors readings or not
> 
> PS. Thanks for warm words and reps


I made a post here:

https://communities.intel.com/thread/112262

With your post too, hope thats ok.


----------



## mimosky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> I made a post here:
> 
> https://communities.intel.com/thread/112262
> 
> With your post too, hope thats ok.


OK, good idea


----------



## Divver

I performed similar tests using HWiNFO64 and the logging feature over a preset period of time.

I dumped the CSV's into spreadsheet and charted my results including average, min, max and range.

As you can see, 1.15v PLL had a difference of 5 degrees between all cores over a preset period of time at idle and a difference of 6 degrees at full load. 1.3v PLL had an idle difference of 1 degree and a load difference of 3 degrees so it does seem the results were more consistent at a higher PLL.

I am shocked the difference at full load at 1.15v is only 6 degrees whereas Mimo's was almost 15 degrees.

The only possible solution I can see at this point is to externally read the CPU temperature at 1.15v and 1.3v and confirm the temperature changes. My results show a range of 22-27 degrees at idle at 1.15v and a clearly consistent 35 degrees at idle at 1.3v.

If I could externally record this 8-13 degree change with a device such as an Infrared thermometer then surely that would throw the borking with the sensors theory out of the window?


----------



## spddmn24

My pll oc voltage is only 0.6 on auto with my asus maximus ix hero. I set regular pll to 1.0 since that's what bios said is normal in the tooltip which helped temps a bit which hit 1.2 with my overclock. On default settings it was also 1.0. Temps seem normal to me, no under ambient readings or anything weird like that.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Right! Its not
> But resoults would be identical as if i would do it from bios ... before Post
> 
> Idkn , im not in to argue or prove things... im trying to understand this thing ...
> 
> Ant thx to all here that participated and are exposing their opinions!
> 
> Look how wierd things are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> well fore me)
> 
> At auto or 1.3 v on pll , temps would go to 90c , and thats on delidded cpu with custome water loop . Kinda sounds unreal right?
> Seems in this case that sensor is fooled to show inaccurate high temps
> After getting the pll volt down to 1.2 ( default ) it would somehow become real in temps reading.
> Doing 1.1 also would make it real.
> Under 1.1 it looks like its not real at idle.
> 
> So its like overvolting pll does show high temps , downvolting it shows way to low temps.
> Question what voltage wont make that damn sensor be fooled


What happens if you go to 1.35/1.4? Do it in the thing and take a video if you will?

Because the issue here is.

If default is 1.2, 1.3 is AUTO - IF the temps/sensors are fake, no-one can trust any setting, period.

No-one actually knows what temperatures they have, because every single setting would be possibly false.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> My pll oc voltage is only 0.6 on auto with my asus maximus ix hero. I set regular pll to 1.0 since that's what bios said is normal in the tooltip which helped temps a bit which hit 1.2 with my overclock. On default settings it was also 1.0. Temps seem normal to me, no under ambient readings or anything weird like that.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Yeah mine is around the same, 0.56v on Auto, but my ram is only at it's default 2800Mhz and a overclock of 4.8Ghz (cache on default).
Temps don't change at all for me no matter what I set


----------



## ritchiedrama

People who have had the same issue/temperature problems and CPU PLL OC Voltage, please support these topics if we want an answer:

https://communities.intel.com/thread/112262 - Intel forums

https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=283236.0 - MSI forums

Thanks


----------



## cech12

I think i hit the jackpot. 5.1 stable under very high IBT + prime95 with 1.31v




CPU-Z


----------



## skingun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eminded1*
> 
> id suggest checking your delid and make sure you use liquid metal and scrub the ihs with the brillo pad and make sure you put liquid metal on both surfaces the cpu silicon and the ihs and use a very small amount of thermal paste on the top of the ihs so that air doesnt get traped and cause heat also scrub the bottom of the copper water block to make sure it gets good contact with the thermal paste and ihs. i get about 19c idle and i can put the cpu pll all the way up to 1.3 and the vcore up to 1.4 and run prime 95 small fft and the chips average temp at load is 53c w peaks to 65c. just make sure you have alot of air flow and use static pressure fans on the rad so you get the most heat transfer. Get some XSPC static pressure fans i use them they are great.


This advice seems irresponsible.

Why the heck would you scrub your heatsink with a brillo pad!!??


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cech12*
> 
> I think i hit the jackpot. 5.1 stable under very high IBT + prime95 with 1.31v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPU-Z


Looks like a great chip! What's your RAM at? The scoring of CB and speed of IBT look oddly low so that's either from slower RAM or throttling. Regardless, still looks very good.


----------



## cech12

false
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Looks like a great chip! What's your RAM at? The scoring of CB and speed of IBT look oddly low so that's either from slower RAM or throttling. Regardless, still looks very good.


It s not throttling, it was at around 2k dont remember the exact freq. i will do further testing in the upcoming days, i ve had it like that for the past 3 days under heavy CFD simulation and it worked without any crash so far.









Btw not delidded yet which makes it quite impressive under an ANTEC 1250


----------



## eminded1

I delid and applied cool laboratory liquid pro on the die and the ihs and put thermal grizzly on the ihs to the copper water block after scrubbing with the brillo pad and my cooler is the thermaltake water 3.0 360mm rad with 6 xspc static pressure fans at 2000rpm oced the i7 7770k to 5 ghz at 1.35 (bios) lvl 6 llc, the cpu averages about 55-60c while running small fft prime and realbench never gets above 65c not bad but what do you expect with a 200$ water cooling setup.


----------



## MooMoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eminded1*
> 
> I delid and applied cool laboratory liquid pro on the die and the ihs and put thermal grizzly on the ihs to the copper water block after scrubbing with the brillo pad and my cooler is the thermaltake water 3.0 360mm rad with 6 xspc static pressure fans at 2000rpm oced the i7 7770k to 5 ghz at 1.35 (bios) lvl 6 llc, the cpu averages about 55-60c while running small fft prime and realbench never gets above 65c not bad but what do you expect with a 200$ water cooling setup.


Why would you scurb with brillo pad?


----------



## eminded1

the pad that comes with the liquid pro is almost like a brillo pad it scraches the surface so the thermal paste sinks into it better.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eminded1*
> 
> the pad that comes with the liquid pro is almost like a brillo pad it scraches the surface so the thermal paste sinks into it better.


Lol, i was all time thinking that this pad that comes with lmp is for removing the old lm. It actually worked well when i did reaply LM on ihs. Lm wont come off easy from inner IHS side if you wont use this pad they supply.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Lol, i was all time thinking that this pad that comes with lmp is for removing the old lm. It actually worked well when i did reaply LM on ihs. Lm wont come off easy from inner IHS side if you wont use this pad they supply.


Did you try going above 1.3 in the msi program to see if the temps get higher?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Did you try going above 1.3 in the msi program to see if the temps get higher?


The program show going above 1.3 in red color , kinda afraid to do so... we already see how big the efect is from changing 0.1 v on it , so overvolting beyond the max limit that comand center shows , scares me


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol, okay, this:
> 
> 
> 
> the little guy on the lower left (like $200 or less on ebay)


So... Is there a cooling system you DON'T own? Make me jealous


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> So... Is there a cooling system you DON'T own? Make me jealous




(no cryogenic stuff







)


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hiikeri*
> 
> Against condension:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [email protected] CineBench R15 (CPU L643G242)


As you get more comfortable, nothing is needed on bottom of chip. Some eraser in socket between chip and retainer after chip is installed is more than capable of keeping moisture out. It is really about knowing when to stop to prevent any damage. As long as the pot and board have a layer of insulation, there are no worries. -20 and warmer is the danger zone when the temps of pot and warmer ambient air can create condensation. Getting it cold and keeping it cold removes a lot of issues and worry. As soon as you end your session remember to unplug psu.
It is prudent to remount and repaste between every session.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 
> 
> (no cryogenic stuff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


I was 1/2 expecting a "yet" at the end there


----------



## hotrod717

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I was 1/2 expecting a "yet" at the end there


He has a open invitation. Just do it!!!!
Seriously, I believe he knows how addictive it coud be.


----------



## MikeS3000

Edit:
My submission for the chart didn't follow proper instructions so I will redo at a later time.


----------



## MikeS3000

The better question I have is it safe to run this vcore 24/7? Temps averaged 72c for 8 hours and peaked at 77c. I'm testing 5.1 no avx offset right now on Realbench and voltage spikes at 1.44 when an avx instruction kicks in. With offset I ran 1.42 steady for 8 hours. I know I can run 5.0 no offset with vcore under 1.4. What would you pick for daily use?


----------



## cech12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*
> 
> The better question I have is it safe to run this vcore 24/7? Temps averaged 72c for 8 hours and peaked at 77c. I'm testing 5.1 no avx offset right now on Realbench and voltage spikes at 1.44 when an avx instruction kicks in. With offset I ran 1.42 steady for 8 hours. I know I can run 5.0 no offset with vcore under 1.4. What would you pick for daily use?


someone says if u are under 1.5 u are fine but personally i wouldnt go over 1.35 for 24/7. 1.4+ is hella lot.
u are either unlucky or u need to refine ur oc because to me looks really high vcore to get 5.1


----------



## MikeS3000

I'm stuck regarding what else to tweak to get vcore down. My last 5.1 run I bumped vcore 0.1 at a time until realbench passed 8 hours. Up to 1.39 it would blue screen between 1 and 2 hours. Cache frequency too high? Vccio and sa voltages are on auto in bios. Will tweaking those allow me to drop vcore?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*
> 
> The better question I have is it safe to run this vcore 24/7? Temps averaged 72c for 8 hours and peaked at 77c. I'm testing 5.1 no avx offset right now on Realbench and voltage spikes at 1.44 when an avx instruction kicks in. With offset I ran 1.42 steady for 8 hours. I know I can run 5.0 no offset with vcore under 1.4. What would you pick for daily use?


Stay with 5.1. I'm doing 5.2 peeking at 1.47, but it's usually 1.44. Vcore requirement varies a lot by motherboard models. My temps are under 75 after 8 hours of realbench and my everyday use is far less demanding, and I'm sure yours is as well. I did 5.0 at 1.28 before the delid so it was a huge jump to 5.2. I'm not worried. I've been running chips over the hive minds recommendation on air cooling for more than a decade and haven't seen a chip die or noticeably degrade.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> He has a open invitation. Just do it!!!!
> Seriously, I believe he knows how addictive it coud be.


Now that setup is WAY past what I would try. Looks like something they pulled out of the Roswell dashboard


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*
> 
> The better question I have is it safe to run this vcore 24/7? Temps averaged 72c for 8 hours and peaked at 77c. I'm testing 5.1 no avx offset right now on Realbench and voltage spikes at 1.44 when an avx instruction kicks in. With offset I ran 1.42 steady for 8 hours. I know I can run 5.0 no offset with vcore under 1.4. What would you pick for daily use?


You can run 1.44Vcore max at 90c 24/7.


----------



## Jpmboy

Might not be all that many "24/7's" at that voltage and temperature.


----------



## MikeS3000

So I just passed at 5.0 ghz RealBench 8 hours with no AVX offset at 1.365 vcore in bios and it ramps up to about 1.39-1.40 under heavy load. I think this may be my daily setup as it keeps voltage under 1.4. I'm not sure it's worth it to push to 1.44v just to get an extra 100mhz of speed and still only run 5.0 AVX instructions. I know under 1.5 is Intel's max voltage spec, but getting up to 1.44 makes me nervous for some reason. It's a lot of extra wattage and temperature as well.


----------



## redone13

I don't see a problem with going over 1.4 by a little bit, especially with adaptive voltage or C-states. It is even stated that a "ballsy" person could do it with caution in the original post. If one's temps are within reason and considering how most people don't stress test 24/7, I'd say the majority will probably end up upgrading their platform before the chip dies or at least experiences severe degradation. Granted none of us know the long term effects due to the how new the CPU is, if one is comfortable with 1.4, then what's another .02v or .04v, again assuming temperatures are within reason.


----------



## 77792

I can confirm that the PLL OC Voltage also drops the temperature of the CPU(7700K) in the MSI Z270 Gaming M3.
1.3 PLL (auto after setting RAM XMP to 3000 Mhz) = 83ºC on Core 2 100% load
1.2 PLL (default setting, RAM still at 3000 Mhz) = 74ºC on Core 2 100% load

MB sensor also reports a lower temperature by lowering PLL Voltage.

MB giving high voltages to SA and IO Voltages too, 1.25V for both.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> I can confirm that the PLL OC Voltage also drops the temperature of the CPU(7700K) in the MSI Z270 Gaming M3.
> 1.3 PLL (auto after setting RAM XMP to 3000 Mhz) = 83ºC on Core 2 100% load
> 1.2 PLL (default setting, RAM still at 3000 Mhz) = 74ºC on Core 2 100% load
> 
> MB sensor also reports a lower temperature by lowering PLL Voltage.
> 
> MB giving high voltages to SA and IO Voltages too, 1.25V for both.


I contacted elmor who works for ASUS and he has Master's in Microelectronics. The PLL (Phase-locked loop) skews the on-die temp sensor with reference or supply voltage to the ADC (Analog Digital Converter)

elmor
Quote:


> PLL Termination is known to skew the on-die temp sensors, that's what you're talking about I presume? Is there anything specific you'd like to know regarding the CPU PLL? Essentially it takes in the base clock and modulates it up to the core and uncore clocks.


elmor
Quote:


> Typically increasing the Core PLL voltage can help the PLL stability at high output frequencies (above 60x Core Ratio), it's not related to CPU Core Voltage. PLL Termination helps when increasing the BCLK or reaching higher frequency during LN2 scenarios. I don't have specifics on the internal layout of Intel's CPUs, but most likely PLL Termination is also used as reference or supply voltage to the ADC which is reading the on-chip thermal sensor.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I contacted elmor who works for ASUS and he has Master's in Microelectronics. The PLL (Phase-locked loop) skews the on-die temp sensor with reference or supply voltage to the ADC (Analog Digital Converter)
> 
> elmor
> elmor


Once again, absolute nonsense.

So how is anyone supposed to know which CPU PLL to use?

You are not seeking answers, merely posting crap over three different forums.

And once again, no proof just a few lines and words.

If this is "known" to do it, why is there like no documentation about it anywhere?


----------



## ducegt

I can see both sides here. There is truth in both camps. We don't yet have a detailed explanation from a person of adequate authority, and we likely won't be getting it. It's too complicated and would likely require diagrams to illustrate how PLL interacts with the sensors. Not to mention an understanding of the ICs in play.

So, we must accept we don't know and that we can't know. We take risks running our chips out of spec. If one isn't comfortable with their PLL and temperatures, that's on them. I honestly dont care much what my temperatures are. I only care if my PC is stable or not and that it's fast. I'm also not trying to fry it in a week's time, but that's a risk I accept.


----------



## ducegt

It's not only MSI, but perhaps you should focus your efforts on their channels instead of making demands and passing your less than civil judgements of content and people here.


----------



## mimosky

Well, I'm not an expert, but PLL voltage != PLL OC voltage. The PLL OC setting is MSI-only. If other manufacturers use something like that - its name is different.

I see one logical problem here - if it's true, that changing PLL OC voltage make temp readings skewed, then... what are the real temps? With PLL OC set on 1.2V? Or maybe default auto 1.3V when you overclock your memory to 3000/3200Mhz? Or something between? It's just ridiculous and not possible to work like that. There is no difference between 2133Mhz and 3200Mhz CPU temps. The difference is generated by PLL OC auto setting going from 1.2V to 1.3V.

I can see where's that Ritchie frustration is coming from. I'm also frustrated. I cannot accept this setting auto value, because 90 degrees is not what I should see when stressing my CPU by NON-AVX program using 1kilo cooler. On the other side, I'm not sure that these temps are real anyway, so I'm afraid my CPU will be damaged some time.


----------



## ritchiedrama

JUst received some information from Intel:

"We are fully aware of the inconveniences and the frustration this issue might have caused you.

We would definitely suggest you to set the values in BIOS in default, because the mother board manufacturers and Intel work together to set a specific parameters for the CPU's voltage and settings. Anything else that is not enabled or disabled by default could potentially affect the CPU behavior/temperature.
Therefore, could you be please so kind, and tell us what is the temperature of your CPU, when the BIOS is set in default settings?

Could you please send us a photo of that?"

So my response:

"This is where the issue lies.

What is the default PLL setting?

If I go into BIOS it is set to AUTO (1.3) if I go onto the setting it says DEFAULT 1.2 - which should I use?

If I select 1.2 my temperatures drop by 5-10 degrees, if I set 1.3 they raise. If I set 1.15 my temps drop even further.

I've ran the Intel tool and my temps are fine, infact, theyre fine most the time but the problem is, i need to know which is the real value because one is hotter than the other, and some people are having worse temperatures than myself so i can help them.

So is AUTO the correct setting? Or is default (manually changing to 1.2) the correct setting.

I think Intel need to speak with MSI and find out how this should be, as changing this CPU PLL OC Voltage severely affects temperatures.

I've tested temps in BIoS, intel tool, HWmonitor, Realtemp, etc.#"

Mimosky, can you set your bios to default (no overclocks) and then open the control center and tell me what the default PPL OC is then? (I'm on my phone right now and can't).


----------



## mimosky

It's 1.2V on fully default.

But when I use X.M.P. to OC my memory (or just manually set 3200Mhz, without using XMP profile) the auto value becomes 1.3V.


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> Well, I'm not an expert, but PLL voltage != PLL OC voltage. The PLL OC setting is MSI-only. If other manufacturers use something like that - its name is different.
> 
> I see one logical problem here - if it's true, that changing PLL OC voltage make temp readings skewed, then... what are the real temps? With PLL OC set on 1.2V? Or maybe default auto 1.3V when you overclock your memory to 3000/3200Mhz? Or something between? It's just ridiculous and not possible to work like that. There is no difference between 2133Mhz and 3200Mhz CPU temps. The difference is generated by PLL OC auto setting going from 1.2V to 1.3V.
> 
> I can see where's that Ritchie frustration is coming from. I'm also frustrated. I cannot accept this setting auto value, because 90 degrees is not what I should see when stressing my CPU by NON-AVX program using 1kilo cooler. On the other side, I'm not sure that these temps are real anyway, so I'm afraid my CPU will be damaged some time.


Thats how i feel. My gf wants me to overclock her system, but i wont feel confortable because i dont know what the real temps are.
If messing with the PLL OC Voltage really "breaks" the die-sensors, what voltage will show me the real temps? 1.2V Default setting? 1.3V after setting XMP Profiles? 1.25V? 1.33? Maybe 1.15?
I really think MSI should give us some clear answers here about that issue, because right now, i would say overclocking on MSI Z270 boards IS NOT SAFE.


----------



## mimosky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> Thats how i feel. My gf wants me to overclock her system, but i wont feel confortable because i dont know what the real temps are.
> If messing with the PLL OC Voltage really "breaks" the die-sensors, what voltage will show me the real temps? 1.2V Default setting? 1.3V after setting XMP Profiles? 1.25V? 1.33? Maybe 1.15?
> I really think MSI should give us some clear answers here about that issue, because right now, i would say overclocking on MSI Z270 boards IS NOT SAFE.


Exactly what I think.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> i would say overclocking on MSI Z270 boards IS NOT SAFE.


I think you're going a bit over the top there... a few degrees C hardly makes anything unsafe. I suggest simply enjoying your system rather than fretting over this.


----------



## SweWiking

These 7700k sure gets hot. I got mine under water (EK block) on a Gigabyte board (Gigabyte Aorus GA-Z270X-Gaming 5). I got it running at 5ghz using 1.325v and the cpu spikes to around 71c, while normal gaming its around 55-65c (depending on game).

I tried re-installing the waterblock but it didnt do anything, then i read on the web that these chips get really warm. I guess the only real solution is to delid it, maybe i have to do that when the summer comes to keep the temp in check.


----------



## mimosky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> I think you're going a bit over the top there... a few degrees C hardly makes anything unsafe. I suggest simply enjoying your system rather than fretting over this.


For my system it's something like 9 degrees difference between two fully stable configurations (prime 26.6 load with manual 75% fan RPM). For me it's huge.

PS. Manual RPM set only for testing purposes.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> For my system it's something like 9 degrees difference between two fully stable configurations (prime 26.6 load with manual 75% fan RPM). For me it's huge.
> 
> PS. Manual RPM set only for testing purposes.


The difference from my ambient temperature in North America is more than 9C different than India or Australia...


----------



## mimosky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> The difference from my ambient temperature in North America is more than 9C different than India or Australia...


So? I'm talking about two stable configurations in my room


----------



## MaKeN

Guys : who has time and running prime 95 or other hard stress test.
What are you t1 tremps in hwinfo or cputin temps in cpuid hw monitor?
Thx


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> So? I'm talking about two stable configurations in my room


Which would most likely still be stable in a room that's even 9C warmer. It's stable during prime95 and everything else you will do is far less demanding, so why are you obsessed with something trivial? Error on the safe side if your losing sleep...


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> JUst received some information from Intel:
> 
> "We are fully aware of the inconveniences and the frustration this issue might have caused you.
> 
> We would definitely suggest you to set the values in BIOS in default, because the mother board manufacturers and Intel work together to set a specific parameters for the CPU's voltage and settings. Anything else that is not enabled or disabled by default could potentially affect the CPU behavior/temperature.
> Therefore, could you be please so kind, and tell us what is the temperature of your CPU, when the BIOS is set in default settings?
> 
> Could you please send us a photo of that?"
> 
> So my response:
> 
> "This is where the issue lies.
> 
> What is the default PLL setting?
> 
> If I go into BIOS it is set to AUTO (1.3) if I go onto the setting it says DEFAULT 1.2 - which should I use?
> 
> *If I select 1.2 my temperatures drop by 5-10 degrees, if I set 1.3 they raise. If I set 1.15 my temps drop even further.
> *
> I've ran the Intel tool and my temps are fine, infact, theyre fine most the time but the problem is, i need to know which is the real value because one is hotter than the other, and some people are having worse temperatures than myself so i can help them.
> 
> So is AUTO the correct setting? Or is default (manually changing to 1.2) the correct setting.
> 
> I think Intel need to speak with MSI and find out how this should be, as changing this CPU PLL OC Voltage severely affects temperatures.
> 
> I've tested temps in BIoS, intel tool, HWmonitor, Realtemp, etc.#"
> 
> Mimosky, can you set your bios to default (no overclocks) and then open the control center and tell me what the default PPL OC is then? (I'm on my phone right now and can't).


I am sorry if I am missing something here, but what is unusual about CPU temps going down when you lower the PLL voltage? Voltage generates heat & we can control more volts than just the Vcore, so what is so unusual about CPU generating less heat when you feed it less voltage??









Sorry, I'm just confused. Lower volts = lower temps, it has always been like this. Laws of physics and all....

Edit:- As for your correct setting question, the answer is, it depends. Not every piece of silicon is the same, my CPU might need 1.2 PLL @ 5Ghz to be stable, while yours might be able to function with 1.15V. Intel/Msi configure the volts with enough margin to account for the variances in silicon. So that all chips work, not just the ones that can work at 1.15V.

Undervolting to lower temps has been a thing even for Phone SOC for years now.


----------



## mimosky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> I am sorry if I am missing something here, but what is unusual about CPU temps going down when you lower the PLL voltage? Voltage generates heat & we can control more volts than just the Vcore, so what is so unusual about CPU generating less heat when you feed it less voltage??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I'm just confused. Lower volts = lower temps, it has always been like this. Laws of physics and all....


Well, I was thinking the same way. Then I saw some guy talking that it's possible that lowering PLL OC voltage can skew temp readings


----------



## rt123

Well there's a way to verify if the temps are really lower or if they are "skewed". Asus motherboards have a hole in the center of the socket that allows you to slip in a temperature probe from the back of the motherboard & have it touch the CPU to monitor temps. This is mostly meant for Cryogenic use, but someone can use it to verify if the temps really go down with lower the PLL volts or if they are just "skewed".

This is the only reliable way i can think of to test this.


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> I think you're going a bit over the top there... a few degrees C hardly makes anything unsafe. I suggest simply enjoying your system rather than fretting over this.


So let me give you an exemple.

When i overclock my systems, i like that my cores temperature dont go over 85ºC. WHAT IF because the die-sensor is f*cked up, my temps are 95º-100ºC REAL and programs like RealTemp are showing "just" 85ºC?

I think whats happening here is pretty dangerous, high temps at high voltages can fry your CPU.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> So let me give you an exemple.
> 
> When i overclock my systems, i like that my cores temperature dont go over 85ºC. WHAT IF because the die-sensor is f*cked up, my temps are 95º-100ºC REAL and programs like RealTemp are showing "just" 85ºC?


It would be unstable and crash without you knowing why?

also

https://click.intel.com/tuningplan/

Maybe it's just me being used to Asus wording

what do you need the PLL voltage for anyway?

from the top of my head
the only setting I had was PLL termination voltage
and when I tried 53 as a multiplier the board increased the value to 1.6v
edit:
and temps shot up by over 20 degrees in idle

but it a huge jump in voltage
I think 1v was standard


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> It would be unstable and crash without you knowing why?
> 
> also
> 
> https://click.intel.com/tuningplan/
> 
> Maybe it's just me being used to Asus wording
> 
> what do you need the PLL voltage for anyway?
> 
> from the top of my head
> the only setting I had was PLL termination voltage
> and when I tried 53 as a multiplier the board increased the value to 1.6v
> 
> I think 1v was standard


I dont need the PLL OC Voltage, the question here is that changing that voltage at MSI boards change the CPU temperature drastically. Default is 1.2V, but after setting RAM XMP to 3000 Mhz and leaving PLL OC Voltage on auto, it raises to 1.3V, and CPU temperature rises up to 10ºC.
We are discussing here to know if changing the PLL OC Voltage REALLY changes the temperature or the die-sensor get skewed up. IF the die-sensor get skewed up, should i trust the temperature from 1.2V or 1.3V?


----------



## MaKeN

Guys im doing some stress test at the moment using prime 95, meanwhile using my IRT gun ( i know its kinda stupid test but at least something) , i am shooting my mb from the back where cpu touches the metal and where capacitators do also touch the mb, in other words weld points.

So first for capacitators temps
T1 or cputin in hwinfo and hw monitor:


And the irt in real life ( i mean not in software







)

So as you see temps do match but because that screw that hold capacitators heatsing is expose to real 23c temperature air in my room, would show some lower temps and not by that much.

Next ill test cpu under load of pll 1.1v vs 1.3v


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> I dont need the PLL OC Voltage, the question here is that changing that voltage at MSI boards change the CPU temperature drastically. Default is 1.2V, but after setting RAM XMP to 3000 Mhz and leaving PLL OC Voltage on auto, it raises to 1.3V, and CPU temperature rises up to 10ºC.
> We are discussing here to know if changing the PLL OC Voltage REALLY changes the temperature or the die-sensor get skewed up. IF the die-sensor get skewed up, should i trust the temperature from 1.2V or 1.3V?


Why not set it manually to the default value
it's what I had to do

and leave it at that, knowing the DEFAULT setting is most likely the right one

as far as I know my board setting this value to 1.6 is a bug that has been "plaguing" Asus boards for some time
but only once you hit 5300Mhz

and if left on auto


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Guys im doing some stress test at the moment using prime 95, meanwhile using my IRT gun ( i know its kinda stupid test but at least something) , i am shooting my mb from the back where cpu touches the metal and where capacitators do also touch the mb, in other words weld points.
> 
> So first for capacitators temps
> T1 or cputin in hwinfo and hw monitor:
> 
> 
> And the irt in real life ( i mean not in software
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> So as you see temps do match but because that screw that hold capacitators heatsing is expose to real 23c temperature air in my room, would show some lower temps and not by that much.
> 
> Next ill test cpu under load of pll 1.1v vs 1.3v


Well cool you do this

sigh
I don't really want to do it myself as I'm having less time IRL these days

but my AiO does have a temp sensor for the water temperature

if increasing the PLL does increase you're CPU temp
then the water temp should be also higher

well if everything else is left the same (fan/pump speed, stresstest and load,time for the water to reach equilibrium)


----------



## MaKeN

Ok so for 1.1v pll oc voltage , shooting the hottest pond of metal backplate behind the cpu
Software:


Vs irt:



Next test is 1.3 v pll , i must give it some time to make sure it got heated up....


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Ok so for 1.1v pll oc voltage , shooting the hottest pond of metal backplate behind the cpu
> Software:
> 
> 
> Vs irt:
> 
> 
> 
> Next test is 1.3 v pll , i must give it some time to make sure it got heated up....












Getting excited to see 1.3V results.


----------



## MaKeN

[quote name="Vommok" url="/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/990#pos

Yep me too , never done it before with 1.3 , but ill still give it like another 10 mins .... il make sure to shoot same exact point.


----------



## MaKeN

Well ill give it another 10 min ....
Its 71 now :


Remember this is overvolted pll oc its not 1.2 as it should be, its 1.3. If in theory downvolting pll oc would couse fault reading in lowering temps , means overvolting woulg couse it to show way to high temps ( in software)


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Well ill give it another 10 min ....
> Its 71 now :
> 
> 
> Remember this is overvolted pll oc its not 1.2 as it should be, its 1.3. If in theory downvolting pll oc would couse fault reading in lowering temps , means overvolting woulg couse it to show way to high temps ( in software)


Just to be sure the results will be accurate, how long did you run prime95 at 1.1V? Long enough to stabilize the temperature?


----------



## mimosky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Well ill give it another 10 min ....
> Its 71 now :
> 
> 
> Remember this is overvolted pll oc its not 1.2 as it should be, its 1.3. If in theory downvolting pll oc would couse fault reading in lowering temps , means overvolting woulg couse it to show way to high temps ( in software)


For me it's important that PLL OC 1.3V is 71C and 1.1V is 66C with your measures. That shows that the temp difference is real, of course, we all realize it's not a 100% accurate measurement.


----------



## MaKeN

Ok so afte like 20 mins running 1.3 pll voltage testing it with irt and prime 95 :
Software :


Vs irt:



So my thought for now are , ikn 1.1 v on pll oc voltage showed acurate reaoult (kinda , its an irt gun







and testing method is not the best) . And 1.3v did ahow higher temps on that metal backplate and in software , but with a big gap between them.
Im not stating anything just being here with all you that are interested in it. Do your conclusions.

But ill do a next test with not downvolted or overvolted pll oc. Ill set it on 1.2 v what the board claims to be default voltage and see temps again . But i must cool it down after that 1.3 v heat


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> Just to be sure the results will be accurate, how long did you run prime95 at 1.1V? Long enough to stabilize the temperature?


You can see it in real temps window..... it more then an hour

1.28 min vs 2:08 min so its 40 min gap between 1.1 vs 1.3


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Ok so afte like 20 mins running 1.3 pll voltage testing it with irt and prime 95 :
> Software :
> 
> 
> Vs irt:
> 
> 
> 
> So my thought for now are , ikn 1.1 v on pll oc voltage showed acurate reaoult (kinda , its an irt gun
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and testing method is not the best) . And 1.3v did ahow higher temps on that metal backplate and in software , but with a big gap between them.
> Im not stating anything just being here with all you that are interested in it. Do your conclusions.
> 
> But ill do a next test with not downvolted or overvolted pll oc. Ill set it on 1.2 v what the board claims to be default voltage and see temps again . But i must cool it down after that 1.3 v heat


Right now im feeling OK to lower PLL OC Voltage from my girlfriend computer. I'll be waiting for 1.2V results to decide between 1.1V and 1.2V.
Kinda offtopic, but i can see your MB also overvolts SA and IO Voltage. Unless you're running memories with 3866+Mhz, i think something like 1.15V SA and 1.10V IO will get the job done.


----------



## MaKeN

Pc is on idle now... cooling , because there is much liquid in that loop, it takes some time to cool it after 2 h prime testbut again, look, on idle:
Mb:


Vs irt:

Software would still spike to 43 , need a video for it but i wont , im wont lie , i dont have why


----------



## mimosky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Ok so afte like 20 mins running 1.3 pll voltage testing it with irt and prime 95 :
> Software :
> 
> 
> Vs irt:
> 
> 
> 
> So my thought for now are , ikn 1.1 v on pll oc voltage showed acurate reaoult (kinda , its an irt gun
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and testing method is not the best) . And 1.3v did ahow higher temps on that metal backplate and in software , but with a big gap between them.
> Im not stating anything just being here with all you that are interested in it. Do your conclusions.
> 
> But ill do a next test with not downvolted or overvolted pll oc. Ill set it on 1.2 v what the board claims to be default voltage and see temps again . But i must cool it down after that 1.3 v heat


Well, it's possible and probably true that the backplate just can't achieve such high temperatures (it's giving heat away etc.), so it's not indicating that PLL OC skewes temp readings.
But there is a difference between 1.1 and 1.3 and that's we're looking for


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> I am sorry if I am missing something here, but what is unusual about CPU temps going down when you lower the PLL voltage? Voltage generates heat & we can control more volts than just the Vcore, so what is so unusual about CPU generating less heat when you feed it less voltage??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I'm just confused. Lower volts = lower temps, it has always been like this. Laws of physics and all....
> 
> Edit:- As for your correct setting question, the answer is, it depends. Not every piece of silicon is the same, my CPU might need 1.2 PLL @ 5Ghz to be stable, while yours might be able to function with 1.15V. Intel/Msi configure the volts with enough margin to account for the variances in silicon. So that all chips work, not just the ones that can work at 1.15V.
> 
> Undervolting to lower temps has been a thing even for Phone SOC for years now.


No, I get it.

But everyone here is telling me its giving false readings, but no evidence.

I am in agreement with you.


----------



## mimosky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> Right now im feeling OK to lower PLL OC Voltage from my girlfriend computer. I'll be waiting for 1.2V results to decide between 1.1V and 1.2V.
> Kinda offtopic, but i can see your MB also overvolts SA and IO Voltage. Unless you're running memories with 3866+Mhz, i think something like 1.15V SA and 1.10V IO will get the job done.


Yep, my MB also sets some crazy SA and IO voltages (red font heh...). I use 1.15 and 1.1 and it's ok with 2x8GB 3200Mhz.


----------



## ducegt

It would have been better to have tested 1.3v first and then go down because we can only assume your coolant will become warmer as you test.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> It's 1.2V on fully default.
> 
> But when I use X.M.P. to OC my memory (or just manually set 3200Mhz, without using XMP profile) the auto value becomes 1.3V.


Then 1.2 is the correct value based off what Intel said, imo.

1.3 is just MSI over-volting.

However, makens testing looks interesting.

And to whoever said "it's weird that temps just drop/raise when he presses apply"..

Prime95 does the same god damn thing.

My PC crashed after a few hours at 1.10 CPU PLL OC Voltage, and then I changed it to 1.15 and its been stable since.

I infact just bought a new case and put my pc in it today, to see if i could improve temperatures. (h440 to 460X - cable management was tough! lol)

Temps are improved, I've kept it at 1.3v for now, and my max temps in prime95 are 86, but thats after 5 minutes, but it used to hit 90 fast.


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> Yep, my MB also sets some crazy SA and IO voltages (red font heh...). I use 1.15 and 1.1 and it's ok with 2x8GB 3200Mhz.


My girlfriends MB(msi z270 m3) overvolts SA and IO as well. 1.25V both with 2x8GB 3000Mhz CL15.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Maken, sorry to be a pain but can you re-do testing starting with 1.3 and going down? When you get time?

Also these are my settings for anyone (CPU PLL Voltage is set to 1.15, though).


----------



## Seijitsu

If there is an actual reduction of temperature from undervolting PLL, there should be a reduction in power consumption. Power consumption at the wall is probably much easier to measure.


----------



## MaKeN

So at 1.2v pll oc volts,

System:


Vs irt gun:



So 1.2v vs 1.1 v they do have almost similar resoults on irt gun . But they wont in software. ( i see like 74 software vs 66c irt gun) same irt temps with 1.1 and 1.2 v (mb default) they may differ if a pc is cooled to room tempa( liquid in the loop) and teste at 1.1 then 1.2 v next time pc is cooled to room temps....

My conclusion , for my particular motherboard msi gaming m7 best pll oc voltage is 1.1v for me, unless i find a better way to test it. And i will


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> So at 1.2v pll oc volts,
> 
> System:
> 
> 
> Vs irt gun:
> 
> 
> 
> So 1.2v vs 1.1 v they do have almost similar resoults on irt gun . But they wont in software. ( i see like 74 software vs 66c irt gun) same irt temps with 1.1 and 1.2 v (mb default) they may differ if a pc is cooled to room tempa( liquid in the loop) and teste at 1.1 then 1.2 v next time pc is cooled to room temps....
> 
> My conclusion , for my particular motherboard msi gaming m7 best pll oc voltage is 1.1v for me, unless i find a better way to test it. And i will


It looks like you keep going different distances when you do the reading though? Like you were closer in the first one then further away in the others?

good job though, it seems to show there IS a difference with lower PLL's


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> If there is an actual reduction of temperature from undervolting PLL, there should be a reduction in power consumption. Power consumption at the wall is probably much easier to measure.


Where do i measure it ?


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> So at 1.2v pll oc volts,
> 
> System:
> 
> 
> Vs irt gun:
> 
> 
> 
> So 1.2v vs 1.1 v they do have almost similar resoults on irt gun . But they wont in software. ( i see like 74 software vs 66c irt gun) same irt temps with 1.1 and 1.2 v (mb default) they may differ if a pc is cooled to room tempa( liquid in the loop) and teste at 1.1 then 1.2 v next time pc is cooled to room temps....
> 
> My conclusion , for my particular motherboard msi gaming m7 best pll oc voltage is 1.1v for me, unless i find a better way to test it. And i will


I would like to say thank you for providing us some really nice and cool data. It is really important for MSI Z270 MB owners.
I hope someone could do some similar tests like you did to give to us some additional data to compare. By now, i feel pretty confident to set 1.2V or lower in my gf computer, instead of the 1.3V auto.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Maken, sorry to be a pain but can you re-do testing starting with 1.3 and going down? When you get time?
> 
> Also these are my settings for anyone (CPU PLL Voltage is set to 1.15, though).


I just tested it for you:
Pll oc volts 1.150v
Software:



Vs irt gun:


At 1.15 as i see all cores do stay at almost same temperature... so its about to be best one to consider for msi boards... idkn how correct is that , but somehow for me it is , anyway we all have diff voltage on v core diff volts everywhere and difernt cpus batch nrbures and motherboards....
Finding a sweet spot is hard and who knows if its real.

I would confidently say that lowering pll oc voltage wont harm till setup is stabe . About temps that pll volts will increase or drop... its still interesting, i would not say im 100% sure what they are ...


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I just tested it for you:
> Pll oc volts 1.150v
> Software:
> 
> 
> 
> Vs irt gun:
> 
> 
> At 1.15 as i see all cores do stay at almost same temperature... so its about to be best one to consider for msi boards... idkn how correct is that , but somehow for me it is , anyway we all have diff voltage on v core diff volts everywhere and difernt cpus batch nrbures and motherboards....
> Finding a sweet spot is hard and who knows if its real.
> 
> I would confidently say that lowering pll oc voltage wont harm till setup is stabe . About temps that pll volts will increase or drop... its still interesting, i would not say im 100% sure what they are ...


Are you running prime95 when doing this as you said?

I'm using 1.2v right now, as its 'default' and mimosky said that was also the default if bios is reset to normal config with 7700K, so according to Intel thats what we should use.

If its stable, id say the temps are real, too.

You had a clear diffrence from 1.3 and 1.1 no?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Are you running prime95 when doing this as you said?
> 
> I'm using 1.2v right now, as its 'default' and mimosky said that was also the default if bios is reset to normal config with 7700K, so according to Intel thats what we should use.
> 
> If its stable, id say the temps are real, too.
> 
> You had a clear diffrence from 1.3 and 1.1 no?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> If there is an actual reduction of temperature from undervolting PLL, there should be a reduction in power consumption. Power consumption at the wall is probably much easier to measure.


Where do i measure it ?
Yep i did ha a clear difference betwenn 1.1 and 1.3 v
But not as big 1.1 vs 1.15. Vs 1.20. Temps would really show lower at idle and not on full load. At fool load they are almost same like 1-3 c difference. But anyway i would stay at 1.1 v for myself as its more common for all brand boards and it would be stable for me and even if on idle temps are not as reall , on full load they are , even if its not full load and just something that afects your cpu load you will see temps that would be kinda real


----------



## ritchiedrama

I get about 75-77 degrees on load Prime95 26.5 (not delidded) with 5 ghz and 1.2

If I drop to 1.15 it's like 67-73 on load lol.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Where do i measure it ?


he probably means something like this



where I'm reading "at the wall" as in wall plug


----------



## MaKeN

I just ***** up something in my system.... inhave tried regular thermometer.... and minus and plus contacts have come together... now my system is down







hah donno what that is my mb down or the psu...


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> he probably means something like this
> 
> 
> 
> where I'm reading "at the wall" as in wall plug


Yeah, grab a Kill-A-Watt and see if power consumption is going down is what I meant.


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I just ***** up something in my system.... inhave tried regular thermometer.... and minus and plus contacts have come together... now my system is down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hah donno what that is my mb down or the psu...


It was in the name of science! But all joking aside, sorry to hear that and I hope it isn't busted. Either way thanks for the data.


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I just ***** up something in my system.... inhave tried regular thermometer.... and minus and plus contacts have come together... now my system is down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hah donno what that is my mb down or the psu...


That is some bad news







you shorted something.
Hope you can revive your system somehow.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> It was in the name of science! But all joking aside, sorry to hear that and I hope it isn't busted. Either way thanks for the data.


Hehe yep..
It went as that :



Hah wel hand did shake a bit and touched the other point . Well lesson learned . I hope its just a mb or psu or any 1 thing , not all of them







my bet is on a mb ... even though msi mb givesheadics with that pll voltage thing , 3 m.2 port makes me want to buy it again


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Well there's a way to verify if the temps are really lower or if they are "skewed". Asus motherboards have a hole in the center of the socket that allows you to slip in a temperature probe from the back of the motherboard & have it touch the CPU to monitor temps. This is mostly meant for Cryogenic use, but someone can use it to verify if the temps really go down with lower the PLL volts or if they are just "skewed".
> 
> This is the only reliable way i can think of to test this.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/920_20#post_25913686

cores coalesce (align) at a voltage. Looks like signal alignment to me.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Where do i measure it ?
> Yep i did ha a clear difference betwenn 1.1 and 1.3 v
> But not as big 1.1 vs 1.15. Vs 1.20. Temps would really show lower at idle and not on full load. At fool load they are almost same like 1-3 c difference. But anyway i would stay at 1.1 v for myself as its more common for all brand boards and it would be stable for me and even if on idle temps are not as reall , on full load they are , even if its not full load and just something that afects your cpu load you will see temps that would be kinda real


Table 7.8

7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-.pdf 1678k .pdf file


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Table 7.8
> 
> 7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-.pdf 1678k .pdf file


What's odd is that it states 1V, when default is apparently 1.2. My board won't go any lower than 1.1.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Table 7.8
> 
> 7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-.pdf 1678k .pdf file


mmm
I actually have no idea about this particular setting

can't find it on my Asus at all
only things with PLL at all:

PLL termination voltage
standard is 1v

I also know that this setting gets set to 1.6v if I leave it on auto and put in a multiplier of 53
and temps shoot up by ~25 degrees


and under tweakers paradise :
core pll voltage (1v)
internal pll voltage (0.9v)
pll bandwidth (lvl 6 to 8 for high BCLK or high cpu frequency, right







)


----------



## mimosky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Hehe yep..
> It went as that :
> 
> 
> 
> Hah wel hand did shake a bit and touched the other point . Well lesson learned . I hope its just a mb or psu or any 1 thing , not all of them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my bet is on a mb ... even though msi mb givesheadics with that pll voltage thing , 3 m.2 port makes me want to buy it again


****... Sorry to hear that.


----------



## mimosky

Regarding PLL OC voltage... MSI answered to my support ticket. They said that if the system is stable with lower PLL OC I should not worry and use the lower value


----------



## ritchiedrama

Dear Richard,

Thanks for contacting MSI technical support.

Regarding your concern,about the PLL OC voltage,we consulted the relevant department,yes,if you overclock the memory,the PLL OC voltage will rise automatically to improve the stability of the system and to ensure the success of your overclocking,we are sorry,the CPU temperature will be affected by PLL OC voltage,this is normal.

Even the same model,CPU and memory stability is not the same，if the PLL OC voltage not rise when the user overclock the memory,some CPUs and memory can not work stable after overclocking.For some users,if the PC still can work stable after the PLL voltage is reduced and they mind the CPU temperatures,users can adjust the PLL OC voltage manually,please don't worry.

Thanks for your cooperation in advance!

Best Regards,

MSI Technical Support Team


----------



## skingun

Excellent work @ritchiedrama


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> What's odd is that it states 1V, when default is apparently 1.2. My board won't go any lower than 1.1.



PLL = 1.0V on Asus Apex.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> mmm
> I actually have no idea about this particular setting
> 
> can't find it on my Asus at all
> only things with PLL at all:
> 
> *PLL termination voltage
> standard is 1v*
> 
> I also know that this setting gets set to 1.6v if I leave it on auto and put in a multiplier of 53
> and temps shoot up by ~25 degrees
> 
> 
> and under tweakers paradise :
> core pll voltage (1v)
> internal pll voltage (0.9v)
> pll bandwidth (lvl 6 to 8 for high BCLK or high cpu frequency, right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Yes - that's the CPU PLL setting on your board. Also, Standby will go to 1.6V at multipliers > 52 (bios 0801 on the Apex) as shown in the snip above) You can set these much lower without any loss of stability. I run 53 and 54 at 1.15V and 1.2V Standby (also called "VCC Sustain".
http://www.overclock.net/t/1619957/asus-z270-motherboards-north-america-q-a-thread/620_20#post_25910718


----------



## OutlawII

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 
> 1.0V on Asus Apex.
> Yes - that's the CPU PLL setting on your board. Also, Standby will go to 1.6V at multipliers > 52 (bios 0801 on the Apex) as shown in the snip above) You can set these much lower without any loss of stability. I run 53 and 54 at 1.15V and 1.2V Standby (also called "VCC Sustain".
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1619957/asus-z270-motherboards-north-america-q-a-thread/620_20#post_25910718


My hero runs at 1.17 @ 5.0 according to HW, if im looking at correctly it would be the vtt volts?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> My hero runs at 1.17 @ 5.0 according to HW, if im looking at correctly it would be the vtt volts?


1.17V for what voltage? PLL? ST?


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> Regarding PLL OC voltage... MSI answered to my support ticket. They said that if the system is stable with lower PLL OC I should not worry and use the lower value


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Dear Richard,
> 
> Thanks for contacting MSI technical support.
> 
> Regarding your concern,about the PLL OC voltage,we consulted the relevant department,yes,if you overclock the memory,the PLL OC voltage will rise automatically to improve the stability of the system and to ensure the success of your overclocking,we are sorry,the CPU temperature will be affected by PLL OC voltage,this is normal.
> 
> Even the same model,CPU and memory stability is not the same，if the PLL OC voltage not rise when the user overclock the memory,some CPUs and memory can not work stable after overclocking.For some users,if the PC still can work stable after the PLL voltage is reduced and they mind the CPU temperatures,users can adjust the PLL OC voltage manually,please don't worry.
> 
> Thanks for your cooperation in advance!
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> MSI Technical Support Team


The data from MaKen and the responses by MSI show to us that is SAFE to mess around with lowering the PLL OC Voltage.
Maybe IDLE temps get skewed, but LOAD temps feels ok to me.


----------



## OutlawII

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 1.17V for what voltage? PLL? ST?


PLL i think,thats what i was kind of asking is that vtt volts on HW?


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> The data from MaKen and the responses by MSI show to us that is SAFE to mess around with lowering the PLL OC Voltage.
> Maybe IDLE temps get skewed, but LOAD temps feels ok to me.


Yeah, Vommok! Looks that way! Positive









And to all the people who said we're wrong and that the sensors are giving false readings:

Screw you.

This is supposed to be a community where we help each other, and although I'm new here, it's terrible that you give people information with NO evidence to back your claims. You should think twice next time and be ashamed of yourselves for just believing anything you read/write without any data to back up what has been said.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Yeah, Vommok! Looks that way! Positive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And to all the people who said we're wrong and that the sensors are giving false readings:
> 
> *Screw you.*
> 
> This is supposed to be a community where we help each other, and although I'm new here, it's terrible that you give people information with NO evidence to back your claims. You should think twice next time and be ashamed of yourselves for just believing anything you read/write without any data to back up what has been said.


nah, ,but since you are such a noob at this we'll let the juvenile insult pass.
Tried to help, it is your decision to live with poorly phase signals... and the DTS is not the only thing affected. Next time, buy a better mobo.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> PLL i think,thats what i was kind of asking is that vtt volts on HW?


yeah, HW has that problem. Use the most recent Beta release of AID64 - it has all the voltages reported (and labeled) correctly.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nah, ,but since you are such a noob at this we'll let the juvenile insult pass.
> Tried to help, it is your decision to live with poorly phase signals... and the DTS is not the only thing affected. Next time, buy a better mobo.


Hahaha, yeah, I'm the noob, seeking actual evidence and answers while you sit on a forum and spout non-sense believing anything anyone has ever told you.

MSI are a great company, and do great motherboards, and the Gaming Pro Carbon is excellent. Others here have the models up from that and they are a bit more expensive, nothing wrong with any of them.

It'd be better if you just realised you goofed.


----------



## Dude970

He didnt goof. Stop being rude


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Hahaha, yeah, I'm the noob, seeking actual evidence and answers while you sit on a forum and spout non-sense believing anything anyone has ever told you.
> 
> MSI are a great company, and do great motherboards, and the Gaming Pro Carbon is excellent. Others here have the models up from that and they are a bit more expensive, nothing wrong with any of them.
> 
> It'd be better if you just realised you goofed.


What people told me? C'mom man get a grip.
Out
Blocked and helpless.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dude970*
> 
> He didnt goof. Stop being rude


Stop being rude? I've had people sit here and tell me that I'm a "noob" and that I don't know what I'm talking about, etc. That I should just live with it and so on.

How about THANK me for finding out information for the community and others who were concerned about their CPU's and temperatures.

Don't bother replying again to me please.


----------



## Dude970

I have nothing to thank you for. You are rude to well respected members here.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dude970*
> 
> I have nothing to thank you for. You are rude to well respected members here.


Does it matter if someone is 'well respected' or if they've been here for a long time?

False information is false information, and when pressed about it if you can't back up claims you shouldn't be making them in the first place.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Stop being rude? I've had people sit here and tell me that I'm a "noob" and that I don't know what I'm talking about, etc. That I should just live with it and so on.
> 
> How about THANK me for finding out information for the community and others who were concerned about their CPU's and temperatures.
> 
> Don't bother replying again to me please.


The golden rule works both ways. Do you realize what kind of a tone you BROUGHT to this thread?

I appreciate all contributions from people here, but you are mistaken if you think you were the first person to point out PLL and odd temperature readings. Done12 did months ago for one. MSI didn't say anything different than...don't worry about it. Also, you are misinformed that this is only a MSI thing.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> The golden rule works both ways. Do you realize what kind of a tone you BROUGHT to this thread?
> 
> I appreciate all contributions from people here, but you are mistaken if you think you were the first person to point out PLL and odd temperature readings. Done12 did months ago for one. MSI didn't say anything different than...don't worry about it. *Also, you are misinformed that this is only a MSI thing.*


Yes that's already been pointed out, so when that 'well respected' member tells people to buy a better motherboard, he must be referring to almost every brand with a z270 then.

I brought a tone here through frustration. I'm glad others saw why I was frustrated too, especially when 'well respected' members don't provide any *evidence* don't you get it? You can't just claim something and have no evidence to back it up?! This is why I'm frustrated, someone who is 'well respected' giving false information and not backing down and making it out as if I or others are stupid, and this is a forum where people will come for answers.

Maybe someone did bring it up 12 months ago, and that's great - but look what we've done when we tried to find out the answer, valuable contributions from mimosky and maken (RIP motherboard).


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> The golden rule works both ways. Do you realize what kind of a tone you BROUGHT to this thread?
> 
> I appreciate all contributions from people here, but you are mistaken if you think you were the first person to point out PLL and odd temperature readings. Done12 did months ago for one. MSI didn't say anything different than...don't worry about it. Also, you are misinformed that this is only a MSI thing.


I believe I was also the first person to knock a 7700k thermal sensor out of calibration by messing with this stuff. RIP Core0 sensor.









Am I crazy or is it hard to believe that the following response came from a "professional" that should be taken with any bit of seriousness?

If you truly read what he/she said, you'd realize that they basically said that if you adjust the PLL OC, you need to "mind" or pay attention to the temperatures. Why would you need to "mind" the temperatures if they indeed dropped instead of being skewed?

Truthfully, this response did nothing to shed light on the subject.

Quote:


> Dear Richard,
> 
> Thanks for contacting MSI technical support.
> 
> Regarding your concern,about the PLL OC voltage,we consulted the relevant department,yes,if you overclock the memory,the PLL OC voltage will rise automatically to improve the stability of the system and to ensure the success of your overclocking,we are sorry,the CPU temperature will be affected by PLL OC voltage,this is normal.
> 
> Even the same model,CPU and memory stability is not the same，if the PLL OC voltage not rise when the user overclock the memory,some CPUs and memory can not work stable after overclocking.For some users*,if the PC still can work stable after the PLL voltage is reduced and they mind the CPU temperatures,*users can adjust the PLL OC voltage manually,please don't worry.
> 
> Thanks for your cooperation in advance!
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> MSI Technical Support Team


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Maybe someone did bring it up 12 months ago, and that's great - but look what we've done when we tried to find out the answer, valuable contributions from mimosky and maken (RIP motherboard).


I'm not sure that they'll ever allow OCN members to REP themselves, but until then, you can do what you did just here. That should more than suffice.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> You think I care about 'reps' on a forum? Speaks volumes doesn't it that you'll bring something like that up.


As you have done throughout most of this quest of yours, you missed the point. It's hardly flattering to publicly parade around patting yourself on the back. That sir, is what speaks volumes of character.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> I responded to MSI to further get some more clarification.


You shouldn't need to if it indeed solved the mystery.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> But you're just simply not making any sense and you're trying to find ANY reason to discredit the information that has been found rather than the non-evidence everywhere else in this entire thread.


I only stated that the email response was beyond poorly written and generally I'd be displeased with an unprofessional response like that. Then there's the fact that it didn't actually clarify anything, so I'm not sure how you arrived at your conclusion.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> How did you manage to kill your sensor then?


When you reduce PLL OC voltage you choke/skew the DTSs and when you increase them to unreasonable levels, you overvolt and knock the DTS out of calibration as I did. Both are obviously bad.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> When you reduce PLL OC voltage you choke/skew the DTSs and when you increase them to unreasonable levels, you overvolt and knock the DTS out of calibration as I did. Both are obviously bad.


I'm guessing you're gonna get asked for proof in a minute or 2

might I ask on which board/brand
as every manufacturer uses different wording?


----------



## mimosky

Well, ritchiedrama, I know it was frustrating etc., but there is no need to be rude. We all should chill out, I think.

Jpmboy, saying that he should have bought a better mainboard is rude, also.

done12many2:

*"When you reduce PLL OC voltage you choke/skew the DTSs and when you increase them to unreasonable levels, you overvolt and knock the DTS out of calibration as I did"*
Well, that's why ritchie's so frustrated, because of people saying things you say without even knowing a thing.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I'm guessing you're gonna get asked for proof in a minute or 2


I have no doubt bud, but I'm just trying to help folks. If I can spare someone damage to a chip, I'll gladly do so. I have plenty of them so it didn't hurt quite as bad.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> might I ask on which board/brand
> as every manufacturer uses different wording?


Asus ROG Maximus IX Formula.

On this particular board "CPU PLL OC" is adjusted via PLL Bandwidth in BIOS.

The biggest problem I see going on with this topic is, as you mentioned, the inconsistency in terminology.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> *"When you reduce PLL OC voltage you choke/skew the DTSs and when you increase them to unreasonable levels, you overvolt and knock the DTS out of calibration as I did"*
> Well, that's why ritchie's so frustrated, because of people saying things you say without even knowing a thing.


I'm not sure that I understand what you are saying.

I should add, that as a result of my misfortune with the DTS on my previous 7700k CPU, I knowingly run excessively low CPU PLL OC voltage on all of my overclocks past 5.2 GHz.

I tested temp/voltage scaling to make sure that my temps were good and all of my OC profiles starting at 5.3 have PLL Bandwidth manually set to Level 0, which results in a CPU PLL OC voltage of .0592v. I recognize the fact that my temps are skewed (reporting very low), but I'd rather not ruin another DTS at high overclocks with excessive CPU PLL OC voltage. I went through a lot of chips to find this one after borking the first great one that I had, so I'm going to take care of it.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I'm not sure that I understand what you are saying.
> 
> I should add, that as a result of my misfortune with the DTS on my previous 7700k CPU, I knowingly run excessively low CPU PLL OC voltage on all of my overclocks past 5.2 GHz.
> 
> I tested temp/voltage scaling to make sure that my temps were good and all of my OC profiles starting at 5.3 have PLL Bandwidth manually set to Level 0, which results in a CPU PLL OC voltage of .0592v. I recognize the fact that my temps are skewed (reporting very low), but I'd rather not ruin another DTS at high overclocks with excessive CPU PLL OC voltage. I went through a lot of chips to find this one after borking the first great one that I had, so I'm going to take care of it.


I don't even know what point you're trying to make now.

For a start you're seemingly saying excessive CPU PLL damages the sensors, yet no-one here has mentioned wanting to use high PLL, just to lower it to get better temps (which there is no evidence to suggest that the temps are false, none, not a zip).

So what are you trying to get across here?


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I'm not sure that I understand what you are saying.
> 
> I should add, that as a result of my misfortune with the DTS on my previous 7700k CPU, I knowingly run excessively low CPU PLL OC voltage on all of my overclocks past 5.2 GHz.
> 
> I tested temp/voltage scaling to make sure that my temps were good and all of my OC profiles starting at 5.3 have PLL Bandwidth manually set to Level 0, which results in a CPU PLL OC voltage of .0592v. I recognize the fact that my temps are skewed (reporting very low), but I'd rather not ruin another DTS at high overclocks with excessive CPU PLL OC voltage. I went through a lot of chips to find this one after borking the first great one that I had, so I'm going to take care of it.


Nice to hear you made some tests by yourself too.
May i ask what "Level" PLL Bandwidth are you running your chip right now? And what PLL OC Voltage that "Level" is?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> I don't even know what point you're trying to make now.
> 
> For a start you're seemingly saying excessive CPU PLL damages the sensors, yet no-one here has mentioned wanting to use high PLL, just to lower it to get better temps (which there is no evidence to suggest that the temps are false, none, not a zip).
> 
> So what are you trying to get across here?


I actually made the point several posts ago, but you didn't care to pay attention. At this point you are only seeing and hearing what you want to so I'll leave you to it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> *When you reduce PLL OC voltage you choke/skew the DTSs* and *when you increase them to unreasonable levels, you overvolt and knock the DTS out of calibration* as I did. Both are obviously bad.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I actually made the point several posts ago, but you didn't care to pay attention. At this point you are only seeing and hearing what you want to so I'll leave you to it.


No, you made a point and then left no proof, again, just like anyone else who claimed such absurd things.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> Nice to hear you made some tests by yourself too.
> May i ask what "Level" PLL Bandwidth are you running your chip right now? And what PLL OC Voltage that "Level" is?


I think I was actually posting a comment clarifying this as you were posting this question. With that said, two posts above yours.


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I think I was actually posting a comment clarifying this as you were posting this question. With that said, two posts above yours.


Lol, my bad







i thought the Level 0 was only for testing, but seems that you're really using that setting the whole time.
0.0592v seems pretty low. At MSI Boards, the minimum we can go is 0.6V.


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I have no doubt bud, but I'm just trying to help folks. If I can spare someone damage to a chip, I'll gladly do so. I have plenty of them so it didn't hurt quite as bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asus ROG Maximus IX Formula.
> 
> On this particular board "CPU PLL OC" is adjusted via PLL Bandwidth in BIOS.
> 
> The biggest problem I see going on with this topic is, as you mentioned, the inconsistency in terminology.


My IX Hero also defaults to .592. Do you believe that this is creating inaccurate temperature measurements if left at that setting? That is what I am gathering from these posts. If that is the case, I tried putting it to 1.152 and my temps shot up so now I am wondering if those are the real temps like everyone else lol.


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> My IX Hero also defaults to .592. Do you believe that this is creating inaccurate temperature measurements if left at that setting? That is what I am gathering from these posts. If that is the case, I tried putting it to 1.152 and my temps shot up so now I am wondering if those are the real temps like everyone else lol.


My IX hero defaults to .600 and level 0 is the same. My idle temps are a couple c higher than the loop temp which is measured before the radiator so they seem accurate to me. There's always the possibility that hwinfo is reading the sensor wrong too. My old z270e strix was .3xx i believe.


----------



## FrostyAMD

Personally I don't think any temps or voltages are entirely accurate. Each board uses different processes to achieve stability across their board. Each board manufacturer calls something by a different name. We all take a chance when we overclock !!! As for voltages I heard that 1.20 v set on a mb may read 1.22 v when measuring at the cpu. Also from following the conversation I understand the temps may be skewed with the raising or lowering of Pll OC. So it may be reasonable to take reported temps with more than a grain of salt and not give into feeling safe because a piece of software reports a certain number.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I actually made the point several posts ago, but you didn't care to pay attention. At this point you are only seeing and hearing what you want to so I'll leave you to it.


I'm confused as to what the point is you're trying to put across.

My posts have been clear and to the point.

I want to find out if lowering the PLL voltage ACTUALLY lowers the CPU temperatures as the sensors indicate. I want clear EVIDENCE from ANYONE.
I don't want to see evidence that isn't even based on what I'm asking or listen to people who tell me to believe it does because they say it does.
Why are people unable to understand a question and give a simple answer. Why do you have to weigh in 40 different opinions that are further clouding the solution?!
If you don't know the answer, have the knowledge and evidence to back it up.

Firstly,
You claim you've knocked the DTS out of calibration by overvolting.
Basically you're saying you've run too much PLL voltage and damaged your processor.
Don't get technical about it, just say that.

Secondly,
You claim to be using CPU PLL OC voltage. I assume this is the offset voltage applied to the default PLL voltage when PLL over voltage is enabled.
If you're applying a positive offset to your PLL, i.e increasing voltage, why would the INCREASE in voltage, skew your temperatures and give LOWER than normal results?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> Lol, my bad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i thought the Level 0 was only for testing, but seems that you're really using that setting the whole time.
> 0.0592v seems pretty low. At MSI Boards, the minimum we can go is 0.6V.


Yeah, when left on auto, .052v is the default for anything 5.2 GHz and lower. That's why I manually set PLL Bandwidth to Level 0 when I overclock to 5.3 GHz and higher. If left on auto at 5.3 or higher, that CPU PLL OC jumps immediately from .052v to 1.3v as soon as the 53 multiplier is selected. The same thing happens with VTT voltage, but it goes clear up to 1.6v.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> My IX Hero also defaults to .592. Do you believe that this is creating inaccurate temperature measurements if left at that setting? That is what I am gathering from these posts. If that is the case, I tried putting it to 1.152 and my temps shot up so now I am wondering if those are the real temps like everyone else lol.


How are you adjusting CPU PLL OC on your Hero board? I have a Hero on my test bench and it lacks the PLL Bandwidth option in "Tweaker's Paradise" so I couldn't adjust CPU PLL OC on that board. I could adjust CPU PLL, but not CPU PLL OC. Admittedly, I didn't look much as I don't push chips to 5.3 or higher on that setup.

I don't think that you are getting inaccurate temp readings at all until you get higher into the overclocks. I believe that this voltage needs to scale up at a certain point as clockspeed/VCore increase as mine does at 5.3 GHz. I just choose to not let it on my main setup.


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Yeah, when left on auto, .052v is the default for anything 5.2 GHz and lower. That's why I manually set PLL Bandwidth to Level 0 when I overclock to 5.3 GHz and higher. If left on auto at 5.3 or higher, that CPU PLL OC jumps immediately from .052v to 1.3v as soon as the 53 multiplier is selected. The same thing happens with VTT voltage, but it goes clear up to 1.6v.
> How are you adjusting CPU PLL OC on your Hero board? I have a Hero on my test bench and it lacks the PLL Bandwidth option in "Tweaker's Paradise" so I couldn't adjust CPU PLL OC on that board. I could adjust CPU PLL, but not CPU PLL OC. Admittedly, I didn't look much as I don't push chips to 5.3 or higher on that setup.
> 
> I don't think that you are getting inaccurate temp readings at all until you get higher into the overclocks. I believe that this voltage needs to scale up at a certain point as clockspeed/VCore increase as mine does at 5.3 GHz. I just choose to not let on my setup.


The same way you are. The IX Hero uses PLL Bandwidth 0-8 (CPU PLLs OC in HWinfo). Level 3 is 1.0v, level 4 is 1.15. Level six was like 1.6. My overclock is 5.1GHZ and it has been on auto or .592 so all this debate just got me thinking or perhaps overthinking. Obviously increasing a voltage double will make more heat but I don't want the skewing to occur.


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Yeah, when left on auto, .052v is the default for anything 5.2 GHz and lower. That's why I manually set PLL Bandwidth to Level 0 when I overclock to 5.3 GHz and higher. If left on auto at 5.3 or higher, that CPU PLL OC jumps immediately from .052v to 1.3v as soon as the 53 multiplier is selected. The same thing happens with VTT voltage, but it goes clear up to 1.6v.
> How are you adjusting CPU PLL OC on your Hero board? I have a Hero on my test bench and it lacks the PLL Bandwidth option in "Tweaker's Paradise" so I couldn't adjust CPU PLL OC on that board. I could adjust CPU PLL, but not CPU PLL OC. Admittedly, I didn't look much as I don't push chips to 5.3 or higher on that setup.
> 
> I don't think that you are getting inaccurate temp readings at all until you get higher into the overclocks. I believe that this voltage needs to scale up at a certain point as clockspeed/VCore increase as mine does at 5.3 GHz. I just choose to not let it on my main setup.


Done, just to be sure, the voltage is *0.0592V* or *0.592V*?

You said *0.0592V* at first, which to me seems way toooo low, but redone13 and spddmn24 said *0.592V*.


----------



## Divver

How is your board applying the PLL OC voltage? Is it an offset on default PLL? The way it's worded sure makes it sound like it.
I find it hard to believe you're able to boot and run stable with a PLL voltage of 0.0562v.
Is the fact it jumps from 0.0562v to 1.3v with a 53 ratio the reason you managed to screw your Core #0 sensor?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> Done, just to be sure, the voltage is *0.0592V* or *0.592V*?
> 
> You said *0.0592V* at first, which to me seems way toooo low, but redone13 and spddmn24 said *0.592V*.


Good catch bud. .592. Sorry for the confusion.

Right now, everything is at stock as I have another 7700k that I'm testing loaded.



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> The same way you are. The IX Hero uses PLL Bandwidth 0-8 (CPU PLLs OC in HWinfo). Level 3 is 1.0v, level 4 is 1.15. Level six was like 1.6. My overclock is 5.1GHZ and it has been on auto or .592 so all this debate just got me thinking or perhaps overthinking. Obviously increasing a voltage double will make more heat but I don't want the skewing to occur.


I might need a BIOS update then. Thanks for sharing this!


----------



## marik123

I tried last night and set my CPU PLL OC voltage from Auto to 1.2v, that lower my load temperature from 75c all the way down to 61c. When I lower my CPU PLL OC voltage to 1.15v, I see 0c idle temperature and it must be some type of error from my Gigabyte Z170 Ultra Gaming board.


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Divver*
> 
> How is your board applying the PLL OC voltage? Is it an offset on default PLL? The way it's worded sure makes it sound like it.
> I find it hard to believe you're able to boot and run stable with a PLL voltage of 0.0562v.
> Is the fact it jumps from 0.0562v to 1.3v with a 53 ratio the reason you managed to screw your Core #0 sensor?


As far as I can tell, PLL Bandwidth level 0-8 adjusts it because it directly changes CPU PLLs OC in HWinfo. The concern I suppose rises from the possibility of a CPU PLL voltage that low skewing the accuracy of readings. Either that or HWinfo isn't just reporting correctly? Or it is all fine in the typical fashion of more voltage creates more heat when raising it from .592 to say 1.15. My temps went from 76 peak in x264 to like 86 celsius doing so. But then perhaps I could back off vcore. I really don't wanna do it until there is solid evidence.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> As far as I can tell, PLL Bandwidth level 0-8 adjusts it because it directly changes CPU PLLs OC in HWinfo. The concern I suppose rises from the possibility of a CPU PLL voltage that low skewing the accuracy of readings. Either that or HWinfo isn't just reporting correctly? Or it is all fine in the typical fashion of more voltage creates more heat when raising it from .592 to say 1.15. My temps went from 76 peak in x264 to like 86.


No-one has given any evidence to suggest that the idle temps are broken with lower PLL, the only information that has been presented is MSI themselves saying that it DOES lower temperatures (whether they are accurate or not is another story) but it's more than these people saying it skews temperatures and then giving ZERO proof.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Hi fellas, cutting across the convo sorry. Thanks to Darkwizzie for the guide, Ive been using it in conjunction with the Asus one very useful.

I got my 7700K a couple of days ago, been tweaking it on an Asus Prime Z270-A which I got a great deal on as a bundle with the CPU and RAM.

I've got my RAM (Gskill Ripjaws 5 3200, the stuff with the bad stock timings) running at 3333-15-17-17-36 1N with a slight bump to volts at 1.4 in BIOS which is reporting at 1.376 in HWinfo. Its 500% coverage stable in HCI Memtest. I have a couple of problems, if anyone has any suggestions

Firstly has anyone else had a bug in HWinfo where VCCSA and VCCIO are reporting the same whatever you set in BIOS?

I'd initially set them both to 1.23xx something volts (the last level before they turn purple for *danger*







) with the intention of tuning them down when Id got as far as that would take me with the frequency and timings. However now when I'm tuning them down in BIOS they are still reading the same as they were on Auto. VCCSA 1.184 and VCCIO @ 1.120. Its not affecting the stability apparently, but I'm pretty sure that when I had them at their highest they were reading correctly. Google has repeatedly failed me on this one.

My first thought was I had old board used to have a bug where after it failed to post it would sometimes lock up in BIOS, you had to CLR-CMOS before any changes you made in BIOS would actually work in Windows, I think it cant be that because I can change everything else except those two.

Before that Id got my CPU there or thereabouts at 5 GHZ a couple of hours stable in X264 at around 1.3 volts Ring Bus at 4.7. Now I'm testing with Realbench I'm needing about 1.28 volts (CPUz) with LLC level 5 to be stable for a couple of hours Realbench which seems pretty damn good volts wise, unfortunately this is causing my temperatures to hit a max of 87C. Which is a little warm for my taste.

I noticed that enabling XMP increased my temps a lot from around 80 max to 88 max in X264 at 5.0 Ghz so I figured it must have been one of the RAM voltages on Auto that caused it. I didnt change anything else at that time other then XMP on.

I've tried setting the Internal CPU PLL (which I assume is the Power Load Line and not the other PLL being discussed?) to 0.900 V (lowest possible) to reduce temps, setting the VRM switching (I forget the exact term) to T-probe from extreme and its not really helping. Ive also tried reducing the System Agent and VCCIO right down as low as I dare at 1.110 and 1.120 checking they are still good in Memtest, although because of the issue I mentioned first I cant tell if its actually changing. I'm not sure it would help with core temps anyway but I figured it was worth a shot. Are there any settings anyone could recommend that might lose me a few C in temps?

I know youre going to tell me to delid, and I might eventually but is there anything I could do in the mean time? Its under a Cryorig R1 Ultimate, which performs about the same as a NH-D15. I'll try a remount in the morning probably, but Im pretty sure its a good mount and whats concerning me is the heat bump from enabling XMP and why I can get it down again.

Thanks in advance for any ideas you can offer, cheers.


----------



## FrostyAMD

You may want to try getting out of xpm and just maualy set your ram up without the profile


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> Hi fellas, cutting across the convo sorry. Thanks to Darkwizzie for the guide, Ive been using it in conjunction with the Asus one very useful.
> 
> I got my 7700K a couple of days ago, been tweaking it on an Asus Prime Z270-A which I got a great deal on as a bundle with the CPU and RAM.
> 
> I've got my RAM (Gskill Ripjaws 5 3200, the stuff with the bad stock timings) running at 3333-15-17-17-36 1N with a slight bump to volts at 1.4 in BIOS which is reporting at 1.376 in HWinfo. Its 500% coverage stable in HCI Memtest. I have a couple of problems, if anyone has any suggestions
> 
> Firstly has anyone else had a bug in HWinfo where VCCSA and VCCIO are reporting the same whatever you set in BIOS?
> 
> I'd initially set them both to 1.23xx something volts (the last level before they turn purple for *danger*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) with the intention of tuning them down when Id got as far as that would take me with the frequency and timings. However now when I'm tuning them down in BIOS they are still reading the same as they were on Auto. VCCSA 1.184 and VCCIO @ 1.120. Its not affecting the stability apparently, but I'm pretty sure that when I had them at their highest they were reading correctly. Google has repeatedly failed me on this one.
> 
> My first thought was I had old board used to have a bug where after it failed to post it would sometimes lock up in BIOS, you had to CLR-CMOS before any changes you made in BIOS would actually work in Windows, I think it cant be that because I can change everything else except those two.
> 
> Before that Id got my CPU there or thereabouts at 5 GHZ a couple of hours stable in X264 at around 1.3 volts Ring Bus at 4.7. Now I'm testing with Realbench I'm needing about 1.28 volts (CPUz) with LLC level 5 to be stable for a couple of hours Realbench which seems pretty damn good volts wise, unfortunately this is causing my temperatures to hit a max of 87C. Which is a little warm for my taste.
> 
> I noticed that enabling XMP increased my temps a lot from around 80 max to 88 max in X264 at 5.0 Ghz so I figured it must have been one of the RAM voltages on Auto that caused it. I didnt change anything else at that time other then XMP on.
> 
> I've tried setting the Internal CPU PLL (which I assume is the Power Load Line and not the other PLL being discussed?) to 0.900 V (lowest possible) to reduce temps, setting the VRM switching (I forget the exact term) to T-probe from extreme and its not really helping. Ive also tried reducing the System Agent and VCCIO right down as low as I dare at 1.110 and 1.120 checking they are still good in Memtest, although because of the issue I mentioned first I cant tell if its actually changing. I'm not sure it would help with core temps anyway but I figured it was worth a shot. Are there any settings anyone could recommend that might lose me a few C in temps?
> 
> I know youre going to tell me to delid, and I might eventually but is there anything I could do in the mean time? Its under a Cryorig R1 Ultimate, which performs about the same as a NH-D15. I'll try a remount in the morning probably, but Im pretty sure its a good mount and whats concerning me is the heat bump from enabling XMP and why I can get it down again.
> 
> Thanks in advance for any ideas you can offer, cheers.


Your temps rising from 80ºC to 88ºC after enableing XMP COULD be exactly whats being discussed here. Try messing around with the PLL OC Voltage(at Asus motherboards, it should be called PLL Bandwidth).


----------



## OutlawII

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> No-one has given any evidence to suggest that the idle temps are broken with lower PLL, the only information that has been presented is MSI themselves saying that it DOES lower temperatures (whether they are accurate or not is another story) but it's more than these people saying it skews temperatures and then giving ZERO proof.


If you want proof test it with a temperature probe,quit relying on everyone else and then disregarding there comments and opinions


----------



## redone13

Just a little more data. My temperatures rise the same they do going from CPU PLL OC level 0 to level 1. It is like a 10 degree increase, much the same way they rise going from level 0 to level 3 or 4. It's all speculation right now but I can't see how going up from level 0.592 to level 1 which is just a tad bit higher results in a 10 degree increase. Unless of course that 10 degree increase is the accurate temperature and leaving it all the default is masking the real temperature. If that is the case, and the majority who OC on Asus boards (at least the IX Hero) don't even touch CPU PLL OC due to hardly even knowing it exists, are all Asus board users actually overclocking under the impression that their temperatures are lower than they really are?


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> Your temps rising from 80ºC to 88ºC after enableing XMP COULD be exactly whats being discussed here. Try messing around with the PLL OC Voltage(at Asus motherboards, it should be called PLL Bandwidth).


Haven't been able to find another PLL other then the Internal PLL, but I'll have another look tomorrow, thanks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FrostyAMD*
> 
> You may want to try getting out of xpm and just maualy set your ram up without the profile


Problem is with setting RAM manually that I think I lose all the secondary and tertiary timings back down to stock non XMP levels and I don't fancy doing the monkey on a typewriter thing trying to get them decent again. I know lower timings don't make a massive difference individually but all together I think they add up so I wanted to keep them at the XMP settings.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> If you want proof test it with a temperature probe,quit relying on everyone else and then disregarding there comments and opinions


I already said that I have no means to test it right now, and I have no problem with "OPINIONS" i have a problem with someone claiming something and having no proof. give it a rest lad.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> Just a little more data. My temperatures rise the same they do going from CPU PLL OC level 0 to level 1. It is like a 10 degree increase, much the same way they rise going from level 0 to level 3 or 4. It's all speculation right now but I can't see how going up from level 0.592 to level 1 which is just a tad bit higher results in a 10 degree increase. Unless of course that 10 degree increase is the accurate temperature and leaving it all the default is masking the real temperature. If that is the case, and the majority who OC on Asus boards (at least the IX Hero) don't even touch CPU PLL OC due to hardly even knowing it exists, are all Asus board users actually overclocking under the impression that their temperatures are lower than they really are?


ritchiedrama is on a MSI

at the top of the page you have someone on a Gigabyte
I think someone else the last page or so had a MSI too

it's not unique to Asus

that being said

the reason why I came here was that when I moved past 5.2 GHz my idle temps rose from 40 degrees to 85 or so

without me changing anything besides the multiplier

through some help here I found its a bug that PLL termination voltage got bumbed up way too high if left on Auto (with speeds past 5.3)

if anything the different terminology between manufacturers makes things more complicated


----------



## redone13

I made a post on the ASUS Rog forum. I want to see what they have to say or if they can provide any hard data or if they are aware and this has been asked before.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> I made a post on the ASUS Rog forum. I want to see what they have to say or if they can provide any hard data or if they are aware and this has been asked before.


interesting to see if this goes anywhere

I find those forums to be,,, slow

hell my beta bios for my Formula VIII I found here and not there (wasn't able to OC my kaby on the latest stable release back in January)

I have yet to get a response if the Aura software gets updated for my board as well (there's already several new versions out for Z270)

made that post in January


----------



## redone13

Yea, they are slow. But I find that that Raja guy seems to have an idea of what is going on most of the time. I think it's worth asking because if CPU PLL Bandwidth at level 0 is under-reporting temps by ten degrees versus that of level 1, chip degradation will occur sooner rather than later.

It doesn't make sense that temps increase 10 degrees from .592 to .696 at the same rate they do from .592 to 1.15 or 1.2. It makes me believe that the temps are 10 degrees higher in the first place, not just from the .1 bump in voltage.

There is further reason for concern because .592 is the Auto value on the board so it is possible that it is masking the true temperatures by default. Intel's spec is not even close to .592.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> that Raja guy seems to have an idea of what is going on most of the time.


And that's one reason why I'm here

http://www.overclock.net/u/195930/raja-asus


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> PROVE it.
> 
> As for MSI response, how did it not clarify anything exactly? Nothing will make you people happy, what about Makens temperature results with a thermal gun? That proves what MSI said, also. You're just looking for any excuse seriously.
> Of course he is, you plank. He can't just CLAIM something.


I asked Elmor at Asus and he has Master's in Microelectronics.

QUOTE: Elmor
PLL Termination is known to skew the on-die temp sensors, that's what you're talking about I presume? Is there anything specific you'd like to know regarding the CPU PLL? Essentially it takes in the base clock and modulates it up to the core and uncore clocks.

QUOTE: Elmor
Typically increasing the Core PLL voltage can help the PLL stability at high output frequencies (above 60x Core Ratio), it's not related to CPU Core Voltage. PLL Termination helps when increasing the BCLK or reaching higher frequency during LN2 scenarios. I don't have specifics on the internal layout of Intel's CPUs, but most likely PLL Termination is also used as reference or supply voltage to the ADC which is reading the on-chip thermal sensor.


----------



## redone13

Hey Done12many2,

You said you are setting your CPU PLL OC to .592 for your OCs because the board will choose a dangerously high value for higher multipliers.

Are you getting drastically different temperatures going from level 0/auto to level 1? Temps that seem like they wouldn't equate to bumping the voltage from up from .592 to .696 or an increase in one level of PLL bandwidth?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I asked Elmor at Asus and he has Master's in Microelectronics.
> 
> QUOTE: Elmor
> PLL Termination is known to skew the on-die temp sensors, that's what you're talking about I presume? Is there anything specific you'd like to know regarding the CPU PLL? Essentially it takes in the base clock and modulates it up to the core and uncore clocks.
> 
> QUOTE: Elmor
> Typically increasing the Core PLL voltage can help the PLL stability at high output frequencies (above 60x Core Ratio), it's not related to CPU Core Voltage. PLL Termination helps when increasing the BCLK or reaching higher frequency during LN2 scenarios. I don't have specifics on the internal layout of Intel's CPUs, but most likely PLL Termination is also used as reference or supply voltage to the ADC which is reading the on-chip thermal sensor.


You tried that before

not sure why you try again









http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/960#post_25921292

I believe you

or rather Elmor

how many other sites have so many hardware reps hanging out like here


----------



## FrostyAMD

if increasing voltage skews temps then decreasing should skew temps. All the info that it skews temps either way has been attested to and proven as far as I can see.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I have no doubt bud, but I'm just trying to help folks. If I can spare someone damage to a chip, I'll gladly do so. I have plenty of them so it didn't hurt quite as bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asus ROG Maximus IX Formula.
> On this particular board "CPU PLL OC" is adjusted via PLL Bandwidth in BIOS.
> The biggest problem I see going on with this topic is, as you mentioned, the inconsistency in terminology.


hey bud, on the Apex bandwidth on Auto = 0.592V, 6= 1.4V at 5.2GHz. no difference at 5.5GHz. Only time I use PLL OC (bandwidth) at 6 or higher is with BCLK at 200 and up. Helps with boot and IO, but once in the OS this can be lowered using the "Eventual" setting in bios. Should be the same on the 9 formula.
lol - have you culled that stack of CPUs?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> You tried that before
> not sure why you try again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/960#post_25921292
> I believe you
> or rather Elmor
> *how many other sites have so many hardware reps hanging out like here*


None (period).


----------



## redone13

JPM,

Can you confirm this question? I asked Done12many2 but it really applies to anyone.

Are you getting drastically different temperatures going from level 0/auto to level 1? Temps that seem like they wouldn't equate to bumping the voltage from up from .592 to .696 or an increase in one level of PLL bandwidth?


----------



## MaKeN

Heh its the the motherboard , its the cpu that died
With no cpu the board light up and powers on, as soon as i put the cpu in, light go of and it wont power on.... so i hope its the cpu only









Tomoroow will pic a new one in microcenter.
Any advise on batch number should i look for?


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Heh its the the motherboard , its the cpu that died. Tomoroow will pic a new one in microcenter. Any advise on batch number should i look for?


You shorted the capacitors which provides energy to the CPU.
RIP








https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NoxceLMU9dnVev8QmYmBT16fnjwrGkwdIRjTQzzKaVk/edit#gid=0
L639G023 and L639F977 looks good.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> You shorted the capacitors which provides energy to the CPU.
> RIP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NoxceLMU9dnVev8QmYmBT16fnjwrGkwdIRjTQzzKaVk/edit#gid=0
> L639G023 and L639F977 looks good.


Thx , will try to search for it there.

My current is l639g029


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> You tried that before
> 
> not sure why you try again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/960#post_25921292
> 
> I believe you
> 
> or rather Elmor
> 
> how many other sites have so many hardware reps hanging out like here


Because he keep talking about MSI PLL statement that does not define if the temperature as actual core temperature. My background is electronics I just can't prove it here.

I need proof on what is going on with the CPU schematics, and Asus has gave me the best description so far with ADC (Analog Digital Conversion) for the on-die temp sensors, then modulation change with PLL termination causing to skew the true reading.

I think there is a difference from PLL voltage or having PLL termination. PLL voltage can strengthen the signal or weaken it and PLL termination changes the frequency modulation point up and down for a smooth or not smooth clock signal to a point of failure.

PLL (Phase-locked loop)
Quote:
Automobile race analogy[edit]
For a practical idea of what is going on, consider an auto race. There are many cars, and the driver of each of them wants to go around the track as fast as possible. Each lap corresponds to a complete cycle, and each car will complete dozens of laps per hour. The number of laps per hour (a speed) corresponds to an angular velocity (i.e. a frequency), but the number of laps (a distance) corresponds to a phase (and the conversion factor is the distance around the track loop).

During most of the race, each car is on its own and the driver of the car is trying to beat the driver of every other car on the course, and the phase of each car varies freely.

However, if there is an accident, a pace car comes out to set a safe speed. None of the race cars are permitted to pass the pace car (or the race cars in front of them), but each of the race cars wants to stay as close to the pace car as it can. While it is on the track, the pace car is a reference, and the race cars become phase-locked loops. Each driver will measure the phase difference (a distance in laps) between him and the pace car. If the driver is far away, he will increase his engine speed to close the gap. If he's too close to the pace car, he will slow down. The result is all the race cars lock on to the phase of the pace car. The cars travel around the track in a tight group that is a small fraction of a lap. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-locked_loop


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> No-one has given any evidence to suggest that the idle temps are broken with lower PLL, the only information that has been presented is MSI themselves saying that it DOES lower temperatures (whether they are accurate or not is another story) but it's more than these people saying it skews temperatures and then giving ZERO proof.


Wrong! Fake News! It's been reported...many times... a large tremendous amount of many times... Here is proof.



8C difference on core 0 minimum between VCC PLL 1.1 and 1.2 AT IDLE.


----------



## MaKeN

From all that pll oc tweeking , i made myself a conclusion ...

1. Msi boards do run higher pll voltage then many other boards
2. Even if pll voltage does make temps sensor read faulty values, this mean undervolting will show lower then it is, overvolting show higher that it is for real.

So question? What is that middle of overvolting vs downvolting for the temp sensor to report true temps? Idkn , i guess for diff boards it is its own point in that voltage.

I beleve for my board pll oc voltage that is default or really closed to it , would be the one that would make the sensor read true temps on idle and on load .

By the measurements with irt gun i have seen a real 5c-6c difference between 1.1v and 1.3v , but software would report a massive 20c difference.


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> From all that pll oc tweeking , i made myself a conclusion ...
> 
> 1. Msi boards do run higher pll voltage then many other boards
> 2. Even if pll voltage does make temps sensor read faulty values, this mean undervolting will show lower then it is, overvolting show higher that it is for real.
> 
> So question? What is that middle of overvolting vs downvolting for the temp sensor to report true temps? Idkn , i guess for diff boards it is its own point in that voltage.
> 
> I beleve for my board pll oc voltage that is default or really closed to it , would be the one that would make the sensor read true temps on idle and on load .
> 
> By the measurements with irt gun i have seen a real 5c-6c difference between 1.1v and 1.3v , but software would report a massive 20c difference.


That's a good question Maken. I don't know what the middle is based on how different MSI and Asus boards are. MSI appears closer to Intel spec.

Am I the only one concerned that Asus boards Auto CPU OC PLL may be causing under-reporting of temperatures as evidenced by the drastic increase in temps going from auto or level 0 to level 1 CPU PLL bandwidth? This would mean that we all have to reassess our OCs unless I am the only one getting a 10 degree celsius spike when changing from level 0 of .592 to level 1 of .696.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> From all that pll oc tweeking , i made myself a conclusion ...
> 
> 1. Msi boards do run higher pll voltage then many other boards
> 2. Even if pll voltage does make temps sensor read faulty values, this mean undervolting will show lower then it is, overvolting show higher that it is for real.
> 
> So question? What is that middle of overvolting vs downvolting for the temp sensor to report true temps? Idkn , i guess for diff boards it is its own point in that voltage.
> 
> I beleve for my board pll oc voltage that is default or really closed to it , would be the one that would make the sensor read true temps on idle and on load .
> 
> By the measurements with irt gun i have seen a real 5c-6c difference between 1.1v and 1.3v , but software would report a massive 20c difference.


The sensible move is to use 1.2, imo. As Intel emailed me and said that companies work together and the 'default' settings is what should be used (no overclocking).

1.2 is default when bios is default with no OC, so I can only assume 1.2 is the 'right' value if any, as long as its stable with the OC.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> And?
> 
> Now set your vCore to 1.2 at 4.5ghz, then set it to 1.3 - but let me guess you'd say that is normal right?
> 
> It's the same way underload, change your vCore by 0.1 and your temps will be much higher, but for some reason you think it's so acceptable to do that for vCore but not CPU PLL.
> 
> Listen, mate, you don't have any idea what institutes as "proof" - you are either a young kid, or a 60+ year old man that is having some sort of issue with your life, I can almost guarantee it.
> 
> And if you're so smart, what value should we be using then, ducegt? 1.2? 1.3? Auto?












I'm not changing my vcore or clocks. 1.3 to 1.2 is a 2C minimum idle difference for me. I've never said anything is _normal_, but I'll say again that it's a minor detail that's not worth worrying too much about.

You aren't very good at guessing. Use whatever gets you a higher overclock.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not changing my vcore or clocks. 1.3 to 1.2 is a 2C minimum idle difference for me. I've never said anything is _normal_, but I'll say again that it's a minor detail that's not worth worrying too much about.
> 
> You aren't very good at guessing. Use whatever gets you a higher overclock.


How can you say it's not worth worrying about for some? Some people on auto (1.3) have temps over 80 on load or gaming. On 1.2 that drops into the 75s on 1.1 or 1.15 low 70s

If those temps are real, that is a massive improvement and only good for the CPU and the user. Stop being silly.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> That's a good question Maken. I don't know what the middle is based on how different MSI and Asus boards are. MSI appears closer to Intel spec.
> 
> Am I the only one concerned that Asus boards Auto CPU OC PLL may be causing under-reporting of temperatures as evidenced by the drastic increase in temps going from auto or level 0 to level 1 CPU PLL bandwidth? This would mean that we all have to reassess our OCs unless I am the only one getting a 10 degree celsius spike when changing from level 0 of .592 to level 1 of .696.


Its as same as on msi boards. 1.2v vs 1.3v reports like a 10++ difference in software not on the irt gun . And also i have really felt with my hand what means 80++c exhausted air feels like . On 1.3 it will show me 84c temps but i cant feel them with my hand or irt gun would report them.....
But look, its twice as biger then on asus boards







(pll oc voltage)

I dont have a liquid coolant temp sensor in my loop , if you are using io one , cane you test if liquid temps do get biger with pll oc volts biger?


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Its as same as on msi boards. 1.2v vs 1.3v reports like a 10++ difference in software not on the irt gun . And also i have really felt with my hand what means 80++c exhausted air feels like . On 1.3 it will show me 84c temps but i cant feel them with my hand or irt gun would report them.....
> But look, its twice as biger then on asus boards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (pll oc voltage)
> 
> I dont have a liquid coolant temp sensor in my loop , if you are using io one , cane you test if liquid temps do get biger with pll oc volts biger?


I am on air Mak. You mention no difference for MSI going from 1.2 and 1.3 on the gun but a 10 degree difference in the software. You also mention that MSI uses rougly double the PLL OC voltage. If I were to draw any conclusions from this, I can only hope that the 10 degree difference between .592 to .696v (PLL Bandwidth level 0 aka auto vs level 1) on Asus boards is only in software and not be IRT gun. Unfortunately, I don't have a gun.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> The sensible move is to use 1.2, imo. As Intel emailed me and said that companies work together and the 'default' settings is what should be used (no overclocking).
> 
> 1.2 is default when bios is default with no OC, so I can only assume 1.2 is the 'right' value if any, as long as its stable with the OC.


Idkn , i would still stay at 1.15 on my board , i find it most accurate. And its so close to defaults and its undervolting , and its stable and for sure its not bad for cpu.
So ill stay happy at my own that pleasures me.








We do have diff boards and diff memory sticks ( me and you) so a little as 0.05 v may be the difference idkn


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> JPM,
> 
> Can you confirm this question? I asked Done12many2 but it really applies to anyone.
> 
> Are you getting drastically different temperatures going from level 0/auto to level 1? Temps that seem like they wouldn't equate to bumping the voltage from up from .592 to .696 or an increase in one level of PLL bandwidth?


First, no one should be surprised that increasing CPU PLL or PLL OC voltage above the board-set auto value results in higher temperatures - they should. And each board manages these differently simply due to trace layout at the very least. They are not the same voltage lines and should not be conflated.

The question is whether undervolting CPU PLL (not PLL OC voltage - which should be on Auto unless you are running very high BCLK or very high frequencies) results in a misalignment of the on-die dts temp sensors report. The answer is it will... period. That said, here's the info you asked for.
[email protected] w/ 1.285V vcore in bios.ASUS Apex Bios 0801, 16GB Ram at 3866c16 w/ 1.425V (on a 3600c15 kit). Custom water.
Stressor: HWBOT x265 benchmark (a high current AVX load)
PLL Bandwidth = auto (0.592V pll oc)


PLL bandwidth = 1 (0.69V)


PLL bandwidth = 6 (1.4V )


"net-net" an 8C difference going from 0.592V to 1.4V PLL OC. And remember - we are relying upon HWi to be accurate in reporting this voltage... a software package that reports data from sensors that don;t even exist.









CPU PLL and PLL OC voltage are not the same voltage as you can see here (had to use HWi and ADA to show them)


----------



## redone13

JPMboy,

Thank you. The clarification of PLL vs PLL OC and the fact that boards using different voltages is the norm helps shed some light on the situation.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> JPMboy,
> 
> Thank you. The clarification of PLL vs PLL OC and the fact that boards using different voltages is the norm helps shed some light on the situation.


you're welcome!


----------



## ritchiedrama

Another confirmation email from MSI:

The CPU temperature will be affected by PLL OC voltage, these are the real temperatures and this is normal, if you worry about the temperatures, please adjust the PLL OC voltage manually..Sorry for any inconvenience caused.

Please do not change the subject if you reply directly, or you can login into https://register.msi.com/ to reply, Thank you.


----------



## ducegt

I just did a short and simple test (2 hashes of RealBench) of 1.1 vs 1.2 by monitoring my coolant temp. No difference.


----------



## Jpmboy

mimosky's data shows the effect. Dude deserves kudos, reps whtever for the work put into that post:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/920_20#post_25913686


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I just did a short and simple test (2 hashes of RealBench) of 1.1 vs 1.2 by monitoring my coolant temp. No difference.


Thanks for taking some time to look at it duce.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> mimosky's data shows the effect. Dude deserves kudos, reps whtever for the work put into that post:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/920_20#post_25913686


You are definitely right, that is good solid information. The confusion for me started when we began looking at ASUS' PLL OC voltage. It is a little different but we can definitely extrapolate information from his findings.


----------



## Jpmboy

just be careful about the labels/nomenclature used there too.. PLL OC and CPU PLL.


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just be careful about the labels/nomenclature used there too.. PLL OC and CPU PLL.


Oh definitely. It looks like mimosky was talking about PLL OC which is PLL Bandwidth on Asus boards.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I just did a short and simple test (2 hashes of RealBench) of 1.1 vs 1.2 by monitoring my coolant temp. No difference.


Did they change in software?
If yes and not in water temps then it means 1.2 wold be your real temps

But , brother keep in mind liquid temps may get higher, but not as cpu temps.( there wont be a like 10c jump ever , i guess max is like mb 3-4c)You may need lot time of getting that liquid hotter.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Did they change in software?
> If yes and not in water temps then it means 1.2 wold be your real temps
> 
> But , brother keep in mind liquid temps may get higher, but not as cpu temps.( there wont be a like 10c jump ever , i guess max is like mb 3-4c)You may need lot time of getting that liquid hotter.


Yes, 1.2 reports higher temps in software. You may be right about the length of the test, but I won't be testing longer unless something comes over me at a later time. I don't care if my "real temp" is 76 or 86 during a stress test because normally I'm browsing the web, watching a video, or gaming at temps that are 60.. or actually 70... My chip does not throttle and is stable. If the longevity of my chip was my utmost concern, I wouldn't overclock. That being said, I'm not trying to kill my chip either. It's a gamble.


----------



## FrostyAMD

Guys leave him alone you will never "prove" anything to him


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Me pointing out what you posted on another forum is not relevant though i was just stating it because you seem to think you have the answers for this but all you've done is claim things and not back them up.


I posted in the Intel forum about dropping the Vcore and they backed me up, you should know that with all the research your doing on me. What do you know anyway? I'm still waiting.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I posted in the Intel forum about dropping the Vcore and they backed me up, you should know that with all the research your doing on me. What do you know anyway? I'm still waiting.


Of course they recommend dropping vcore they said they don't recommend over clocking but do you listen to that too? I spoke with Intel in email and they said use default BIOS settings including CPU PLL vcore.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Soo. I'll try and keep it shorter this time. Asus Prime Z270-A latest BIOS, 7700K 4.9Ghz 1.272V BIOS LLC 5, Gskill Ripjaws 5 @3333-15-17-17-36 set too XMP 3200 and tuned from there 500% stable across 8 instances of HCI Memtest.

2 Hours initial testing in X264 16 threads a 5GHZ 1.31 volts BIOS (1.28/1.296 CPUz) LLC 4 stable no XMP temps at around 80C

Setting XMP to on raises temperatures 5-8 C over all cores, without me touching anything else.

Setting OC to manual limits me to 3200 frequency max, so not an option.

The only option labelled PLL is 'CPU Internal PLL' in Tweakers Paradise menu, not sure if it makes a difference here. I tried setting it to the minimum value of 0.900 made no difference to Realbench temps.

HWINFO seems to misread the values for VCCSA and VCCIO.

The only voltage I can imagine at this point that is adding the extra temperatures is the DRAM voltage.

Any other option then delid or lower O.C? there must be some voltages I can squeeze down a bit I'm missing? Little help









Edit. Seems my BIOS was corrupted, managed to lose 5c off of temps by reflashing, some voltage obviously got stuck. Remounted cooler and maybe lost 1c, old print looked ok if a little too much.

Still a bit dissapointed to be touching 80c max at 4.9 1.248V going by what some others non delidded temps with similar coolers. Seems like a damn good chip volts wise, without XMP hitting 5 ghz at 1.28 volts stable for a couple of hours x264, just too hot for me. Running final Realbench 8 hours now.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> Soo. I'll try and keep it shorter this time. Asus Prime Z270-A latest BIOS, 7700K 4.9Ghz 1.272V BIOS LLC 5, Gskill Ripjaws 5 @3333-15-17-17-36 set too XMP 3200 and tuned from there 500% stable across 8 instances of HCI Memtest.
> 
> 2 Hours initial testing in X264 16 threads a 5GHZ 1.31 volts BIOS (1.28/1.296 CPUz) LLC 4 stable no XMP temps at around 80C
> 
> Setting XMP to on raises temperatures 5-8 C over all cores, without me touching anything else.
> 
> Setting OC to manual limits me to 3200 frequency max, so not an option.
> 
> The only option labelled PLL is 'CPU Internal PLL' in Tweakers Paradise menu, not sure if it makes a difference here. I tried setting it to the minimum value of 0.900 made no difference to Realbench temps.
> 
> HWINFO seems to misread the values for VCCSA and VCCIO.
> 
> The only voltage I can imagine at this point that is adding the extra temperatures is the DRAM voltage.
> 
> Any other option then delid or lower O.C? there must be some voltages I can squeeze down a bit I'm missing? Little help
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit. Seems my BIOS was corrupted, managed to lose 5c off of temps by reflashing, some voltage obviously got stuck. Remounted cooler and maybe lost 1c, old print looked ok if a little too much.
> 
> Still a bit dissapointed to be touching 80c max at 4.9 1.248V going by what some others non delidded temps with similar coolers. Seems like a damn good chip volts wise, without XMP hitting 5 ghz at 1.28 volts stable for a couple of hours x264, just too hot for me. Running final Realbench 8 hours now.


these cpus really need to be delidded and have the tim replaced with liquid metal. You'll be able to run higher clocks, voltage and get lower temperatures.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> these cpus really need to be delidded and have the tim replaced with liquid metal. You'll be able to run higher clocks, voltage and get lower temperatures.


I know youre right, Im just a bit surprised how hot this chip runs at such a low voltage. Theres another user with an NHD-15 getting better temps then me with 1.28 volts at 5.0 in the chart.

I know theres a lot of variables, ambients in my place are at 22 year round, I have good case airflow, no difference in having the sides off the case the GPU is on a Kraken X41 exhausting straight outside the case.

Part of me is like if I can get to 5.2 at under 1.4 delidded which seems pretty likely then it will only be 6 or 7 % more performance that i wont notice. Then the other part just wants the jiggles for the giggles. And I already have some liquid metal in the cupboard.


----------



## Dnic41

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> these cpus really need to be delidded and have the tim replaced with liquid metal. You'll be able to run higher clocks, voltage and get lower temperatures.


Actually thinking of sending my in to Silicon Lottery so that I can achieve lower temps.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> I know youre right, Im just a bit surprised how hot this chip runs at such a low voltage. Theres another user with an NHD-15 getting better temps then me with 1.28 volts at 5.0 in the chart.
> 
> I know theres a lot of variables, ambients in my place are at 22 year round, I have good case airflow, no difference in having the sides off the case the GPU is on a Kraken X41 exhausting straight outside the case.
> 
> Part of me is like if I can get to 5.2 at under 1.4 delidded which seems pretty likely then it will only be 6 or 7 % more performance that i wont notice. Then the other part just wants the jiggles for the giggles. And I already have some liquid metal in the cupboard.


jiggle giggles have a lot of value IMO.








among a lot of cpu samples, the OEM tim application and temps is not very consistent. some delids see -20C others only -10C or so. Downside is you completely void any warranty.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dnic41*
> 
> Actually thinking of sending my in to Silicon Lottery so that I can achieve lower temps.


you can do that, or buy the rockit delid/relid kit. works very well.


----------



## ritchiedrama

From Intel:

Thank you very much for your reply.
A phase-locked loop (PLL) is an electronic circuit with a voltage or voltage-driven oscillator that constantly adjusts to match the frequency of an input signal.
Unfortunately, I cannot advise in which settings you need to use in your BIOS for the PLL setting. The BIOS is designed by the board manufacturer and they can set any behavior/values they see fit. I would recommend you to contact the board manufacturer for advice in BIOS settings, as is the BIOS which controls the CPU.
That said I believe the value you should leave is the one assigned by default when you set the whole BIOS in default settings, as it is the one the manufacturer intended, although sometimes there might be BIOS errors, or wrong options which are set as default.
Please have a look to the 7th Gen processor datasheet, where you will further information about the PLL:http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html
I understand this is not the answer you were looking for, but for further information regarding the PLL settings you would need to contact your board's manufacturer.


----------



## ducegt

In return, did you rant to Intel how that's not proof of anything and that the tech support person is an unqualified teenager who thinks he is a big cheese?


----------



## Jpmboy

you can teach anyone to fish... but then they are on their own.










Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> In return, did you rant to Intel how that's not proof of anything and that the tech support person is an unqualified teenager who thinks he is a big cheese?


They contacted the relevant department after i pressed them. Just because you and many others here don't seek answers and just believe the first thing you're told don't be mad. My work here is done you can all go back to your fantasy land of ignorance. Not sure why some of these people are considered reputable members and are even in a table for overclocking in the OP took two minutes and I was at 5ghz, so difficult.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> They contacted the relevant department after i pressed them. Just because you and many others here don't seek answers and just believe the first thing you're told don't be mad. My work here is done ymu can all go back to your fantasy land of ignorance. Not sure why some of these people are considered reputable members and are even in a table for overclocking in the OP took two minutes and I was at 5ghz, so difficult.


The relevant department who couldn't answer the question? That's an accomplishment? You have not got your answer so where has your frustration turned? You seem to have an excessive need for approval. Much like teenage girls on instagram...thanks for your efforts, even if they were in vain.


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> The relevant department who couldn't answer the question? That's an accomplishment? You have not got your answer so where has your frustration turned? You seem to have an excessive need for approval. Much like teenage girls on instagram...thanks for your efforts, even if they were in vain.


Well what they said aligns with what MSI said and what most of us said yesterday auto isn't the correct option likely and just using default 1.2 is the smartest idea. This is better than knowing nothing because before this people on this forum just said absolutely nothing and provided no valuable insight other than making false claims about sensor readings. Get a grip man honestly.


----------



## Dude970

Now that dickdrama's work is done, we can move on


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dude970*
> 
> Now that dickdrama's work is done, we can move on


^^ This.


----------



## moorhen2

New toys arrived today, now to see what this silicon can do. Batch number L644G988.


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dude970*
> 
> Now that dickdrama's work is done, we can move on


I don't see what the harm in him reaching out was. They kinda deferred the question to whomever the board manufacturer is but I didn't expect much else to be honest. Even the board manufacturers don't see the most keen.


----------



## jasjeet

My temps seem to be creeping up, hitting 75-80c again in gaming.
Think I applied too much CLU after delid?
I painted the die and underside of IHS.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> My temps seem to be creeping up, hitting 75-80c again in gaming.
> Think I applied too much CLU after delid?
> I painted the die and underside of IHS.


If there was too much CLU, it would squeeze out once under the mount pressure and socket clips (tho this can be a bad thing since it is conductive.). Did you reseal the IHS or leave the bondline cleaned with no adhesive?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> I painted the die and underside of IHS.


That's what I did and saw good drop in temps and it stayed that way








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Did you reseal the IHS or leave the bondline cleaned with no adhesive?


this

there could be a problem if you used too much silicon
like Intel does


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> They contacted the relevant department after i pressed them. Just because you and many others here don't seek answers and just believe the first thing you're told don't be mad. My work here is done you can all go back to your fantasy land of ignorance. Not sure why some of these people are considered reputable members and are even in a table for overclocking in the OP took two minutes and I was at 5ghz, so difficult.


This is childish and ridiculous Im right your wrong, like a child pack up your bat and ball and go home!


----------



## ducegt

I used a lot less than what Peter just showed. Mine didn't look consistent, but it's still holding up.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I used a lot less than what Peter just showed. Mine didn't look consistent, but it's still holding up.












I wasn't really so sure

but having a look at the inside of the IHS and I guessed I might need more

was kinda rough

also I wasn't sure how thin I could make the silicon

which ended up barely any at all


----------



## needh3lp

Can anyone tell me if running off the onboard graphics would reduce or otherwise influence my overclocking potential in any way?

I've got most of my parts in for my 7700k build, but the GPU has yet to arrive. I was thinking I'd get going with the OC while I waited. Good/bad idea?


----------



## MikeS3000

Is anyone else's 7700k uncore frequency super sensitive to the stability of their core clocks? I've been having a hell of a time getting stability at the correct voltages and I have been foolishly running my uncore at 4.7 ghz because many guides say you should be able to run uncore within 300 mhz of your core clock. I passed 8 hours of Realbench at 5.0 and 5.1 core finally, but then I decided that I wanted to use OCCT large as a secondary stability test. OCCT large kept failing anywhere from minutes to 1.5 hours. I dropped my uncore back down to stock 4.2 and so far I'm at 90 minutes and still going in OCCT. I had no idea the uncore could be hampering my core overclocks so badly. I know the effects of overclocking uncore are minimal at best, but if you're reading this forum then I'm sure you're trying to overclock every aspect of the system just like I am. I'm not screwing with uncore anymore, lesson learned.


----------



## ducegt

You would be better off not messing around with OCCT. It's overkill. If it was RealBench stable at 4.7, leave it there IMO


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> You shorted the capacitors which provides energy to the CPU.
> RIP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NoxceLMU9dnVev8QmYmBT16fnjwrGkwdIRjTQzzKaVk/edit#gid=0
> L639G023 and L639F977 looks good.


Hust picked a l639f977. Cant wait what will it show me


----------



## MikeS3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> You would be better off not messing around with OCCT. It's overkill. If it was RealBench stable at 4.7, leave it there IMO


So the thing is that I thought OCCT would be overkill as well due to maybe it being over the top with heat generation. Since I delidded my temps are more than in control. My average package temp is 61 deg and a brief core max of 73 deg during my OCCT large test for almost 2 hours. Since it's not crushing me on heat, my thoughts are that any core errors that popup w/ OCCT (especially quickly) cannot mean that I have a rock solid system. I just wanted to use Realbench (real world application usage scenario) and a synthetic that supposedly has been reliable for years to give myself confidence that I'm not "cheating" my system with an unstable overclock. Am I just being too much of a perfectionist?


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> If there was too much CLU, it would squeeze out once under the mount pressure and socket clips (tho this can be a bad thing since it is conductive.). Did you reseal the IHS or leave the bondline cleaned with no adhesive?


Pretty much 99% clean of adhesive. I didn't glue it back.

I'm thinking my tube of mx4 is going bad since it's like 3 years without a protective cap, just a tissue to seal the tube lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *needh3lp*
> 
> Can anyone tell me if running off the onboard graphics would reduce or otherwise influence my overclocking potential in any way?
> 
> I've got most of my parts in for my 7700k build, but the GPU has yet to arrive. I was thinking I'd get going with the OC while I waited. Good/bad idea?


depending on whether you OC the iGPU or not, it can impact the overall OC. But not by much.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Hust picked a l639f977. Cant wait what will it show me


I like that batch!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> Pretty much 99% clean of adhesive. I didn't glue it back.
> 
> I'm thinking my tube of mx4 is going bad since it's like 3 years without a protective cap, just a tissue to seal the tube lol.


that's too funny, it's worth getting some Gelid Extreme or Grizzly Kryonaut if you decide to redo the TIM. Regarding the IHS, it really only takes a very small dab of adhesive at the four corners (permatex black is good, I use Loctite 587 only because it's what I happen to have). Main reason, besides ease of pulling iot out of the socket if needed, is toi help avoid the forward slide on the IHS that will occur when you close the socket latching mech. Other than those reasons, a clean PCB and IHS is the best.


----------



## MaKeN

Guys , can some one share his opinions... so on new mb new cpu , it wont boot ...
What can it be?
There is an led that stays red saying the cpu is bad. Really? Its just from the store....



What would that be?
Do i need to give it like 5 mins for first boot? ( no cooler is installed kinda scares me.


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> depending on whether you OC the iGPU or not, it can impact the overall OC. But not by much.
> I like that batch!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that's too funny, it's worth getting some Gelid Extreme or Grizzly Kryonaut if you decide to redo the TIM. Regarding the IHS, it really only takes a very small dab of adhesive at the four corners (permatex black is good, I use Loctite 587 only because it's what I happen to have). Main reason, besides ease of pulling iot out of the socket if needed, is toi help avoid the forward slide on the IHS that will occur when you close the socket latching mech. Other than those reasons, a clean PCB and IHS is the best.


I just put my finger on the IHS when locking in place, didn't move at all. I'm just wondering if I got it lined up perfectly, since coolers are designed specifically for the curvature of the IHS.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> no cooler is installed kinda scares me.


Install the cooler. The light is probably because of not having it on.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Install the cooler. The light is probably because of not having it on.


Thx bro ill try to , just itsk kinda a damn big job to do man
Makes me hate custome loop now , if the problem is not the cooler











Like a 1 hor work









You think any fan pluged into cpu fan port will fake his thought?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> I just put my finger on the IHS when locking in place, didn't move at all. I'm just wondering if I got it lined up perfectly, since coolers are designed specifically for the curvature of the IHS.


gotta get a better paste mate











Intel Kaby Lake i5-7600K CPU De-Lid & Re-Lid Temp Results

they also did a 7700k, but went straight to liquid metal with it
also there's another statement in regards to the curvature of IHS
Quote:


> Worth mentioning is that the Integrated Heat Spreader (IHS) that Intel is now using seems to be quite a bit more flat than what I was used to seeing on Skylake CPUs


have to agree on that for my model at least
seems way more even than I was used to even from Skylake

also
7600k naked die cooling









7600K Naked Die Cooling Temperature Follow-Up
Quote:


> To be succinct, I would not suggest going naked with the die at this time with Kaby Lake or Skylake processors. The best temperature delta I was able to get out of the naked die was 3 degrees C


that's compared to de-lid and re-lid


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Guys , can some one share his opinions... so on new mb new cpu , it wont boot ...
> What can it be?
> There is an led that stays red saying the cpu is bad. Really? Its just from the store....
> 
> 
> 
> What would that be?
> Do i need to give it like 5 mins for first boot? ( no cooler is installed kinda scares me.


just use an intel stock cooler. It's better than nothing and the cpu will trip "prochot" when booting without one... it hit an over temp condition almost immediately. Hopefully that the problem. The only other thing possible is bent socket pins.
wait.. that's not the L639F977 batch is it!







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jasjeet*
> 
> I just put my finger on the IHS when locking in place, didn't move at all. I'm just wondering if I got it lined up perfectly, since coolers are designed specifically for the curvature of the IHS.


that works! there's not much of a crown to the KBL IHS. In the past the crown was there to help manage tim spread and to spread the contact pressure to the edge of the IHS (rather than straight down).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Thx bro ill try to , just itsk kinda a damn big job to do man
> Makes me hate custome loop now , if the problem is not the cooler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like a 1 hor work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You think any fan pluged into cpu fan port will fake his thought?


cpu fan error would still post and provide that warning... no heat sink at all will overheat just to post. lol - put some koolance QDCs in that loop!


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just use an intel stock cooler. It's better than nothing and the cpu will trip "prochot" when booting without one... it hit an over temp condition almost immediately. Hopefully that the problem. The only other thing possible is bent socket pins.
> wait.. that's not the L639F977 batch is it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that works! there's not much of a crown to the KBL IHS. In the past the crown was there to help manage tim spread and to spread the contact pressure to the edge of the IHS (rather than straight down).
> cpu fan error would still post and provide that warning... no heat sink at all will overheat just to post. lol - put some koolance QDCs in that loop!


Just called msi , they told me the board is bad...

Ok ill try to assemble it to make sure it has that cooler in there

May it be a psu?


----------



## godboy

After reading this and the Asus guide provided for the 7700K I am just slightly confused. Outside of Vcore and CPU Multiplier do I need to change any other settings?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *godboy*
> 
> After reading this and the Asus guide provided for the 7700K I am just slightly confused. Outside of Vcore and CPU Multiplier do I need to change any other settings?


not really for the cpu core unless you run >5.2GHz..


----------



## godboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not really for the cpu core unless you run >5.2GHz..


Thanks Jpmboy,

After performing my delid I can run 5.0 GHz at 1.35V stable. So now all thats left to do is download the vcore by .1 until I find the lowest vcore I can run at stable right? I don't really want to go above 5.0GHz because I'm running on air in a SFF ncase. But my temps sit right around 70C on load at 5.0 GHz 1.35v


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *godboy*
> 
> Thanks Jpmboy,
> 
> After performing my delid I can run 5.0 GHz at 1.35V stable. So now all thats left to do is download the vcore by .1 until I find the lowest vcore I can run at stable right? I don't really want to go above 5.0GHz because I'm running on air in a SFF ncase. But my temps sit right around 70C on load at 5.0 GHz 1.35v


for the core, yes that's a good process. lower vcore until the system becomes unstable to what ever stability test you elect to use as your measure. once done, increase cache until is becomes unstable at the voltage you ended up at for core. Last... and overlooked too often is to tune the ram up until it is at the freq you want (or that will do) AND pass >500% Hci Memtest or 1h google stressapptest (needs linux or win 10 bash). unlike core or cache which just crash/bsod, bad ram settings can completely corrupt an OS install, without really any warning along the way.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Are people here watching this Intel thread about 7700K processors experiencing large transient temperature spikes when doing mundane things like opening a browser tab, opening Note Pad, clicking to start a video, even clicking on the desktop? People are seeing short term temperature spikes of ~30C. The Intel guy told them to download the Intel System Support Utility, run it, and upload the resulting info file, which many have done. Intel was going to open an internal investigation but now seems to have gone silent. The thread over there is now 8 pages long and getting ugly.

When I come here, I see people happily overclocking their 7700K CPUs to 5 GHz and beyond and not reporting any kind of strange temperature spikes. The people posting over there are saying there is a series fundamental problem with the processors. Some are considering returning them. I was toying with the idea of staring a Kaby Lake build but now I am having serious second thoughts.

Anyone?

https://communities.intel.com/thread/110728


----------



## godboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Are people here watching this Intel thread about 7700K processors experiencing large transient temperature spikes when doing mundane things like opening a browser tab, opening Note Pad, clicking to start a video, even clicking on the desktop? People are seeing short term temperature spikes of ~30C. The Intel guy told them to download the Intel System Support Utility, run it, and upload the resulting info file, which many have done. Intel was going to open an internal investigation but now seems to have gone silent. The thread over there is now 8 pages long and getting ugly.
> 
> When I come here, I see people happily overclocking their 7700K CPUs to 5 GHz and beyond and not reporting any kind of strange temperature spikes. The people posting over there are saying there is a series fundamental problem with the processors. Some are considering returning them. I was toying with the idea of staring a Kaby Lake build but now I am having serious second thoughts.
> 
> Anyone?
> 
> https://communities.intel.com/thread/110728


I have the issue, I think everyone does to be honest. Done 3 builds with 7700K all the same even on the delid. Wouldn't let it deter you.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Are people here watching this Intel thread about 7700K processors experiencing large transient temperature spikes when doing mundane things like opening a browser tab, opening Note Pad, clicking to start a video, even clicking on the desktop? People are seeing short term temperature spikes of ~30C. The Intel guy told them to download the Intel System Support Utility, run it, and upload the resulting info file, which many have done. Intel was going to open an internal investigation but now seems to have gone silent. The thread over there is now 8 pages long and getting ugly.
> 
> When I come here, I see people happily overclocking their 7700K CPUs to 5 GHz and beyond and not reporting any kind of strange temperature spikes. The people posting over there are saying there is a series fundamental problem with the processors. Some are considering returning them. I was toying with the idea of staring a Kaby Lake build but now I am having serious second thoughts.
> 
> Anyone?
> 
> https://communities.intel.com/thread/110728


yeah, I saw that thread, I've tried to reproduce the issue and have not been able to whether running 5.0/4.8 or 5.3/5.0 at 1.210V and 1.328V resp - cpu is delidded. (same thing for a delid 7350K)
here's a trace of temps while win8.1 update has been searching for updates (at 11-13% cpu usage for hours! until i disable the service), opening and closing firefox and every other program I have installed on this OS. Weird problem for sure that a lot of users have reported on that thread.

I'll let this go overnight to see if there are any spikes.


----------



## creasian

Well I went and got my 7700k, and after some effort I've struck a wall. I've passed a 2 hour realbench and have the temp readouts from the 1 hour test to show, but I'm kinda bummed that I had to hit such a high vcore for 4.9ghz across all cores stable. XMP is enabled, with the corsair lpx running at it's 3200mhz. LLC is level 5, and I will admit I am rather rusty to overclocking. My cooler is the Noctua D15.



This was one of the games I played with hwinfo up as well. I've played much longer and the results stayed the same.



Idle temps I tested using hwinfo and going to work, which was about 12 hours to see how they handled. This was just turning the monitor off and letting the system idle without sleep/hibernate to see how stable they were. I was pretty happy with them.



Given my vcore and temps with realbench, gaming, and idle should I just be satisfied or do any of you think there is anything i could/should be doing? The cpu isn't delidded, and the case is a phanteks primo. The only thing that bugs me is the vcore needing 1.36, as even 1.355 causes realbench to fail. Prime 95 hasn't showed me any issues either, and once I got the vcore to 1.36vcore the system has been running superb in everything i've done without any headaches.


----------



## Jayjr1105

Hey all, running my Sig Rig @ 4.7 with 1.28v and it passes everything from IBT, to Realbench, to Cinebench but one core fails every single time with P95 2810. Since when is P95 so difficult to get stable. It used to be the other way around.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> Well what they said aligns with what MSI said and what most of us said yesterday auto isn't the correct option likely and just using default 1.2 is the smartest idea. This is better than knowing nothing because before this people on this forum just said absolutely nothing and provided no valuable insight other than making false claims about sensor readings. Get a grip man honestly.


Intel said to go with what the board manufacture use for it's default Bios setting and Automatic or default Bios setting is stock.

Where did you contact Intel?


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel said to go with what the board manufacture use for it's default Bios setting and Automatic or default Bios setting is stock.
> 
> Where did you contact Intel?


I contacted Intel via support ticket.

When bios is set to 'default' the setting is 1.2, not AUTO (1.3).


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, I saw that thread, I've tried to reproduce the issue and have not been able to whether running 5.0/4.8 or 5.3/5.0 at 1.210V and 1.328V resp - cpu is delidded. (same thing for a delid 7350K)
> here's a trace of temps while win8.1 update has been searching for updates (at 11-13% cpu usage for hours! until i disable the service), opening and closing firefox and every other program I have installed on this OS. Weird problem for sure that a lot of users have reported on that thread.
> 
> I'll let this go overnight to see if there are any spikes.


Hmmm Thanks for responding and posting those pics. I saw you posted over there too. From the Intel thread it sounds like EVERYONE has this issue but maybe because only people with the issue are posting there. Happens even after a delid so it's not an IHS or TIM issue. Someone said voltage regulation problem or faulty temperature sensor. Either seems reasonable. I will keep an eye on that thread. I was surprised how responsive Intel was - at least at first.


----------



## koji

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> I contacted Intel via support ticket.
> 
> When bios is set to 'default' the setting is 1.2, not AUTO (1.3).


Yo ritchie,

So you are running 1.20 PLL manually dialed in right? When I put mine on auto the thing defaults to (a whopping) 1.35 PLL OC.

Still stresstesting myself but so far 1.20 PLL appeared to be just fine (on 4.8 that is...)

I'm on a MSI z270 Gaming M7, I assume they use the same voltage specs for our boards/bios.

+rep for the effort man, every thing I can min max = win


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *koji*
> 
> Yo ritchie,
> 
> So you are running 1.20 PLL manually dialed in right? When I put mine on auto the thing defaults to (a whopping) 1.35 PLL OC.
> 
> Still stresstesting myself but so far 1.20 PLL appeared to be just fine (on 4.8 that is...)
> 
> I'm on a MSI z270 Gaming M7, I assume they use the same voltage specs for our boards/bios.
> 
> +rep for the effort man, every thing I can min max = win


I'm using 1.15 manually dialled in, but yeah 1.2 is a good shout


----------



## koji

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ritchiedrama*
> 
> I'm using 1.15 manually dialled in, but yeah 1.2 is a good shout


Aight will have to give that a go once I manage to get my stuff stable, thanks!


----------



## ritchiedrama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *koji*
> 
> Aight will have to give that a go once I manage to get my stuff stable, thanks!


I just went to 5.1GHz and 1.2 CPU PLL to see how that is


----------



## domcio84

5.0 GHz 1,28v

You can see that you bobcatchris is very close to my batch

Position in the table 14, on the first page.




























My PC

CPU: I5 7600K | 4.8 GHz / 1.22 V-Core | Gelid GC-Extreme
COOLER: Thermalright Venomous X + Noiseblocker Eloop B12-PS |
MOBO: Gigabyte HD3P Z270 |
RAM: Corsair Vengeance LPX CL 16 3333 Mhz 16 GB |
GPU: MSI GeForce GTX 1070 GAMING X 8 GB |
PSU: Corsair RMx 550W |
CASE: Fractal Design Arc Midi + 2X Be Quiet SilentWings 3 140mm |
SSD: Cricial MX550 256 GB | Crucial MX300 750 GB |
HDD: Samsung 7200 2 TB |
SOUND:Creative X-Fi x64MB
SYSTEM: WINDOWS 10 x64 MOD |
PERIPHERAL: Roccat Kone Pure | Logitech UltraX


----------



## mimosky

Well, I asked MSI if it's possible that lowering PLL OC voltage (under 1.2 default value) can skew the CPU temp readings.

They answered that lower PLL OC means lower temperatures and undervolting it won't cause skewed sensor readings. So... 1.16V is stable for me I will try with 1.15, why not









PS. I received the answer yesterday.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Hmmm Thanks for responding and posting those pics. I saw you posted over there too. *From the Intel thread it sounds like EVERYONE has this issue but maybe because only people with the issue are posting there.* Happens even after a delid so it's not an IHS or TIM issue. Someone said voltage regulation problem or faulty temperature sensor. Either seems reasonable. I will keep an eye on that thread. I was surprised how responsive Intel was - at least at first.


That's what 90% of the posts in any such thread are. You don't hear from users if everything is working right.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mimosky*
> 
> They answered that lower PLL OC means lower temperatures and undervolting it won't cause skewed sensor readings. So


So, all our anecdotes suggest they are wrong about it not changing sensor readings thus how credible is their former statement?


----------



## mimosky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> So, all our anecdotes suggest they are wrong about it not changing sensor readings thus how credible is their former statement?


Well, I will stick to what MSI says. For me, personally, core temperatures are really weird when being on 1.1V (two cores are 15-16 degrees on idle). But on the other hand, the package temp or CPU PECI temps are much more realistic (being i.e. 35 degrees on idle, when cores are: 23, 28, 15, 16 or something like that).

So here's my last thoughts about this matter: if the readings are skewed, it looks like it affects only separate cores temperatures, not the CPU temp itself (and it's probably the most important one when it comes to cooling etc.). Secondly, reducing PLL OC voltage means lower temperatures. And finally, **** this


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> That's what 90% of the posts in any such thread are. You don't hear from users if everything is working right.


Yeah its the same reading customer MOBO reviews on New Egg - Almost all of them are horror stories from people who had terrible problems - oft times self inflicted (IMHO). From those reviews, around 90% of new boards are defective from the factory. Not that these things don't happen, but just sayin'


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Yeah its the same reading customer MOBO reviews on New Egg - Almost all of them are horror stories from people who had terrible problems - oft times self inflicted (IMHO). From those reviews, around 90% of new boards are defective from the factory. Not that these things don't happen, but just sayin'


some newegg reviews are like... "Ancient Alien Theorists' contend that...."


----------



## needh3lp

I'm in the middle of tweaking my OC and I've noticed that even at stock settings AVX prime95 causes my temps to skyrocket into scary territory (90's). I quickly stopped the test once I saw this.

Is this normal for a completely stock 7700k with a noctua d15?

Temps are under 80 during x256 test loads even while OC'd. I'm not delidded, but it's starting to seem necessary...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *needh3lp*
> 
> I'm in the middle of tweaking my OC and I've noticed that even at stock settings AVX prime95 causes my temps to skyrocket into scary territory (90's). I quickly stopped the test once I saw this.
> 
> Is this normal for a completely stock 7700k with a noctua d15?
> 
> Temps are under 80 during x256 test loads even while OC'd. I'm not delidded, but it's starting to seem necessary...


http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> That's what 90% of the posts in any such thread are. You don't hear from users if everything is working right.


I too notice that my fan spins up faster when I open up programs but it is so brief that it never bothered me and I never gave it a second thought. I put big fat fans on my heatsink for them to be used but they are for the most part quiet.

As an aside, when you guys are stress testing, do you guys not touch your computers? I noticed Realbench gets interrupted if you do but I use x264 which allows you too and sometimes it'll pass for many hours but when I open a video in my internet browser the computer will crash or randomly a few days later during a gaming session. It leads me to having my browser open with a video streaming in the back while I have my media player playing music while I use x264 as this crashes stuff sooner rather than later if its unstable. Thanks.


----------



## needh3lp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


I've been following this guide and I'm at the point where I'd like to use an AVX offset. My thinking was to see where the temps and vcore settle under default/auto conditions and then adjust my offset while overclocked from there. To my surprise temps were crazy high under AVX loads at default settings.

My question is, are 90 degree temps normal at default settings under AVX loads? (Noctua d15 not delidded)


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *needh3lp*
> 
> I've been following this guide and I'm at the point where I'd like to use an AVX offset. My thinking was to see where the temps and vcore settle under default/auto conditions and then adjust my offset while overclocked from there. To my surprise temps were crazy high under AVX loads at default settings.
> 
> My question is, are 90 degree temps normal at default settings under AVX loads? (Noctua d15 not delidded)


AVX loads are supposed to be the most intense so that is why it downclocks during these loads. With that said, 90 degree peak temps is way too hot for any load. You need to lower your multiplier and voltage.


----------



## needh3lp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> AVX loads are supposed to be the most intense so that is why it downclocks during these loads. With that said, 90 degree peak temps is way too hot for any load. You need to lower your multiplier and voltage.


I agree that this is too high that's why I wanted another opinion.

I'm saying the entire bios is set to default - no overclock, not even xmp - and temps are this high with a high end air cooler.

I should not have to worry about voltage and multipliers at the default settings, right? Yet these are my results.

I think my chip has a horrible paste job from intel.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> AVX loads are supposed to be the most intense so that is why it downclocks during these loads. With that said, 90 degree peak temps is way too hot for any load. You need to lower your multiplier and voltage.


That's not how it's supposed to work

let's say you're stable at 5.2 or more
with temps at 70ish

now some heavy AVX instructions kick in and you're temps go above 90 or so and may even cause insatbilty

as in
testing with most recent Prime is not recommended any more

hint: first page

avx offset let's you achieve higher clocks and let anything heavy on AVX run at lower settings

I've done my stability testing without avx offset

but for daily use I have it set

also while I can see RealBench having some AVX, it's nowhere near Prime

if you have the option on you can see the frequency drop from time to time when using RealBench

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> I noticed Realbench gets interrupted if you do


You sure you're using stress test?
because to me it sounds like benching where it stops when you move the mouse

if that is what you mean

also memory problems are harder to pinpoint and can, can manifest like what you're describing

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *needh3lp*
> 
> I think my chip has a horrible paste job from intel.


could be

if the mounting and paste are both OK

I think I've seen some reviews where non OC 7700k's achieved quite high temps when put under pressure


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> As an aside, when you guys are stress testing, do you guys not touch your computers?


I usually set mine to run for whatever length of time I need it too and leave it alone until it's done.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> I noticed Realbench gets interrupted if you do but I use x264 which allows you too and sometimes it'll pass for many hours but when I open a video in my internet browser the computer will crash or randomly a few days later during a gaming session. It leads me to having my browser open with a video streaming in the back while I have my media player playing music while I use x264 as this crashes stuff sooner rather than later if its unstable. Thanks.


RealBench benchmark will stop if mouse movement is detected, but not the stability test portion. If you are experiencing interrupts/crashes when you do other tasks, you may be a little light in stability for what you are trying to do simultaneously.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> I too notice that my fan spins up faster when I open up programs but it is so brief that it never bothered me and I never gave it a second thought. I put big fat fans on my heatsink for them to be used but they are for the most part quiet.
> 
> As an aside, when you guys are stress testing, do you guys not touch your computers? I noticed Realbench gets interrupted if you do but I use x264 which allows you too and sometimes it'll pass for many hours but when I open a video in my internet browser the computer will crash or randomly a few days later during a gaming session. It leads me to having my browser open with a video streaming in the back while I have my media player playing music while I use x264 as this crashes stuff sooner rather than later if its unstable. Thanks.


realbench Benchmark will halt when you move the mouse. Realbench stresssest should not. set it to 1h with the amount of installed ram selected and it runs.. you can still use the machine, but remember, it will use 95% + of ram so page file use will be high.
oops - ninja'd







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *needh3lp*
> 
> I've been following this guide and I'm at the point where I'd like to use an AVX offset. My thinking was to see where the temps and vcore settle under default/auto conditions and then adjust my offset while overclocked from there. To my surprise temps were crazy high under AVX loads at default settings.
> 
> *My question is, are 90 degree temps normal at default settings under AVX loads*? (Noctua d15 not delidded)


\I don;t think that is normal. WHat TIM did you use and double check the mount quality. Sounds like it needs to be redone (assuming the die to IHS tim appication on that sample is not completely borked







)


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> set it to 1h with the amount of installed ram selected and it runs.


although I'm sure it's just an example

Just want to add that I would really recommend letting it run 8 hours over night

when I moved from 5.2 to 5.3 (just trying to find out highest possible OC) RealBench would consistently crash at the 4 hour mark until I upped the voltage enough to pass finally 8


----------



## redone13

Yea, perhaps I had the bench and not the stress test. I wanted to see how it compared to x264 as they seem to match up very similarly. Peter, thanks for the clarification regarding the AVX offset. I do agree about the 8 hour thing but I find the with x264, sometimes it isn't enough and I need to stress my system more with videos streaming and media playing simultaneously. I had some instability in Cemu, granted it is very experiemental, I got some memory BSODs with it when I was tweaking my OC. This occured after I had done a successful x264 test without touching my computer. And needh3lp, it is very possible your auto settings are setting the voltage and thus temps to unsafe levels. If it is approaching 1.4 on a non-delidded chip, that could be the reason your temps are near 90.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> I too notice that my fan spins up faster when I open up programs but it is so brief


temp and OC problems aside

you should have a look deeper into how you can control you're fans

my board let's me ignore temp spikes for a given time (can enter the seconds as a value) before it ramps up the fans


----------



## needh3lp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> \I don;t think that is normal. WHat TIM did you use and double check the mount quality. Sounds like it needs to be redone (assuming the die to IHS tim appication on that sample is not completely borked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


I used Noctua NT-H1 that came with the cooler. This isn't my first rodeo so I'm fairly confident I've done the application correctly, but I might give it another go just to be sure.

I should clarify these 90 degree temps come from Prime95 latest version. I have not tested with Realbench yet, but it's my understanding that the AVX loads from Realbench should be more realistic and maybe I should stick to that for stress testing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> And needh3lp, it is very possible your auto settings are setting the voltage and thus temps to unsafe levels. If it is approaching 1.4 on a non-delidded chip, that could be the reason your temps are near 90.


Auto settings are putting me at 4.5Ghz @ 1.280 - these high temps are coming from the latest Prime95, which I'm understanding may be an unrealistic test to begin with.


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> temp and OC problems aside
> 
> you should have a look deeper into how you can control you're fans
> 
> my board let's me ignore temp spikes for a given time (can enter the seconds as a value) before it ramps up the fans


I will investigate after my current stress test finishes. Experimenting with the overclock temperature control setting. Are you using an Asus or MSI board?


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *needh3lp*
> 
> I used Noctua NT-H1 that came with the cooler. This isn't my first rodeo so I'm fairly confident I've done the application correctly, but I might give it another go just to be sure.
> 
> I should clarify these 90 degree temps come from Prime95 latest version. I have not tested with Realbench yet, but it's my understanding that the AVX loads from Realbench should be more realistic and maybe I should stick to that for stress testing.
> 
> Auto settings are putting me at 4.5Ghz @ 1.280 - these high temps are coming from the latest Prime95, which I'm understanding may be an unrealistic test to begin with.


Try x264 from the OP. 1.280 shouldn't be roasting the CPU like that, then again, I've also heard that P95 also wasn't running as hot as it used to even in new versions. It is definitely hotter than x264 or Realbench though as evidenced by the time differences of 1 vs 8 hours for stability tests but even that can depend on the size of FFTs.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> Are you using an Asus or MSI board?


Asus

but I'm sure MSI isn't lacking in options to fiddle with


----------



## redone13

Alright, I have the M9H so I'll take a look.


----------



## needh3lp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> Try x264 from the OP. 1.280 shouldn't be roasting the CPU like that, then again, I've also heard that P95 also wasn't running as hot as it used to even in new versions. It is definitely hotter than x264 or Realbench though as evidenced by the time differences of 1 vs 8 hours for stability tests.


I have been using x264 for my testing and temps are much more in line. I'm seeing low 70's during x264. However, this is not an AVX load, correct?

What should I use for AVX testing if not Prime95? Will Realbench work for testing an AVX load?


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *needh3lp*
> 
> I have been using x264 for my testing and temps are much more in line. I'm seeing low 70's during x264. However, this is not an AVX load, correct?
> 
> What should I use for AVX testing if not Prime95? Will Realbench work for testing an AVX load?


I haven't encountered a scenario in my everyday computing where my temperatures shot up that high due to AVX workloads. I just test for what is realistic to me, thus I never saw a point to using P95. Perhaps someone else could chime in.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> Try x264 from the OP. 1.280 shouldn't be roasting the CPU like that, then again, I've also heard that P95 also wasn't running as hot as it used to even in new versions. It is definitely hotter than x264 or Realbench though as evidenced by the time differences of 1 vs 8 hours for stability tests but even that can depend on the size of FFTs.


----------



## redone13

There ya go, a picture is worth a million words haha.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *needh3lp*
> 
> Will Realbench work for testing an AVX load?


Yes

I actually tested this with an AVX offset
and saw frequency drop from time to time


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Yes
> 
> I actually tested this with an AVX offset
> and saw frequency drop from time to time


Before I delided, I tested RB with no offset and a large AVX ratio and my temperatures were no different. So maybe it uses it, but it can't be compared to other AVX power viruses.


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*


It was actually wizzy's statement that was in the back of mind kinda buried in his post. Apparently he wasn't talking 28.7 though which is super high on that graph.

"With Skylake, unlike Haswell, version 28.10 is not significantly hotter than version 27.9. Still, v28.10 has been shown to crash unstable overclocks much faster than 27.9, so consider it a harder test."


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Before I delided, I tested RB with no offset and a large AVX ratio and my temperatures were no different. So maybe it uses it, but it can't be compared to other AVX power viruses.


didn't say it is
only said it uses them

also said drop frequency from time to time, means doesn't use it all the time

that being said
as I understand it RealBench is set up to be a test to simulate normal usage

as in not doing math calculations all day long

it's good enough for me
and good enough for entry here in the list

if one needs something more punishing
I don't mind
edit:
that's what the ultra stable club is for (correct me on the name if I'm wrong)

still
look at the picture I posted and look where battlefield 4 sits at compared to the rest of the field temp wise


----------



## needh3lp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Before I delided, I tested RB with no offset and a large AVX ratio and my temperatures were no different. So maybe it uses it, but it can't be compared to other AVX power viruses.


I haven't tested this myself yet, but I remember reading somewhere that voltage doesn't change, only the multiplier. Wouldn't this account for the lack of temp changes?
I could be completely wrong here.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Yeah its the same reading customer MOBO reviews on New Egg - Almost all of them are horror stories from people who had terrible problems - oft times self inflicted (IMHO). From those reviews, around 90% of new boards are defective from the factory. Not that these things don't happen, but just sayin'


All motherboards have a high failure rate.

Pugetsystems Quote:
If there is a single dead USB port, slight static over the audio, or the voltage levels are measured outside of norm, it does not meet our standards and is considered to have failed.

Because of this, motherboards have one of the highest overall failure rate of any core component with about 1 out of every 18 motherboards (5.5%) failing for one reason or another. This may seem like a high failure rate, but the silver lining is that nearly all of these failures we catch in-house before the system is shipped to the customer. In fact, motherboards as a whole only have a 1% failure rate (or one out of every 100) when you only look at issues that occurred in the field. https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Most-Reliable-PC-Hardware-of-2016-872/


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> It was actually wizzy's statement that was in the back of mind kinda buried in his post. Apparently he wasn't talking 28.7 though which is super high on that graph.
> 
> "With Skylake, unlike Haswell, version 28.10 is not significantly hotter than version 27.9. Still, v28.10 has been shown to crash unstable overclocks much faster than 27.9, so consider it a harder test."


sure
just how stressful do you want it to be
and then pick the tool accordingly

wizzie has them listed









that being said

I have yet to run into any crash for 2 months since I am running with 5.2 (actually Wizzie acknowledged that he missed my entry post, but it's coming to the list







)
or even have something just abruptly close or crash

but I'm not working with blender every day and earn my money with it


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> sure
> just how stressful do you want it to be
> and then pick the tool accordingly
> 
> wizzie has them listed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that being said
> 
> I have yet to run into any crash for 2 months since I am running with 5.2 (actually Wizzie acknowledged that he missed my entry post, but it's coming to the list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> or even have something just abruptly close or crash
> 
> but I'm not working with blender every day and earn my money with it


Awesome man. Yea that layer of liquid metal in your profile picture looks on point.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> Awesome man. Yea that layer of liquid metal in your profile picture looks on point.


mmm

the feel I'm getting on stability from a lot of people and different forums is this

if it passes 8 hour RealBench (and you used all the RAM) then it's considered stable

and anecdotally
some voltage settings crashed at the 4 hour mark

so it's good letting it pass 8

still temp problems on you're end

hmmm


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> mmm
> 
> the feel I'm getting on stability from a lot of people and different forums is this
> 
> if it passes 8 hour RealBench (and you used all the RAM) then it's considered stable
> 
> and anecdotally
> some voltage settings crashed at the 4 hour mark
> 
> so it's good letting it pass 8
> 
> still temp problems on you're end
> 
> hmmm


I am in accordance with your thoughts regarding the stress test. I think it's needh3lp that is having temp problems. I have a NH-D15 but it does well enough up to 1.45v being delidded and resealed with liquid metal.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> I am in accordance with your thoughts regarding the stress test. I think it's needh3lp that is having temp problems. I have a NH-D15 but it does well enough up to 1.45v being delidded and resealed with liquid metal.












I had to look for it again

see it now

mmm
actually 90ish degrees in Prime without delid on Air (I think he had an Air cooler) is not so shabby I think

I'll have to look for something older in regards to temps n stuff
mmm

edit:

mmm
Noctua and stock 90ish degrees in prime
stock
hmm
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *needh3lp*
> 
> I could be completely wrong here.


voltage stays the same
but 90ish at stock
hmm
still, maybe
it's hard to come by numbers at stock speed with stresstest tools

I mean a delid usually drops temps by a big margin
like 20 degrees (was for me like that)
had 91 degrees in RealBench with 5.1 at 1.35v before delid
and that's only in RealBench

2nd edit:

ok 88 degrees max and a tad more voltage
but still "only" RealBench









before delid
and with an air cooler


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> although I'm sure it's just an example
> 
> Just want to add that I would really recommend letting it run 8 hours over night
> 
> when I moved from 5.2 to 5.3 (just trying to find out highest possible OC) RealBench would consistently crash at the 4 hour mark until I upped the voltage enough to pass finally 8


nothing wrong with testing for extended periods of time with a reasonable stressor like RB. I do think it is fair to warn people about two things with p95 with AVX/FMA3 enabled..1) you will likely end up running an OC that is 200MHz or more lower than would otherwise be stable in any actual use setting, 2) measurements of current draw with p95 (v28.7 example) show extraordinary amperage leading to very high temperatures in the microenvrionment. This is why Intel labels this as TDP "virus mode" (and the reason why E-class CPUs down clock when AVX is in the execution stack). IMO, repeated abuse like this will lead to degradation.. and retuning, more testing with p95 in a self-inflicted degrading loop.
Additionally, IMO, too many people conflate heat generation with "difficulty..., well, except as a test of mount quality and cooling capacity. Hot does not = hard. And even when using a large range of FFT sizes P95 really executes a limited instruction set. What trips up the processor logic (a true test of an OC's "stability") is not hammering a substructure like the FPU with cycling the same instructions,m but a rapid succession of instruction sets loading several parts of the architecture. Bottom line.., there is no single stress test that covers it all. Mix 'em up. and if you want to use p95, you can switch off the AVX/AVX2 IS with a simple edit to the local.txt file:
CpuSupportsAVX=0 or 1
CpuSupportsFMA3=0 or 1
(of course, fma3 will not work if AVX is disabled, commands are in the undoc file)
my








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *needh3lp*
> 
> I used Noctua NT-H1 that came with the cooler. This isn't my first rodeo so I'm fairly confident I've done the application correctly, but I might give it another go just to be sure.
> I should clarify these 90 degree temps come from Prime95 latest version. I have not tested with Realbench yet, but it's my understanding that the AVX loads from Realbench should be more realistic and maybe I should stick to that for stress testing.
> Auto settings are putting me at 4.5Ghz @ 1.280 - these high temps are coming from the latest Prime95, which I'm understanding may be an unrealistic test to begin with.


NT-H1 is good stuff. no reason to change it out. the x264 module will use AVX/AVX2, realbench does too.


----------



## wingman99

Folks use prime95 24/7 to find prime numbers on all kinds of Intel PCs. Intel builds the processor to take any kind of load and even has thermal throttling when over heated.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Folks use prime95 24/7 to find prime numbers on all kinds of Intel PCs. Intel builds the processor to take any kind of load and even has thermal throttling when over heated.


And AMD PC's im sure
about Prime has been covered in the first post in this thread
Quote:


> you're really that concerned about CPU longevity you shouldn't be using Prime95 to stress.


AVX offset is a feature that came down to desktop cpu's in response to AVX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the reason why E-class CPUs down clock when AVX is in the execution stack


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nothing wrong with testing for extended periods of time with a reasonable stressor like RB. I do think it is fair to warn people about two things with p95 with AVX/FMA3 enabled..1) you will likely end up running an OC that is 200MHz or more lower than would otherwise be stable in any actual use setting, 2) measurements of current draw with p95 (v28.7 example) show extraordinary amperage leading to very high temperatures in the microenvrionment. This is why Intel labels this as TDP "virus mode" (and the reason why E-class CPUs down clock when AVX is in the execution stack). IMO, repeated abuse like this will lead to degradation.. and retuning, more testing with p95 in a self-inflicted degrading loop.
> Additionally, IMO, too many people conflate heat generation with "difficulty..., well, except as a test of mount quality and cooling capacity. Hot does not = hard. And even when using a large range of FFT sizes P95 really executes a limited instruction set. What trips up the processor logic (a true test of an OC's "stability") is not hammering a substructure like the FPU with cycling the same instructions,m but a rapid succession of instruction sets loading several parts of the architecture. Bottom line.., there is no single stress test that covers it all. Mix 'em up. and if you want to use p95, you can switch off the AVX/AVX2 IS with a simple edit to the local.txt file:
> CpuSupportsAVX=0 or 1
> CpuSupportsFMA3=0 or 1
> (of course, fma3 will not work if AVX is disabled, commands are in the undoc file)
> my
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NT-H1 is good stuff. no reason to change it out. the x264 module will use AVX/AVX2, realbench does too.


JPM I understand your point about hot not necessarily being hard. Just because something passed 1 hour of P95 and roasted the CPU doesn't mean that it is (or isn't) any more stable than Realbench/x264 at lower temps for 8 hours.

I think what leads people to believe this is the way the OP is set up saying OCCT, Linpack, and P95 are "marathon man" tests above the "tough" tests and definitely above "medium" tests like x264/ROG. The graph also doesn't help as the "marathon tests" and "tough" just happen to also be the hottest test. When you combine this with the fact that only 1 hour of these tests is required for OC submission, it only exacerbates the matter.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> only 1 hour of these tests is required for OC submission, it only exacerbates the matter.


"only"









it's only 1 hour for a reason









but that's why this guide is here
if everyone starts reading with the first post that is

edit:
loved this one
Quote:


> I must pass all stress tests!'
> So if I made a program that crashes you at stock clocks, you would feel compelled to underclock your CPU, even if that application in no way represents real-world usage?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> And AMD PC's im sure
> about Prime has been covered in the first post in this thread
> AVX offset is a feature that came down to desktop cpu's in response to AVX


Benefit. Now at least we have control over the option. In the past we had no control over what the server did when AVX was incoming.








6950X really needed it. I haven't used it on 4 cores yet...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> JPM I understand your point about hot not necessarily being hard. Just because something passed 1 hour of P95 and roasted the CPU doesn't mean that it is (or isn't) *any more stable than Realbench/x264 at lower temps for 8 hours*.
> 
> I think what leads people to believe this is the way the OP is set up saying OCCT, Linpack, and P95 are "marathon man" tests above the "tough" tests and definitely above "medium" tests like x264/ROG. The graph also doesn't help as the "marathon tests" and "tough" just happen to also be the hottest test. When you combine this with the fact that only 1 hour of these tests is required for OC submission, it only exacerbates the matter.


I'd add to that, you'll likely be running RB at a higher frequency too. It all depends on what's called "mission criticality". A gaming rig... RB, and HCi memtest are fine. A millisecond trading rig tossing 3+ bigs ones around many times a second... googlestresapptest + linpac (even with most running at stock clocks







)


----------



## MaKeN

So the new cpu apeared to be defective from microcenter picked up other one
Batch nr : l640f777

Custom loop , not delided insanely hot .
Pll oc voltage on auto for now.

Thats prime 95. 4.9 1.36v


----------



## schoolofmonkey

I think I saw someone ask this before about the IX Hero, but where the heck is the PLL OC setting, I can't find it, I have PLL voltage, but nothing with PLL OC.

In saying that my PLL OC voltage is this:


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I think I saw someone ask this before about the IX Hero, but where the heck is the PLL OC setting, I can't find it, I have PLL voltage, but nothing with PLL OC.
> 
> In saying that my PLL OC voltage is this:


It is in tweaker's paradise I believe, under the name PLL Bandwidth level.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> All motherboards have a high failure rate.
> 
> Pugetsystems Quote:
> If there is a single dead USB port, slight static over the audio, or the voltage levels are measured outside of norm, it does not meet our standards and is considered to have failed.
> 
> Because of this, motherboards have one of the highest overall failure rate of any core component with about 1 out of every 18 motherboards (5.5%) failing for one reason or another. This may seem like a high failure rate, but the silver lining is that nearly all of these failures we catch in-house before the system is shipped to the customer. In fact, motherboards as a whole only have a 1% failure rate (or one out of every 100) when you only look at issues that occurred in the field. https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Most-Reliable-PC-Hardware-of-2016-872/


Interesting. Puget Systems site lists the Asus X99-Deluxe II as one of the most reliable MOBOs of 2016 with a mere 2.27% overall failure rate. That is the exact MOBO I have, and the exact MOBO that I read all of these horror stories about on the New Egg customer reviews. Some say they have had 3 in a row bad. One guy claimed all sorts of intermittent problems until he up-sized his power supply to a 1KW model. The guy who claimed 3 boards in a row were acting flaky had a 750 watt supply, so maybe that was his problem. Personally, I have an EVGA SuperNOVA 1200 watt and I have never had a problem with the board.

I was actually getting worried that maybe I had screwed up and bought a PSU that was way more than I needed since the efficiency is a bell curve and if you are way under the PSU capacity, the supply is not running in it's most efficient area of operation, and you have wasted your money. X99 is power hungry. I was also running 2 R9-290 GPUs in Crossfire, 4 SSDs of various vintage, 3 platter drives, 4 sticks of 8GB DDR4, 7 fans, MOBO LEDs, and few aux LED strips. My rig heats up the entire room! I really should put a watt meter on the power line. I have always had good luck with EVGA PSUs that are Super Flower OEM units. And it is 80+ Platinum certified. Maybe that is why I don't have problems with my X99-Deluxe II...


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> It is in tweaker's paradise I believe, under the name PLL Bandwidth level.


This is my tweakers paradise screen.


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> This is my tweakers paradise screen.


It's called PLL Bandwidth. Look at the drop down menu in the second screenshot, has values 1-8. Level 0 or auto is the .592v you see in HWinfo.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> It's called PLL Bandwidth. Look at the drop down menu in the second screenshot, has values 1-8. Level 0 or auto is the .592v you see in HWinfo.


Thought so was just double checking.
I don't have any stability issues with my 4.8Ghz overclock and don't plan on going higher until I delid due to temps.


----------



## Inelastic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> "only"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it's only 1 hour for a reason
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but that's why this guide is here
> if everyone starts reading with the first post that is
> 
> edit:
> loved this one


ALL the stress tests?









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## redone13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Inelastic*
> 
> ALL the stress tests?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


dafuq. lol. I failed this test within a minute.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Inelastic*
> 
> ALL the stress tests?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


all









even if it blows up









edit:
come to think of it
now I remember why I dropped out Physics after 4 semesters









and haven't looked back


----------



## MaKeN

New chip would pass cinabench r15 at 5.0 hz 1.29v llc2 , not delided
Should i return it for another lothery ?


----------



## wholeeo

Man, I can't seem to keep my 7700K cool at all. Went from a H100i, X62, and now a EK block, full loop and I'm thermal throttling.







Never in all my years have I reached these temps while water cooling. Running at 1.35v. I'll have to try remounting the block but its going to be a major PIA since I just filled the loop.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Man, I can't seem to keep my 7700K cool at all. Went from a H100i, X62, and now a EK block, full loop and I'm thermal throttling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never in all my years have I reached these temps while water cooling. Running at 1.35v. I'll have to try remounting the block but its going to be a major PIA since I just filled the loop.


Delid. Better late than never.


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Delid. Better late than never.


Are these normal temps for non delidded Kaby's?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Delid. Better late than never.


This really is step 1 in the process when pushing voltage/clocks with the 7700k.


----------



## Mx518

Hello, how many watts the i7 7700k dissipates when overclocked?

I have now a *delidded* i5 6700k (and I will delid the i7 aswell) and my air cooler can keep it fresh enough at 1.52V and 4.8GHz.

Wondering if hyperthreading, higher frequency but maybe less voltage, will be harder or easier to dissipate with the same air cooler. Now, Hwinfo64 reports a maximum of 100-105 watts with AVX disabled Prime95.

I have a Cooler Master Hyper 212X,


----------



## Inelastic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> even if it blows up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit:
> come to think of it
> now I remember why I dropped out Physics after 4 semesters
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and haven't looked back


Lol. Luckily I was good enough to pass it back then. Now, I'd totally fail. That was the preliminary test I had to take in order to continue on in my PhD. Failure meant the end of the road; definitely a stressful test.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I think I saw someone ask this before about the IX Hero, but where the heck is the PLL OC setting, I can't find it, I have PLL voltage, but nothing with PLL OC.
> 
> In saying that my PLL OC voltage is this:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


you can leave PLL Bandwidth on Auto until you get above 5.2. Only time you really need to run this up (and level 6 = 1.4V) is when running very high bclk (200+) or cpu freqs >5.5 or so. I have mine set to 0 (zero) at 5.3/1.328V vcore. on Auto it would run 1.4V and even with that, I saw only a 8C increase in peak temps running x265 1080P. Also, once you exceed 5.2 on the ASUS rog boards, standby (VC Sustain) will jump to 1.6V... again, at 5.3 up to 5.5GHz 1.10-1.2V has been sufficient








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> New chip would pass cinabench r15 at 5.0 hz 1.29v llc2 , not delided
> Should i return it for another lothery ?


1.29V LLC 2 on what MB??


----------



## redone13

MaKen, that chip sounds like it would do 5.1 with a delid as 1.290 is not bad for 5.0 at all assuming temps are not at the very brink already.


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Man, I can't seem to keep my 7700K cool at all. Went from a H100i, X62, and now a EK block, full loop and I'm thermal throttling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never in all my years have I reached these temps while water cooling. Running at 1.35v. I'll have to try remounting the block but its going to be a major PIA since I just filled the loop.


Just remounted and tried x264 again and am thermal throttling. I'm going to rule out a bad mount. These things must just run insanely hot. Guess I'll get ready to delid.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> All motherboards have a high failure rate.
> 
> Pugetsystems Quote:
> If there is a single dead USB port, slight static over the audio, or the voltage levels are measured outside of norm, it does not meet our standards and is considered to have failed.
> 
> Because of this, motherboards have one of the highest overall failure rate of any core component with about 1 out of every 18 motherboards (5.5%) failing for one reason or another. This may seem like a high failure rate, but the silver lining is that nearly all of these failures we catch in-house before the system is shipped to the customer. In fact, motherboards as a whole only have a 1% failure rate (or one out of every 100) when you only look at issues that occurred in the field. https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Most-Reliable-PC-Hardware-of-2016-872/


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Interesting. Puget Systems site lists the Asus X99-Deluxe II as one of the most reliable MOBOs of 2016 with a mere 2.27% overall failure rate. That is the exact MOBO I have, and the exact MOBO that I read all of these horror stories about on the New Egg customer reviews. Some say they have had 3 in a row bad. One guy claimed all sorts of intermittent problems until he up-sized his power supply to a 1KW model. The guy who claimed 3 boards in a row were acting flaky had a 750 watt supply, so maybe that was his problem. Personally, I have an EVGA SuperNOVA 1200 watt and I have never had a problem with the board.
> 
> I was actually getting worried that maybe I had screwed up and bought a PSU that was way more than I needed since the efficiency is a bell curve and if you are way under the PSU capacity, the supply is not running in it's most efficient area of operation, and you have wasted your money. X99 is power hungry. I was also running 2 R9-290 GPUs in Crossfire, 4 SSDs of various vintage, 3 platter drives, 4 sticks of 8GB DDR4, 7 fans, MOBO LEDs, and few aux LED strips. My rig heats up the entire room! I really should put a watt meter on the power line. I have always had good luck with EVGA PSUs that are Super Flower OEM units. And it is 80+ Platinum certified. Maybe that is why I don't have problems with my X99-Deluxe II...


Folks can get a run of defective motherboards with the same bad part from the factory. Pugetsystems says that 1 out of 18 motherboards have a bad part on the new motherboard and only 1% have a problem in the field use.

The means 1 out of every 18 ASUS motherboards sold have a problem. You should not have a problem if everything works fine at home failure rate is only 1%

ASUS sells 22 million motherboards a year and *1,222,222* are defective in someway.









Most motherboards are not tested at the factory, however CPUs and memory are tested at there factory's.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Just remounted and tried x264 again and am thermal throttling. I'm going to rule out a bad mount. These things must just run insanely hot. Guess I'll get ready to delid.


Its a bit weird that CPUZ seems to read Kaby Lake in 0.016 steps. My old 3570k read in 0.008. So Realbench for me using adaptive voltage at somewhere between 1.248 and 1.264 volts (1.272 LLC5 BIOS) is hitting a peak of 87 C after 8 hours mostly early 80s at 4.9 4.6 cache, with RAM at 1.4, air cooled and well ventilated case on a Cryorig R1 Ultimate.

At 4.8(4.5) 1.2000 volts CPUZ RB load which is 1.216 in BIOS im hitting a peak of 82 with mid 70's average. Haven't tried lower as Id have to do a lot of work on a negative offset for 4.7, and 1.184 isnt RB stable. This is all in a 22c ambient.

The weird thing for me is that on my old chip non delidded I would hit 90 in Prime 95 at 1.312 volts 4.4 GHZ in a hot room ( I know that the volts arent comparable across architectures) but in any game it would never go over 65 in a 30C summer room, usually around 60 with the fans on a silent profile. This 7700k is hitting 75 in a quick 10 minute game of TW Warhammer with the fans almost maxed in the same case.

Talking about Prime 95 28.10 , in my initial testing I was using x264 16T running a single loop to gauge rough stability and I got up to 1.296 volts at 5.1. Decided to check what would happen in Small FFTs and it lost workers as soon as I started the program, literally a second running. Needed to push BIOS up to 1.33V (1.312) to get 10minutes out of it and temps were hitting 90-95+ so I stopped there.

So yea insanely hot even compared to Ivy Bridge, Im definitely considering delidding.

Does anyone have a preference for the Rokit kit or The Der8aur Delid mate? Im not sure if the Der8aur has an optional resealing kit for the IHS or how useful it is. I'd like to re-lid as I dont fancy having to redo the TIM every few months.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you can leave PLL Bandwidth on Auto until you get above 5.2. Only time you really need to run this up (and level 6 = 1.4V) is when running very high bclk (200+) or cpu freqs >5.5 or so. I have mine set to 0 (zero) at 5.3/1.328V vcore. on Auto it would run 1.4V and even with that, I saw only a 8C increase in peak temps running x265 1080P. Also, once you exceed 5.2 on the ASUS rog boards, standby (VC Sustain) will jump to 1.6V... again, at 5.3 up to 5.5GHz 1.10-1.2V has been sufficient


I get it now, thanks for that








I'm keep this rig long term so once I get the delidding done and a good loop on it I'll push it further, plus the wife will end up with it when x299 drops, guessing we're going to see a lot of these additions in Skylake-X.


----------



## SweWiking

Hey guys, just wantred to ask you guys who delided your cpus, Im going to use coollaboratory liquid ultra/pro on the die after delidding, but my question is am i suppose to put it on the IHS too, or is it enuff to put it on the actual core ?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> Hey guys, just wantred to ask you guys who delided your cpus, Im going to use coollaboratory liquid ultra/pro on the die after delidding, but my question is am i suppose to put it on the IHS too, or is it enuff to put it on the actual core ?


Just on the core should be sufficient.


----------



## skingun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> Hey guys, just wantred to ask you guys who delided your cpus, Im going to use coollaboratory liquid ultra/pro on the die after delidding, but my question is am i suppose to put it on the IHS too, or is it enuff to put it on the actual core ?


http://www.overclock.net/t/1313179/official-delidded-club-guide


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> Hey guys, just wantred to ask you guys who delided your cpus, Im going to use coollaboratory liquid ultra/pro on the die after delidding, but my question is am i suppose to put it on the IHS too, or is it enuff to put it on the actual core ?


it also depends a bit

but to be honest a good paste between IHS and cooler that is not a liquid metal would be sufficient

the liquid metal ones harden (happened to me once, while it didn't for some reason twice)

they are quite a mess to clean up and difficult to handle compared to the more usual stuff
I had one droplet of Phobya liquid metal drop on my hardwood floor and I couldn't swipe it up with kitchen paper, drenched in isopropyl or whatever you name it
I had to smear it and then clean the stain with isopropyl

there's a reason there's a metal scrub pad included for the liquid ultra
while some users use it before applying, I found it the only way of removing the stuff (as it "stains") is to scrub it

something I found online,but mine looked like this once, some liquid metal had hardened out at some spots as well


now its been reported that under the IHS it seems to stay liquid (but I would have to get digging quite a lot to find that, was I think on Hardwareluxx forum)

to sum it all up

use liquid metal under the IHS

at HARDOCP they actually went through the trouble of testing a de-lid with liquid metal vs a good paste

but use a good paste between cooler and IHS


Spoiler: some TIMs and temps






youre gonna save yourself some trouble

btw.

it is interesting to watch
especially since he takes it apart again, you can see how the glue on 4 corners work out and so on
to quote
Quote:


> This video is about 45 minutes long. It is shot in 4K and has a lot of close up footage so you can see very well what is actually going on. The first 15 minutes or so will show you the entire delidding and relidding process in detail. After that we check TIM heights and basically see what is going on with our different TIMs, cure times, and adhesive amounts. None of the video was scripted and I was literally learning as I was moving along with the process. I misspeak a couple of times, but hey, cut me some slack. I was not going for a professional presentation, but rather an "along for the ride" feel.






Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skingun*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1313179/official-delidded-club-guide


I've been looking through it
couldn't find a tip if one should use normal TIM or liquid metal *between IHS and Cooler*

personally I have liquid metal applied between IHS and cooler as well
but I had plenty here and no alternative that was good (like Grizzly Hydronaut)

and I have been lapping a handful of coolers and IHS in the past, so this wouldnt be an issue *for me*

still

if I would change out my CPU I'm going to wish I used some high end normal paste


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Just remounted and tried x264 again and am thermal throttling. I'm going to rule out a bad mount. These things must just run insanely hot. Guess I'll get ready to delid.


hey bud... ya know, if the chip is banging it's head on TJmax at stock clocks, I'd try to return or RMA it as defective. thermal throttling is not a normal operation event. Now if it is doing that with an OC on it of any kind Intel will likely refuse the return.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I get it now, thanks for that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm keep this rig long term so once I get the delidding done and a good loop on it I'll push it further, plus the wife will end up with it when x299 drops, guessing we're going to see a lot of these additions in Skylake-X.


Let's hope a number of these features carry forward.







I do like the NVMe raid 0 on the "DIMM 2 card" on the apex.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hey bud... ya know, if the chip is banging it's head on TJmax at stock clocks, I'd try to return or RMA it as defective. thermal throttling is not a normal operation event. Now if it is doing that with an OC on it of any kind Intel will likely refuse the return.
> Let's hope a number of these features carry forward.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do like the NVMe raid 0 on the "DIMM 2 card" on the apex.


Have you done a bios update, whilst your NVMe drives are in raid 0 and if so, has it maintained the raid 0 setup or does it break the raid 0 setup, like it use to on the Z170 boards when performing a bios update ?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Have you done a bios update, whilst your NVMe drives are in raid 0 and if so, has it maintained the raid 0 setup or does it break the raid 0 setup, like it use to on the Z170 boards when performing a bios update ?


Funny you should mention this I have never broken a raid array with a simple bios update on any platforms that I have owned including Z170.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Let's hope a number of these features carry forward.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do like the NVMe raid 0 on the "DIMM 2 card" on the apex.


They just got the Apex's in locally, yeah a little slow here in Australia..








I did look at the Apex, but didn't have enough rear USB ports for what I needed, not to mention I reused my 32GB kit from the x99 so I needed 4 slots.

After using x99 for so long when I opened the Kabylake box I instantly thought how small it was..


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Funny you should mention this I have never broken a raid array with a simple bios update on any platforms that I have owned including Z170.


Depends on the Z170 board. Certain Asus and Gigabyte boards had the issue. The workaround was to disconnect the drives from the board, perform the bios update and make sure you reboot and post and then shutdown, reconnect the drives and then boot up and go into the bios and the bios raid would find the raid 0 on the drives.

If you left the drives connected, it would break the raid 0 setup.

There was a program called TestDisk that could restore the raid0 setup, but it didn't work on all boards.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Depends on the Z170 board. Certain Asus and Gigabyte boards had the issue. The workaround was to disconnect the drives from the board, perform the bios update and make sure you reboot and post and then shutdown, reconnect the drives and then boot up and go into the bios and the bios raid would find the raid 0 on the drives.
> 
> If you left the drives connected, it would break the raid 0 setup.
> 
> There was a program called TestDisk that could restore the raid0 setup, but it didn't work on all boards.


Seems odd my Gigabyte GA-Z87X-UD4 and Asus Z97 Maximus VII Hero as well as my current M8F have never had any issues with breaking raid 0 arrays when updating the UEFI, maybe I'm doing something wrong lol.


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hey bud... ya know, if the chip is banging it's head on TJmax at stock clocks, I'd try to return or RMA it as defective. thermal throttling is not a normal operation event. Now if it is doing that with an OC on it of any kind Intel will likely refuse the return.
> Let's hope a number of these features carry forward.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do like the NVMe raid 0 on the "DIMM 2 card" on the apex.


Thanks, I'm still within Micro Centers return window. I don't want to risk returning a good clocker though so I will see how high I can go on the clocks with lower voltages.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Seems odd my Gigabyte GA-Z87X-UD4 and Asus Z97 Maximus VII Hero as well as my current M8F have never had any issues with breaking raid 0 arrays when updating the Uefi.


It was a real issue. You can google it and you will see quite a few people experiencing it, some with even earlier chipsets than Z170.

Which is why I was wanting to see if it had been rectified in the Z270 bios updates.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you can leave PLL Bandwidth on Auto until you get above 5.2. Only time you really need to run this up (and level 6 = 1.4V) is when running very high bclk (200+) or cpu freqs >5.5 or so. I have mine set to 0 (zero) at 5.3/1.328V vcore. on Auto it would run 1.4V and even with that, I saw only a 8C increase in peak temps running x265 1080P. Also, once you exceed 5.2 on the ASUS rog boards, standby (VC Sustain) will jump to 1.6V... again, at 5.3 up to 5.5GHz 1.10-1.2V has been sufficient
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.29V LLC 2 on what MB??


Thats on msi g m7. Llc2 would make 1.29 into 1.30v.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> It was a real issue. You can google it and you will see quite a few people experiencing it, some with even earlier chipsets than Z170.
> 
> Which is why I was wanting to see if it had been rectified in the Z270 bios updates.


Not doubting you I had plenty of other issues with Gigabyte boards which is why I moved away from them but breaking raid arrays wasn't one of them. What sort of disk speeds are you guys getting with NVME raid 0 arrays?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> 
> MaKen, that chip sounds like it would do 5.1 with a delid as 1.290 is not bad for 5.0 at all assuming temps are not at the very brink already.


It wont pass cb 15 at 1.4v when 5.1.
It did pass 9h realbench at 5.0 1.37v

I doubt delliding would give me anything that just lower temps.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Have you done a bios update, whilst your NVMe drives are in raid 0 and if so, has it maintained the raid 0 setup or does it break the raid 0 setup, like it use to on the Z170 boards when performing a bios update ?


yes I updated to 0801. So, I've never broke a sata raid by flashing. NVMe raid is a little different and requires a few more steps in bios to "re-form" the raid but it comes back up no problem. CLRCMOS does the same.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> They just got the Apex's in locally, yeah a little slow here in Australia..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did look at the Apex, but didn't have enough rear USB ports for what I needed, not to mention I reused my 32GB kit from the x99 so I needed 4 slots.
> After using x99 for so long when I opened the Kabylake box I instantly thought how small it was..


Yeah, the Apex is pretty focused on a different scenario... having a both PS2 mouse and keyboard ports on back kinda tells it all.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Not doubting you I had plenty of other issues with Gigabyte boards which is why I moved away from them but breaking raid arrays wasn't one of them. What sort of disk speeds are you guys getting with NVME raid 0 arrays?


When I did have 2 x Samsung 950 Pro drives in Raid 0, I was getting 3700MB read and 3500MB write in Diskmark. The 950 Pros hit the Z170 DMI 3.0 bandwidth limit of 3.9GB.

I stopped running raid 0 after bios updates broke the raid a couple of times, as it was pain reinstalling from scratch.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> When I did have 2 x Samsung 950 Pro drives in Raid 0, I was getting 3700MB read and 3500MB write in Diskmark. The 950 Pros hit the Z170 DMI 3.0 bandwidth limit of 3.9GB.
> 
> I stopped running raid 0 after bios updates broke the raid a couple of times, as it was pain reinstalling from scratch.


2x 960pro on my set up are good for around 3500MB reads and around 1800MB reads for the 4x 850pro array, both on a good day. Some days the 960pro array slows to only 3200MB for the reads, not sure why. My previous 950pro's behaved the same way only slower.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> It wont pass cb 15 at 1.4v when 5.1.
> It did pass 9h realbench at 5.0 1.37v
> 
> I doubt delliding would give me anything that just lower temps.


Figure 10mV per 100MHz per core (eg 40mV when increasing the multiplier by 1 with bclk=100). So if 5.0 needs 1.37, 5.1 will likely be 1.41 or higher. Temperature really affects the OC ceiling even in the "above zero" world. Again, roughly, as a rule of thumb, figure lowering temps 10C at load can/usually buys 100MHz. It will plateau at around 10C then kick in again at approx -20C and lower. the efffect is very apparent when going from 80C to 60C. Has to do with leakage and e-migration.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> 2x 960pro on my set up are good for around 3500MB reads and around 1800MB reads for the 4x 850pro array, both on a good day. Some days the 960pro array slows to only 3200MB for the reads, not sure why. My previous 950pro's behaved the same way only slower.


I always answer this question like: "just less that 2x the W/R speed of the cheap (*i*nexpensive) drives I made the raid 0 with"


----------



## MikeS3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> It wont pass cb 15 at 1.4v when 5.1.
> It did pass 9h realbench at 5.0 1.37v
> 
> I doubt delliding would give me anything that just lower temps.


Your 7700k sounds almost identical to mine with what it wants for voltages. I just passed 8 hr Realbench last night at 5.1 1.405v in bios and LLC 5 on Asus Hero IX. During RB loads, my vcore in CPUID locks in at 1.408 for the 8 hr run. If I give my cpu anything lower than that, RB will cause a bluescreen after some time. Now I'm currently stress testing at those same settings for x264 and vcore fluctuates between 1.408 and 1.424. I'm no electrical engineer, but my theory is that since RB uses CPU and GPU this applies a much greater overall system load and thus load on the PSU, hence more vdroop than x264 which only stresses CPU. Dialing in vcore and vdroop for safe settings has been really challenging on this system.

Assuming I pass x264 for 8 hours, would these voltages using adaptive be solid for years to come? I'm delidded and temps peak in low 70s on hottest core.


----------



## MaKeN

Many of g
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*
> 
> Your 7700k sounds almost identical to mine with what it wants for voltages. I just passed 8 hr Realbench last night at 5.1 1.405v in bios and LLC 5 on Asus Hero IX. During RB loads, my vcore in CPUID locks in at 1.408 for the 8 hr run. If I give my cpu anything lower than that, RB will cause a bluescreen after some time. Now I'm currently stress testing at those same settings for x264 and vcore fluctuates between 1.408 and 1.424. I'm no electrical engineer, but my theory is that since RB uses CPU and GPU this applies a much greater overall system load and thus load on the PSU, hence more vdroop than x264 which only stresses CPU. Dialing in vcore and vdroop for safe settings has been really challenging on this system.
> 
> Assuming I pass x264 for 8 hours, would these voltages using adaptive be solid for years to come? I'm delidded and temps peak in low 70s on hottest core.


Thx for info.
Many of you guys that use asus board would go with LLC 5 , how does it work on your boards?
For exemple you would need 1.405 for stability in windows. What is it set to in bios then before llc would change it?


----------



## MikeS3000

At least for my Asus board, I fluctuate between LLC 5 and 6. Even manual vs. adaptive voltage behave slightly differently with LLC.. In general, LLC 5 keeps the vcore under load close to what I set in the BIOS or overshoots by maybe 0.01v. depending on the application I use to apply load. LLC 6 always overshoots the value set in the BIOS by more like 0.02 or 0.03v under load. I keep fiddling with these settings trying to dial in the right amount of voltage under load conditions since each stress test causes different amounts of vdroop. On the flip side, LLC 4 will always cause a drop in vcore compared to BIOS settings and I have never tried the highest level 7 because LLC 6 is aggressive enough for my tastes.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*
> 
> At least for my Asus board, I fluctuate between LLC 5 and 6. Even manual vs. adaptive voltage behave slightly differently with LLC.. In general, LLC 5 keeps the vcore under load close to what I set in the BIOS or *overshoots by maybe 0.1v.* depending on the application I use to apply load. LLC 6 always overshoots the value set in the BIOS by more like 0.2 or 0.3v under load. I keep fiddling with these settings trying to dial in the right amount of voltage under load conditions since each stress test causes different amounts of vdroop. On the flip side, LLC 4 will always cause a drop in vcore compared to BIOS settings and I have never tried the highest level 7 because LLC 6 is aggressive enough for my tastes.


0.1V really?

What LLC does is to add a progressive amount of vcore to overcome vdroop. Vdroop is incorporated in to voltage lines to compensate for _micro_ second over and undershoot that will occur whenever the current demand (load) changes on that voltage line even when the voltage is "clamped". These transitent load line changes occur at a time scale that we cannot see without special equipment (attached using an Intel socket tool ideally).. The "V_vos" value (datasheet tbl 7.2) can be as much as 70mV (again, 10 to 30 uSec) at stock clocks... this gets larger as vcore and current increase. Soooo... long story short, allowing for some vdroop is a good thing in the long run... if that's important.


----------



## MikeS3000

My bad, post edited. Should be 0.01.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*
> 
> My bad, post edited. Should be 0.01.


I asked because vcore actually can run that much higher than set in bios depending on the LLC used.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Figure 10mV per 100MHz per core (eg 40mV when increasing the multiplier by 1 with bclk=100). So if 5.0 needs 1.37, 5.1 will likely be 1.41 or higher. Temperature really affects the OC ceiling even in the "above zero" world. Again, roughly, as a rule of thumb, figure lowering temps 10C at load can/usually buys 100MHz. It will plateau at around 10C then kick in again at approx -20C and lower. the efffect is very apparent when going from 80C to 60C. Has to do with leakage and e-migration.


Heh , donno what to do

This cpu would go to max of 75c during prime .
Stays at 55 during occt large blocks. And thats not dellided , pll oc v at 1.1v .

V core at 1.37.

I doubt after delidding il make it run at 5.1mhz

For 5.1 i need vcore 1.45 after all tests.
But!

Batch number cpus as your would ahow better resoults.
Should i be crossing all microcenters arround for this particular batch nr, or dellid the one i have and hope it would give me that extra 100 mhz at lower voltage









Btw , im surprised how low are temps in this chip with no delliding. 55c during occt and irt guns shows 45







makes me wanna love this one


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I asked because vcore actually can run that much higher than set in bios depending on the LLC used.


On my motherboard Vcore runs equal to settings in Bios when I disable load line. What motherboard will boost LL over Vcore settings in Bios?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> On my motherboard Vcore runs equal to settings in Bios when I disable load line. What motherboard will boost LL over Vcore settings in Bios?


most any if you allow the board to. Disabling LLC would seem to mean that the is no compensation and therefore would not try to "compensate for vdroop". BUt each mfr uses different conventions. Basically if you do not see a lowering of Vcore when under heavy load, the board is doing that thru adding vcore. Vdroop is native to the cpu power line, the MB manages LLC.

there is table 7.2 in the kbl datasheet vol 1. here's a plot of the same from skylake. on X99 it is VCCIN that droops and LLC acts on VCCIN in that platform

note the timescale.

Kabylake:


remember.. LLC is there to manage a voltage swing that you will not detect even with a DMM directly attached to the MB.


----------



## Xperimental

Hi there,

My question might be off topic, if so I apologise:

Does anyone know what the stepping letters mean in the batch number?
I just recieved a cpu (i7 7700K) with batch L644H028, previous generations used ABC..


----------



## needh3lp

Wanted to update those who were trying to help me yesterday - peter2k, Jpmboy, redone13, and others. For some context, I was having 90 degree temps during AVX loads at default/auto settings with a Noctua D15. The temps were too insane to even try any overclocking beyond 1.28 voltage. I did in fact have a dud of a chip!









I took the chip out and exchanged it at my retailer and this new one seems great so far. Although I've only test stock settings, temps are 15-20 degrees cooler already. Glad I replaced it instead of just dealing with it.

Now time to see how far I can get with this one...


----------



## DJSave

Hello all
new here, my first post








So i have 7700k OC-ed to 5.0 GHz , delided with CLU tim, H100i v2 AIO
I'm running on Gigabyte z170 gaming gt with BIOS F20
in bios settings since latest update (with kaby lake support) there are very few options in OC section: there is no CPU PLL OC voltage, only CPU PLL overvoltage that is +15 mv increments, only positive values. other settings are cpu vccio, system agent and VGAX voltage i believe.
also my biggest problem is that there is no Adaptive mode for voltage (it was there in previous bios for skylake), only auto, manual and offset
when i set offset voltage, i get massive vdroop, also there are 7 settings for LLC, but on offset mode (normal mode in Gigabyte) it overshoots like 120-140 mv-s! for example if i set 1.3v vcore with offset mode, LLC leve 5 (High) will overshoot it to 1.42 volts during intel burn test and my temps would go to 90s. Higher LLC , Turbo or Extreme will go even further. without LLC lvl 5 or more Realbench encoding test restarts system after 5 seconds.
So what I did is I set manual vcore 1.35 v, that resulted in 1.34 v in bios and no vdroop. also LLC is set to auto and no voltage overshoot.

Does anyone have similar board i.e Gigabyte z170 with latest bios with kaby lake support?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> most any if you allow the board to. Disabling LLC would seem to mean that the is no compensation and therefore would not try to "compensate for vdroop". BUt each mfr uses different conventions. Basically if you do not see a lowering of Vcore when under heavy load, the board is doing that thru adding vcore. Vdroop is native to the cpu power line, the MB manages LLC.
> 
> there is table 7.2 in the kbl datasheet vol 1. here's a plot of the same from skylake. on X99 it is VCCIN that droops and LLC acts on VCCIN in that platform
> 
> note the timescale.
> 
> Kabylake:
> 
> 
> remember.. LLC is there to manage a voltage swing that you will not detect even with a DMM directly attached to the MB.


Thanks for showing all that information. I believe it is the other way around Load line droops the Vcore when using a load with it enabled so the voltage will not overshoot with CPU load fluctuations.







Load line calibration, I think Asus came up with the calibration setting first instead of enabled or disabled of load line only.

Quote:
Actually, load line droop (Vdroop) is an inherent part of any Intel power delivery design specification and serves an important role in maintaining system stability. In most cases, comments regarding unacceptable power delivery performance are completely unfounded. To make matters worse, unjustified negative consumer perception surrounding this often misunderstood design feature eventually forced a few motherboard manufacturers to respond to enthusiasts' demands for action by adding an option in their BIOS that effectively disables this important function.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Thanks for showing all that information. I believe it is the other way around Load line droops the Vcore when using a load with it enabled so the voltage will not overshoot with CPU load fluctuations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Load line calibration, I think Asus came up with the calibration setting first instead of enabled or disabled of load line only.
> 
> Quote:
> Actually, load line droop (Vdroop) is an inherent part of any Intel power delivery design specification and serves an important role in maintaining system stability. In most cases, comments regarding unacceptable power delivery performance are completely unfounded. To make matters worse, unjustified negative consumer perception surrounding this often misunderstood design feature eventually forced a few motherboard manufacturers to respond to enthusiasts' demands for action by adding an option in their BIOS that effectively disables this important function.
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


funny you should show that graph from Q9650 days.







( a lot has changed since then)

and no, LLC does not droop vcore, LLC attempts to manage native Vdroop and dampen the oscillation via better components.


----------



## cyfer

Guys, I also have a question about LLC.

My setup:

i7 7700K
Asus ROG Strix Z270F
2x 8GB Crucial Ballistix 2666MHz RAM
Noctua NH-D15S cooler

OC Settings:

Core: 4.8GHz
Cache: 4.2GHz
AVX: 4.6GHz
RAM: 2666MHz (XMP)
Vcore: 1.333V (adaptive)
IA AC Load Line: 0.01
IA DC Load Line: 0.01
LLC: Level 4 (of 7)

During stress testing, Vcore settles at 1.280V. Idle voltage is 0.640V. During light gaming, however, it's 1.312V. I think that's unnecessary, no? Is there a way to fix the voltage to 1.280V across all loads but idle? Would setting adaptive voltage to 1.280V and then going LLC Level 7 be safe?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cyfer*
> 
> Guys, I also have a question about LLC.
> 
> My setup:
> 
> i7 7700K
> Asus ROG Strix Z270F
> 2x 8GB Crucial Ballistix 2666MHz RAM
> Noctua NH-D15S cooler
> 
> OC Settings:
> 
> Core: 4.8GHz
> Cache: 4.2GHz
> AVX: 4.6GHz
> RAM: 2666MHz (XMP)
> Vcore: 1.333V (adaptive)
> IA AC Load Line: 0.01
> IA DC Load Line: 0.01
> LLC: Level 4 (of 7)
> 
> During stress testing, Vcore settles at 1.280V. Idle voltage is 0.640V. During light gaming, however, it's 1.312V. I think that's unnecessary, no? Is there a way to fix the voltage to 1.280V across all loads but idle? Would setting adaptive voltage to 1.280V and then going LLC Level 7 be safe?


It's all safe.. just for how long. If you want to have vdroop, that's how it should work. it's the same whether using adaptive or manual override. remember, the overshoot occurs at constant voltage and has nothing to do with dynamic voltage regulation. Voltage really does not kill chips in this sense (tho sure, you can electrocute silicon) current kills.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> funny you should show that graph from Q9650 days.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ( a lot has changed since then)
> 
> and no, LLC does not droop vcore, LLC attempts to manage native Vdroop and dampen the oscillation via better components.


All VRMs are fully capable of sustaining voltage with load line disabled, they always have been able to. Reading the article you have a common misconception that has not changed since the introduction of Load line.

The article may be old, however how Load line works is still the same from Intel. VID has changed with more enhancements.

There is no native Voltage drop/droop that is a misconception Load line is added by Intel for Vdroop. like me and the article I posted is saying the VRM can handle loads to it's limit of output. That is how Buck converters work.

I have been in the electrical field for many years and just to give you a example VRMs are much more stable with powersupply load with a minimal drop then a PSU at + or - 5%

One thing I like about Gigabyte is they don't misdirect, they tell folks how things work in Bios and there manual.

Gigabyte manual backs up what I and the article is saying.


http://download.gigabyte.ru/manual/mb_manual_ga-z170-hd3(ddr3)_e.pdf


----------



## BoredErica

Originally Posted by *Lobuttomize* 

Originally Posted by *QuickShot* 

Originally Posted by *kl6mk6* 

Originally Posted by *peter2k*

Yo kl6mk6, you happen to have data on the Grizzle liquid metal TIM vs CLU? BTW, charted.

You get a chart! And you get a chart! And you get a chart!

Originally Posted by *redone13* 

It was actually wizzy's statement that was in the back of mind kinda buried in his post. Apparently he wasn't talking 28.7 though which is super high on that graph.

"With Skylake, unlike Haswell, version 28.10 is not significantly hotter than version 27.9. Still, v28.10 has been shown to crash unstable overclocks much faster than 27.9, so consider it a harder test."

I believe the real difference was 27.9 and any version after that (28.7 included). 28.10 had some bug fixes and such, but it's not a huge difference.


Sample Size29  Average OC5.07Median OC5.10Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.36
Originally Posted by *Jpmboy* 
funny you should show that graph from Q9650 days.







( a lot has changed since then)

and no, LLC does not droop vcore, LLC attempts to manage native Vdroop and *dampen the oscillation via better components.*
So this is the logic behind lower voltage + LLC vs just having a higher voltage that works at load despite vdroop.

On another note, how much would a voltmeter to accurately measure the voltage going to a CPU cost for our overclocking purposes? Would any cheapo one work or should I grab something better?

Originally Posted by *peter2k* 

it also depends a bit
but to be honest a good paste between IHS and cooler that is not a liquid metal would be sufficient
the liquid metal ones harden (happened to me once, while it didn't for some reason twice)

they are quite a mess to clean up and difficult to handle compared to the more usual stuff
I had one droplet of Phobya liquid metal drop on my hardwood floor and I couldn't swipe it up with kitchen paper, drenched in isopropyl or whatever you name it
I had to smear it and then clean the stain with isopropyl

there's a reason there's a metal scrub pad included for the liquid ultra
while some users use it before applying, I found it the only way of removing the stuff (as it "stains") is to scrub it

something I found online,but mine looked like this once, some liquid metal had hardened out at some spots as well
now its been reported that under the IHS it seems to stay liquid (but I would have to get digging quite a lot to find that, was I think on Hardwareluxx forum)

to sum it all up
use liquid metal under the IHS


Been thinking about testing some liquid metal between the cold plate and the IHS. Hm... I really don't know enough about how liquid metal TIM interacts with things outside of the IHS. Raja has said there could be problems with the liquid tim migrating with time due to gravity (which of course depends on how the computer case is oriented). But above the IHS? The stain on there to my knowledge is because there actually is a thin layer of metal stuck up there. Am I supposed to clean it all off until everything's crystal clear again? Or does it still work just fine even if it looks like death?

Something like CLU or the Thermal Grizzly's counterpart are supposed to attack aluminum, but not copper. The end of a D14 or H100 should be copper, so it should be safe. But I have heard a report of CLU ripping a D14. Could just be total BS, and I don't even remember where I read it. Still, I'm a bit timid about it all.

Originally Posted by *peter2k* 
didn't say it is
only said it uses them
also said drop frequency from time to time, means doesn't use it all the time
that being said
as I understand it RealBench is set up to be a test to simulate normal usage

as in not doing math calculations all day long

it's good enough for me
and good enough for entry here in the list

if one needs something more punishing


> I don't mind
> that's what the ultra stable club is for (correct me on the name if I'm wrong)
> 
> still
> look at the picture I posted and look where battlefield 4 sits at compared to the rest of the field temp wise


Of course, nothing stops somebody from doing much more than the minimum requirements to be charted here. In fact, I recommend it if you feel up for it. If there is enough demand I can set up a seperate chart only for high stability overclocks which require passing different difficult stress tests for a significant amount of time. Nobody has ever suggested that to me yet.



> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> Additionally, IMO, too many people conflate heat generation with "difficulty..., well, except as a test of mount quality and cooling capacity. Hot does not = hard. And even when using a large range of FFT sizes P95 really executes a limited instruction set. What trips up the processor logic (a true test of an OC's "stability") is not hammering a substructure like the FPU with cycling the same instructions,m but a rapid succession of instruction sets loading several parts of the architecture. Bottom line.., there is no single stress test that covers it all. Mix 'em up. and if you want to use p95, you can switch off the AVX/AVX2 IS with a simple edit to the local.txt file:
> CpuSupportsAVX=0 or 1
> CpuSupportsFMA3=0 or 1
> (of course, fma3 will not work if AVX is disabled, commands are in the undoc file)
> my
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NT-H1 is good stuff. no reason to change it out. the x264 module will use AVX/AVX2, realbench does too.





> Originally Posted by *redone13*
> JPM I understand your point about hot not necessarily being hard. Just because something passed 1 hour of P95 and roasted the CPU doesn't mean that it is (or isn't) any more stable than Realbench/x264 at lower temps for 8 hours.
> 
> I think what leads people to believe this is the way the OP is set up saying OCCT, Linpack, and P95 are "marathon man" tests above the "tough" tests and definitely above "medium" tests like x264/ROG. The graph also doesn't help as the "marathon tests" and "tough" just happen to also be the hottest test. When you combine this with the fact that only 1 hour of these tests is required for OC submission, it only exacerbates the matter.


So to clarify a little bit on the position of my OP:

When a person runs and claims P95 v28 they need to have FMA3 on. With it off it will be regarded as 27.9 and the requirements will change to reflect that. Right now I think it is too much to expect a mix of stress tests for verification. From my testing on Skylake 27.9 was not much cooler than 28.10 but was much easier to pass. In other words the difficulty increase of the newer Prime was larger than the increase in temps would probably lead a person to believe. My list of stress tests and their difficulties are rough guidelines based on the testing back then.

The way the difficulty of the tests were rated were based on time to crash on a known unstable overclock. Nothing more, nothing less. Even those tests were soul draining and took forever. I'm not sure how I would ever test 'normal usage' and rate stress tests for that. I didn't rank stress test difficulty simply by copying my temperature chart data.

While P95 v28 might be stressing parts of the chip with instruction sets people don't typically use, in the end one needs far more voltage to pass P95 v28 compared to most other things. That alone is enough to say passing P95 v28 is significant. If the average person needs 1.3v to be stable in FMA workload and it takes around 1.3v to be stable in a normal workload then P95 v28 would be suspect. But if it takes 1.4v to be stable in FMA but 1.3v to be stable in normal workload then regardless of whether we're just hammering on one aspect of the chip, we know that passing Prime v28 tells us normal workload is stable even if we didn't even test normal workloads.

However, I see where you are coming from.



> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Folks use prime95 24/7 to find prime numbers on all kinds of Intel PCs. Intel builds the processor to take any kind of load and even has thermal throttling when over heated.


I don't see how that's relevant to anything we are talking about.


----------



## cyfer

With LLC level 6 (of 7), my load voltage is 1.280V at all times, stress testing and gaming. With level 4, it went up to an unnecessary 1.312-1.326V during gaming.
If voltage is sufficiently low (1.280V in my case), even high levels of LLC should be safe, right?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cyfer*
> 
> With LLC level 6 (of 7), my load voltage is 1.280V at all times, stress testing and gaming. With level 4, it went up to an unnecessary 1.312-1.326V during gaming.
> If voltage is sufficiently low (1.280V in my case), even high levels of LLC should be safe, right?


To my knowledge, as long as the voltage under load is okay, it's okay. The question is if it's really okay. The voltage that is read from software might be more off with high LLC (?). Vaguely remember a post on that with a guy with a voltmeter. But even though surely the temperature would rise to reflect the higher voltage.

On the other hand I don't think there is a point in having LLC set such that it far overshoots the idle voltage (assuming we're not on C states).


----------



## cyfer

Idle voltage is at 0.656V, up from 0.640V with less agressive LLC.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Yo kl6mk6, you happen to have data on the Grizzle liquid metal TIM vs CLU?


its hard to come by really
isnt it

well
Conductonaut is 73 W/mK

Liquid Ultra is 38.4 W/mK

going by this chart


it should be clearly ahead in number, but in real life terms its just a matter of handling (and removing) that makes any difference any more
which the coollaboratory pro does best I think

but then I liked this technique the most
and it work quite well for me even on the IHS





Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Am I supposed to clean it all off until everything's crystal clear again? Or does it still work just fine even if it looks like death?


as much as you can I guess
personally I have brushed the IHS and base of my AiO until only the faintest of staining is still left, and have not encountered any difference (as far as I can make out in a non standardised environment anyway)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tw33k*
> 
> I just polished my H100i with Brasso. I only did a quick 5 minute job to see if it worked and temps dropped 5c. Gave it a mirror finish. I've got more Liquid Ultra coming so I will do a proper job on the heatsink and IHS and see what temps I get.
> 
> Before
> 
> 
> After
> 
> 
> The Liquid Ultra I applied for this test must have been the perfect amount. Hottest core was only 53c and the average was 49c. I've tried 4 times but can't get near that again. Best I got is hottest core 59c average is ~54c. I remember I only used a very small amount. It didn't even come out of the syringe properly, I had to wipe it off and onto the die. I've run out now but have 3 more syringes coming so I can keep trying.


still
tw33k has surprising results


personally I'm still waitin on a more recent roundup of TIM's
but I get it why its taking so long









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Raja has said there could be problems with the liquid tim migrating with time due to gravity


I'm not doubting Raja
but firstly youre supposed to use only barely enough to cover the area (I dont have the manual from the Phobya anymore, I think it said on very perfect surfaces one should use so little as to still see the copper color through)
secondly adhesion and cohesion are really great with this stuff (as long as it has not enough volume to form droplets)

also

http://www.coollaboratory.com/pdf/manual_liquid_pro_englisch.pdfmanual_liquid_pro_englisch.pdf
Quote:


> At period about 48 hours after the application (depending on the thickness of the application) the applied liquid
> metal consolidates


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Something like CLU or the Thermal Grizzly's counterpart are supposed to attack aluminum, but not copper.


I think they all do
Quote:


> Aluminum coolers are unsuitable


from the manual of liquid pro

liquid metals secret is Gallium
and Gallium and Aluminium just don't mix


----------



## BoredErica

Peter,

While I have seen figures quoted for the thermal conductivity of these TIMs I think it's much better to test them. Otherwise it feels like I'm buying fans based on rated CFM and static pressure.

Personally I have my case flipped to the side, such that the CPU IHS is facing upwards, looking at my ceiling. There would be no drip even if it were a problem.


----------



## cyfer

So, am I thinking this through correctly? When my load voltage is only 1.28V, transient peaks of, I don't know, 1.35V shouldn't be an issue, considering 1.35V is still an uncritical voltage for Kaby Lake.

By the way, is there a fixed ratio between load/idle voltage and the peak voltage during transients, something like Vpeak = Vcore * 1.25? Or is it unique for every setup?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cyfer*
> 
> With LLC level 6 (of 7), my load voltage is 1.280V at all times, stress testing and gaming. With level 4, it went up to an unnecessary 1.312-1.326V during gaming.
> If voltage is sufficiently low (1.280V in my case), even high levels of LLC should be safe, right?


err

think of LLC of trying to improve the stability of the supplied voltage

so you don't overshoot or under deliver

so say through testing you know you need 1.28v to be stable

then you try to find a LLC level that provides the most spot on value under load

well that's basically how I understood it
and how I have it set up

I need 1.376v for stabilty at 5.2
I put in 1.375v in bios
and then I tried to find the LLC which supplied the voltage the closest (under load)
and as far as I can tell it doesn't overshoot at all

but one has to try out themselves through testing

important is supplied voltage under load
too little might incur instability
and too much more temps (but as you mentioned 1.35v only temps, it's nothing to be concerned about)

Jpmboy knows a LOT about voltages and how they are applied

mmm

Intel has like steps for certain c-states and voltages

but you have like 3 settings
one always supplied the same voltage (manual)

one that always provides a certain +voltage to every step (I think offset, like +.1v)

and one that provides additional voltage only when the turbo boosting above normal clocks under load (I think it's adaptive)

like normal Intel voltages when idle and inbetween
and additional voltage when max load

biggest problem would be different terminology from manufacturer to manufacturer (Asus to MSI)

still

ask Jpmboy directly

or look some more pages earlier (like 10 or 15 or so I think)


----------



## benjamen50

How do you get adaptive voltage on a gigabyte z270 motherboard? I can only get offset and manual.


----------



## dlss

2nd version, after delid:
(pls replace old entry in the sheet)

Username: dlss
CPU Model: i7-7700K
Base Clock: 100 MHz
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency: 5200 MHz
Cache Frequency: 4800 MHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.39 V Adaptive
Vcore: 1.392 V
FCLK: 1000 MHz
Cooling Solution: delidded, Noctua NH-D15
Stability Test: x264 16 threads > 10h

Batch Number: Malaysia, #L640G408
Ram Speed: 3000 (15-15-15-35-2T)
Ram Voltage: 1.376 MHz
VCCIO: 1.15 UEFI / 1.184 actual
VCCSA: 1.15 UEFI / 1.200 actual
Motherboard: Z170 ASUS Z170-A
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: No AVX offset used


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Yo kl6mk6, you happen to have data on the Grizzle liquid metal TIM vs CLU? BTW, charted.
> 
> *On another note, how much would a voltmeter to accurately measure the voltage going to a CPU cost for our overclocking purposes? Would any cheapo one work or should I grab something better?*
> Been thinking about testing some liquid metal between the cold plate and the IHS. Hm... I really don't know enough about how liquid metal TIM interacts with things outside of the IHS. Raja has said there could be problems with the liquid tim migrating with time due to gravity (which of course depends on how the computer case is oriented). But above the IHS? The stain on there to my knowledge is because there actually is a thin layer of metal stuck up there. Am I supposed to clean it all off until everything's crystal clear again? Or does it still work just fine even if it looks like death?


If you just want to measure vcore off the MB - any good DMM is sufficient. I mean I use ones from Fluke, and pocket ones from radioshack also.








It takes some pretty specialized equipment, including an oscilloscope (not necessarily the type we see on "SciFi Theater 2000"







) to see the uSec time scales needed to detect vdroop/LLC effects on V_ovs and T_ovs. @Praz would have a better idea of the cost.

Regarding the LM question, the gallium in the eutectic mixture can form amalgams with other metals it is in contact with (Alu, Cu for exaample) and the stain is not really a stain, but more of a mico thin alloy of gallium and the contact surface. So, best to use LM on a nickel plate, copper is at risk, and Alu is a strong NO!
BTW, the LM we use here are nearly identical to the liquid metal used in thermometers ever since mercury has been banned (for consumer use).









Oh - BTW - I probably use 1/3 the amount of LM shown in the video above. Basically paint it on - that thin.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cyfer*
> 
> With LLC level 6 (of 7), my load voltage is 1.280V at all times, stress testing and gaming. With level 4, it went up to an unnecessary 1.312-1.326V during gaming.
> If voltage is sufficiently low (1.280V in my case), even high levels of LLC should be safe, right?


Again, vdroop is a good thing and with manual or adaptive, running a higher voltage at idle/low load with droop at heavy load is the mechanism to "compensate" for load line overshoot (which you do not see with anything we're using). Said simply, when your voltage does not droop, you are permitting a short (but real) spike in voltage when the current/load changes - it's just a basic property of clamped voltage power transmission. When benching, droop can cause problem.. it can cause the system to fail when the load ends.. not while the load is "on". this is because of undershoot.
I tend to allow for a healthy amount of droop in normal use and will run (apparently) flat vcore when pushing things.. I use the word "apparently" on purpose, knowing that when the load changes the vcore can swing as much a 100mV higher or 100mV lower.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> All VRMs are fully capable of sustaining voltage with load line disabled, they always have been able to. Reading the article you have a common misconception that has not changed since the introduction of Load line.
> 
> The article may be old, however how Load line works is still the same from Intel. VID has changed with more enhancements.
> 
> There is no native Voltage drop/droop that is a misconception Load line is added by Intel for Vdroop. like me and the article I posted is saying the VRM can handle loads to it's limit of output. That is how Buck converters work.
> 
> I have been in the electrical field for many years and just to give you a example VRMs are much more stable with powersupply load with a minimal drop then a PSU at + or - 5%
> 
> One thing I like about Gigabyte is they don't misdirect, they tell folks how things work in Bios and there manual.
> 
> Gigabyte manual backs up what I and the article is saying.
> 
> 
> http://download.gigabyte.ru/manual/mb_manual_ga-z170-hd3(ddr3)_e.pdf


So then, enable the maximum LLC on your board and see for yourself.









(frankly, some of these posts are getting a little aphasic).


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dlss*
> 
> 2nd version, after delid:
> (pls replace old entry in the sheet)










Looking good.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dlss*
> 
> 2nd version, after delid:
> (pls replace old entry in the sheet)
> 
> Username: dlss
> CPU Model: i7-7700K
> Base Clock: 100 MHz
> Core Multiplier: 52
> Core Frequency: 5200 MHz
> Cache Frequency: 4800 MHz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.39 V Adaptive
> Vcore: 1.392 V
> FCLK: 1000 MHz
> Cooling Solution: delidded, Noctua NH-D15
> Stability Test: x264 16 threads > 10h
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia, #L640G408
> Ram Speed: 3000 (15-15-15-35-2T)
> Ram Voltage: 1.376 MHz
> VCCIO: 1.15 UEFI / 1.184 actual
> VCCSA: 1.15 UEFI / 1.200 actual
> Motherboard: Z170 ASUS Z170-A
> LLC Setting: 5
> Misc Comments: No AVX offset used


Excellent result very nice congrats


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> All VRMs are fully capable of sustaining voltage with load line disabled, they always have been able to. Reading the article you have a common misconception that has not changed since the introduction of Load line.
> 
> The article may be old, however how Load line works is still the same from Intel. VID has changed with more enhancements.
> 
> There is no native Voltage drop/droop that is a misconception Load line is added by Intel for Vdroop. like me and the article I posted is saying the VRM can handle loads to it's limit of output. That is how Buck converters work.
> 
> I have been in the electrical field for many years and just to give you a example VRMs are much more stable with powersupply load with a minimal drop then a PSU at + or - 5%
> 
> One thing I like about Gigabyte is they don't misdirect, they tell folks how things work in Bios and there manual.
> 
> Gigabyte manual backs up what I and the article is saying.
> 
> 
> http://download.gigabyte.ru/manual/mb_manual_ga-z170-hd3(ddr3)_e.pdf


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> So then, enable the maximum LLC on your board and see for yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (frankly, some of these posts are getting a little aphasic).


I know what Load line does I've been around since the option was fist introduced and disable was the only option, also I have the knowledge how it works. When folks set load line to the highest level it is the same as disabling load line, there is no inherent Vdroop from the VRM with load.









You said with LLC set to the highest the Vcore will go over what you set for Vcore and that is untrue and the Gigabyte manual above backs me up since you don't believe what I'm saying.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I know what Load line does I've been around since the option was fist introduced and disable was the only option, also I have the knowledge how it works. When folks set load line to the highest level it is the same as disabling load line, there is no inherent Vdroop from the VRM with load.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You said with LLC set to the highest the Vcore will go over what you set for Vcore and that is untrue and the Gigabyte manual above backs me up since you don't believe what I'm saying.


one last time... whether or not your specific MB calls it LLC max or LLC min, (depends on which side of the droop you look from - right?), that setting which overcomes vdroop at load IS ADDING voltage to compensate for vdroop. It's not a debate topic.


----------



## DJSave

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *benjamen50*
> 
> How do you get adaptive voltage on a gigabyte z270 motherboard? I can only get offset and manual.


same here, with z170 board i get same modes only
looks like people here don't like Gigabyte boards...


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DJSave*
> 
> same here, with z170 board i get same modes only
> looks like people here don't like Gigabyte boards...


there is always the possibility that such an option is unique to Asus
it's an OC feature after all and is in no way required by Intel to be an option

or comes (and sometimes goes) with a newer bios version

edit:
to make it simpler

when I want to change the core voltage I have a simple drop down menu letting me choose the way voltage should be applied


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DJSave*
> 
> same here, with z170 board i get same modes only
> looks like people here don't like Gigabyte boards...


May be the same with AsRock. My z170 MOCF does not offer Adaptive. Only Fixed and Offset. Offset works just as well. Whether the rig is idling at 0.8V or 1V is not any different by any measure (it's idling, so there is very little current/amps.. watts being used anyway







).


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> one last time... whether or not your specific MB calls it LLC max or LLC min, (depends on which side of the droop you look from - right?), that setting which overcomes vdroop at load IS ADDING voltage to compensate for vdroop. It's not a debate topic.


I was not debating that load line calibration setting adds or subtracts voltage.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I asked because vcore actually can run that much higher than set in bios depending on the LLC used.


I was talking about your above statement that I don't find to be true with my experience or the Gigabyte manual when setting manual Vcore with Highest LLC.


http://download.gigabyte.ru/manual/mb_manual_ga-z270-hd3_e.pdf


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I was not debating that load line calibration setting adds or subtracts voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was talking about your above statement that I don't find to be true with my experience or the Gigabyte manual when setting manual Vcore with Highest LLC.
> 
> 
> http://download.gigabyte.ru/manual/mb_manual_ga-z270-hd3_e.pdf


that's great. let's move on.


----------



## DJSave

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> May be the same with AsRock. My z170 MOCF does not offer Adaptive. Only Fixed and Offset. Offset works just as well. Whether the rig is idling at 0.8V or 1V is not any different by any measure (it's idling, so there is very little current/amps.. watts being used anyway
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ).


Can you check when using LLC level about 5 or more it during FPU stress like AIDA64 FPU test or OCCT or intel burn test, will it overshoot voltage when on offset mode? if yes how much is the difference?


----------



## MaKeN

People. Sry for a noob qustion. Looking at other overckloaking threds about 7700k , many mention about better resoults on a mocf.

What is that mocf?


----------



## jezzer

Hey,

Have my CPU on 4.7 @ 1.232v
Dont really need/want higher clocks and it's stable now so i am wondering is this a good voltage for 24/7?



Also i never touched offset voltages before and now the volts stay at 1.232, is it correct that with offset settings u can make the voltage drop when CPU does not have a load? Can anyone point me in a direction on a asus MB?

Or do i need to use Adaptive voltage for that?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DJSave*
> 
> Can you check when using LLC level about 5 or more it during FPU stress like AIDA64 FPU test or OCCT or intel burn test, will it overshoot voltage when on offset mode? if yes how much is the difference?


I can, but on which MB? I just put the z170 MOCF back on the bench table... Apex will go back in a day or two. But offset on the MOCF delivers what you set in Bios with LLC1, LLC2 allows ~ 20mV droop to remain.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jezzer*
> 
> Hey,
> 
> Have my CPU on 4.7 @ 1.232v
> Dont really need/want higher clocks and it's stable now so i am wondering is this a good voltage for 24/7?
> 
> 
> 
> Also i never touched offset voltages before and now the volts stay at 1.232, is it correct that with offset settings u can make the voltage drop when CPU does not have a load? Can anyone point me in a direction on a asus MB?
> 
> Or do i need to use Adaptive voltage for that?


no need to use adaptive unless you want to. 1.232V is good forever.


----------



## canna

Username: canna
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 48
Core Frequency: 4.8
Cache Frequency: 4.2
Vcore in UEFI: 1.240
Vcore: Realbench: 1.216 P95: 1.260
FCLK: 1
Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-D14

Stability Test(s):
P95 27.9 Custom 8 threads, FFT size 60-4096, 14000MB RAM, 3 minutes per FFT, 8hours 30 min test time
Realbench 2.44, 8 hours

Batch Number: Malay L641G189
Ram Speed: 3000 15-15-15-35-2T
Ram Voltage: Bios: 1.3332 Hwinfo: 1.296
VCCIO: 0.992
VCCSA: 1.128
Motherboard: z270 Asus z270-a Prime
LLC Setting: 3
Misc Comments: Spread Spectrum Disabled, No AVX offset used in Prime test, NOT delidded

P95 test:


Mem stable:


----------



## canna

Can't edit, on the above I basically ran out of thermal headroom. Realbench was staying mid 75-81 on all cores. P95 was staying mid 70's on the larger FFTs, small FFTs hit upper 80's and even in the 90s a couple times. My voltages were reasonably low for 4.8, but I don't know if this chip has much room for delidding to be worth it. I tried all the way up to 1.35v and 4.9 GHz wouldn't even boot into windows, this was with the RAM set to 2133 and low speed defaults. I didn't adjust anything else besides vcore and multiplier, is there some other setting that might help it go higher that was missing?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *canna*
> 
> Can't edit, on the above I basically ran out of thermal headroom. Realbench was staying mid 75-81 on all cores. P95 was staying mid 70's on the larger FFTs, small FFTs hit upper 80's and even in the 90s a couple times. My voltages were reasonably low for 4.8, but I don't know if this chip has much room for delidding to be worth it. I tried all the way up to 1.35v and 4.9 GHz wouldn't even boot into windows, this was with the RAM set to 2133 and low speed defaults. I didn't adjust anything else besides vcore and multiplier, is there some other setting that might help it go higher that was missing?


Solid OC! HCi memtest tops it off proper.


----------



## wholeeo

What would be a good test to see if my chip is worth a delid. I may buy another tomorrow and put it against the one I have. Batch L639G010


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> What would be a good test to see if my chip is worth a delid. I may buy another tomorrow and put it against the one I have. Batch L639G010


oh, that's a tough question. IMO? First is if the temperature is really limiting OC below 5.0GHz. Second, is if the relationship between mV and Hz is still linear (10mV or less for 100MHz per core) in going stepwise from 4.6 t o5.2 or higher, or what ever the current ceiling is. Lastly if possible, chill the system some how and see if a previously unattainable freq is now possible.


----------



## wholeeo

Thanks for this information. Just picked up a L639F978 from MC. Hopefully it's better than the one I currently have. It takes about 1.34-1.35 to pass x264 but even then I can't keep it from nearly thermal throttling.

Edit: fixed batch number


----------



## jezzer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I can, but on which MB? I just put the z170 MOCF back on the bench table... Apex will go back in a day or two. But offset on the MOCF delivers what you set in Bios with LLC1, LLC2 allows ~ 20mV droop to remain.
> no need to use adaptive unless you want to. 1.232V is good forever.


Good to know, thanks


----------



## MaKeN

Username:MaKeN
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 100.5
Core Multiplier: 51
Blck:100.5
Core Frequency: 5125
Cache Frequency: 4723
Vcore in UEFI: 1.41
Vcore: 1.411-1.420
FCLK: Reminder: auto ( 1000)
Cooling Solution: Delidded,custom loop 2 rade 280+120mm
Stability Test: OCCT 4.5.0
Pll oc voltage 1.1000v

Batch Number: Malaysia L640F777
Ram Speed: 3216 16.18.18.38
VCCIO: auto
VCCSA: auto
Ram Voltage: 1.360
Motherboard: MSI Gaming M7 z270
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: no avx.

Screenshot9.png 1713k .png file


----------



## cyfer

Okay, I think I broke something this time.

System: i7 7700K (delidded); Asus ROG Strix Z270F; 2x 8GB DDR4-2666 Crucial Ballistix Elite; RX480 8GB (stock), BQ Straight Power E10 500W, Noctua D15S

3 days ago, this OC was *stable*:

Cache: 4,2GHz
Core: 4,8GHz
AVX: 4,6GHZ
RAM: 2666MHz per XMP
Spannung: Adaptive Mode, 1.333V eingestellt, real 1.28V bei Stresstests und 1.312V bei Spielen.
LLC: Level 4 von 7

After playing around with more settings, trying to make do with a lower LLC level etc. the system is unstable now. The aforementioned overclock now does not even work with manual (fixed) voltage of 1.280-1.296V anymore. Then I booted up default settings in the UEFI and only activated XMP. *Now, here's the worst: stock settings + XMP memory are not stable anymore either*







OCCT (large file size) gives me an error on core #2 after 18 minutes. And BF1 froze on me with distorted sound yesterday too.

What did I break?


----------



## koji

Username: koji
CPU Model: intel i7-7700k
Base Clock: Bclk. 100
Core Multiplier: 49
Core Frequency: 4900
Cache Frequency: 4600
Vcore in UEFI: 1.320
Vcore: 1.345
FCLK: 1000mhz
Cooling Solution: Delid + D15
Stability Test: Realbench 8h
Batch Number: L644G961
Ram Speed: XMP - 3200mhz 16-18-18-36
Ram Voltage: 1.36
VCCIO: 1.12
VCCSA: 1.14
Motherboard: z270 - MSI Gaming M7
LLC Setting: 2
Misc Comments: No AVX offset, Adaptive voltage, EIST, HT, C1 states enabled



Right, my submission, bit bummed out that I wasn't able to hit 5ghz on it... I think I might get 5 stable around 1.45vcore but that's just too much for me. Can stresstest it for a while at 1.43vcore, that's already 90mv more compared to what I need for 4.9ghz.

Pretty average chip I have it looks like but all in all I'm happy with the results, it's a nice and clean 24/7 OC. Oh and I'm at 1.20 PLL OC voltage + LLC level 2 on my board is the second most aggressive setting.


----------



## koji

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cyfer*
> 
> Okay, I think I broke something this time.
> 
> After playing around with more settings, trying to make do with a lower LLC level etc. the system is unstable now. The aforementioned overclock now does not even work with manual (fixed) voltage of 1.280-1.296V anymore. Then I booted up default settings in the UEFI and only activated XMP. *Now, here's the worst: stock settings + XMP memory are not stable anymore either*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OCCT (large file size) gives me an error on core #2 after 18 minutes. And BF1 froze on me with distorted sound yesterday too.
> 
> What did I break?


Here's what I would do.

1 Go in to your UEFI and load the bios defaults, Usually it's F6. (used to be load optimised defaults)

2 Reboot

3 Go in to your UEFI and enable XMP profile.

4 Reboot

Check if stock is stable now.

If it's stable you can start messing with stuff again, changing cpu multiplier and vcore etc.

If the above doesn't work you'll have to CLRCMOS, and start from step 1 again.


----------



## Hellhamah

I have a 32mV difference between AVX and non- AVX programs when i set adaptive mode in BIOS, is that normal? With manual i have the same voltage in all applications. I play with the LLC in my maximus viii hero but the 32mV difference is still there whatever i do. I mean my cpu is stable with 1.328V and when i try an AVX application goes to 1.360V for no reason, i want to be 1.328V at load at all times, what else can i do from the BIOS decrease this voltage in adaptive mode?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hellhamah*
> 
> I have a 32mV difference between AVX and non- AVX programs when i set adaptive mode in BIOS, is that normal? With manual i have the same voltage in all applications. I play with the LLC in my maximus viii hero but the 32mV difference is still there whatever i do. I mean my cpu is stable with 1.328V and when i try an AVX application goes to 1.360V for no reason, i want to be 1.328V at load at all times, what else can i do from the BIOS decrease this voltage in adaptive mode?


See the KaybyLAke OC Guide link in my sig. in bios set IA AC and IA DC load line to 0.01. THey are on the bios page with power settings.


----------



## wholeeo

Torn on which processor to keep to delid. L639G010 or L643G570. I'm thinking the L643 could possibly be 5.1 stable at near 1.39 but can't really test due to heat. The L639 seems to get limited by heat earlier. 5.0 is stable at about 1.35. Decisions decisions.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Torn on which processor to keep to delid. L639G010 or L643G570. I'm thinking the L643 could possibly be 5.1 stable at near 1.39 but can't really test due to heat. The L639 seems to get limited by heat earlier. 5.0 is stable at about 1.35. Decisions decisions.


5.0 stable 1.35 tested with what app? For RealBench before delid I could do 5.0 1.28v, but for prime95 and IBT it needed 1.328.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Torn on which processor to keep to delid. L639G010 or L643G570. I'm thinking the L643 could possibly be 5.1 stable at near 1.39 but can't really test due to heat. The L639 seems to get limited by heat earlier. 5.0 is stable at about 1.35. Decisions decisions.


Make a spreadsheet... Start with both proc at 4.7 and lowest RB stable voltage... Go up 100 at a time...upping voltage as needed and keep updating the spreadsheet.

See which one scales better, when you start to lose the mhz - volt ratio...its a sign









Just my toughs...


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> 5.0 stable 1.35 tested with what app? For RealBench before delid I could do 5.0 1.28v, but for prime95 and IBT it needed 1.328.


x264 stress test. I really don't care much for Prime95 stable.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Make a spreadsheet... Start with both proc at 4.7 and lowest RB stable voltage... Go up 100 at a time...upping voltage as needed and keep updating the spreadsheet.
> 
> See which one scales better, when you start to lose the mhz - volt ratio...its a sign
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just my toughs...


Thanks, I'll try that this weekend.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> x264 stress test. I really don't care much for Prime95 stable.
> Thanks, I'll try that this weekend.


Spreadsheet is a great idea. If the one can do 5.1 with 50mV more than the other at 5.0.... The 5.1 is better IMO. The last 100mhz on these chips can require more than 100mV than the previous 100mhz step.


----------



## wholeeo

What a difference delidding makes. Got tired of waiting for my delid tool (arrives tomorrow..lol) so I did it the old fashion way razor way. Still waiting on my Conductonaut so just used Kyronaut between the HS and the die for now. So I'm currently seeing 23c lower temps and am able to run x264 stress test at 1.28 at the moment. Before delid it took me 1.35 and that wasn't even totally stable. For some odd reason CPU-Z is showing my Vcore at 1.264 instead of the 1.28 I set in bios. Not only that but HWINFO is showing it at 1.239. Could it be because I'm running in manual mode at the moment?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> What a difference delidding makes. Got tired of waiting for my delid tool (arrives tomorrow..lol) so I did it the old fashion way razor way. Still waiting on my Conductonaut so just used Kyronaut between the HS and the die for now. So I'm currently seeing 23c lower temps and am able to run x264 stress test at 1.28 at the moment. Before delid it took me 1.35 and that wasn't even totally stable. For some odd reason CPU-Z is showing my Vcore at 1.264 instead of the 1.28 I set in bios. Not only that but HWINFO is showing it at 1.239. Could it be because I'm running in manual mode at the moment?


Ive done 2 chips with razor way ( the one sided ones) takes very short time to do it.. like 2 mins? I still think this method is best if there isnt a delliding tool available. Well as long if you are handyman i guess








And yes, big difference there ....

As for the voltage ... idkn . On my board i did not see things as that


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> What a difference delidding makes. Got tired of waiting for my delid tool (arrives tomorrow..lol) so I did it the old fashion way razor way. Still waiting on my Conductonaut so just used Kyronaut between the HS and the die for now. So I'm currently seeing 23c lower temps and am able to run x264 stress test at 1.28 at the moment. Before delid it took me 1.35 and that wasn't even totally stable. For some odd reason CPU-Z is showing my Vcore at 1.264 instead of the 1.28 I set in bios. Not only that but HWINFO is showing it at 1.239. Could it be because I'm running in manual mode at the moment?


*Nice*!! Some of these chips just have REALLY bad tim under the hood (and this really gets me pissed off at Intel for crippling then actually selling such a great chip







)
the 16mV spread: 1.280 and 1.264 is a function of the 8-bit report from the SIO. It has a 16mV resolution. If it floats between those values actual is probably right in th emiddle. That said, only way to know for sure is to measure with a DMM.


----------



## moorhen2

After some initial testing this chip doesn't seem too bad, will do some extended stress testing over the next few days to see what the chip is capable of.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> After some initial testing this chip doesn't seem too bad, will do some extended stress testing over the next few days to see what the chip is capable of


hwinfo looks like it was running for your RB test with the max temps, but the max power was only 46w? It should be double that unless I am mistaken.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> hwinfo looks like it was running for your RB test with the max temps, but the max power was only 46w? It should be double that unless I am mistaken.


Screenshots taken when realbench had finished mate.









This is under load, it's the same.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Screenshots taken when realbench had finished mate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is under load, it's the same


hwinfo logged the max power so it doesn't make any difference if you took the SS after the test. Maybe try a different version of hwinfo to see if it's not reporting accurately. Have you ran any benchmarks to see if performance is in the expected range?


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> hwinfo logged the max power so it doesn't make any difference if you took the SS after the test. Maybe try a different version of hwinfo to see if it's not reporting accurately. Have you ran any benchmarks to see if performance is in the expected range?


Two different versions of HWinfo, thats 3 in total, stress and benchmark tests, all state the same.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Two different versions of HWinfo, thats 3 in total, stress and benchmark tests, all state the same.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


eyah,m that's HWinfo.

Check that you have CPU SVID set properly for the power calc to be correct.... if you care to. It's inaccurate at best.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> eyah,m that's HWinfo.
> 
> Check that you have CPU SVID set properly for the power calc to be correct.... if you care to. It's inaccurate at best.


Gigabyte dont have this as an option in the bios, unless it's called something else by Giga.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Gigabyte dont have this as an option in the bios, unless it's called something else by Giga.


check with lilchronic. I think he has/had that same board.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> check with lilchronic. I think he has/had that same board.


Dont think he has the Aorus z270x gaming 9, or are we at cross purposes, lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Dont think he has the Aorus z270x gaming 9, or are we at cross purposes, lol.


I was looking at your sig rig parts...


----------



## Outcasst

Does the x264 stability test use AVX?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Outcasst*
> 
> Does the x264 stability test use AVX?


yes.


----------



## Outcasst

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes.


That's nice!

What would be the best program to stress test a non AVX workload? 5GHz is stable with the x264 Stability Test, wonder if i could hit 5.1 if not using AVX using the offset.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Gigabyte dont have this as an option in the bios, unless it's called something else by Giga.


SVID then for Gigabyte it is Dynamic DVID.


----------



## OutlawII

Why cant we have standardized terms for all motherboards????////


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Why cant we have standardized terms for all motherboards????////


Be careful with what you wish for... The standard would be Chin, Taiwan, or Japn not EASY.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Outcasst*
> 
> That's nice!
> 
> What would be the best program to stress test a non AVX workload? 5GHz is stable with the x264 Stability Test, wonder if i could hit 5.1 if not using AVX using the offset.


depends on the non-avx load you want to simulate. you can use p95 and disable AVX/FMA3 etc with a simple edit of the local.txt file. details in the undoc.txt file.

CpuSupportsAVX=0 or 1
CpuSupportsFMA3=0 or 1


----------



## MaKeN

Guys, whats the quickest way to find lowest vccio and sa voltage?
Thx


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Guys, whats the quickest way to find lowest vccio and sa voltage?
> Thx


Run HCI Memtest. Errors, crashes and screen "turning on and off" means the voltage are too low.


----------



## Marctraider

Hey boys.

Acquired an ASUS ROG Strix Z270G Gaming (m-atx) with 16GB Trident RGB 3866Mhz DDR4.

Together with a 7600K since my games wouldnt benefit from Hyperthreading.

First thing I did was delid it and put Coollaboratory Ultra between it. Using Flagship Noctua Air cooler!

But with new platforms come new challenges and questions.
First of all, the Turboboost voltage was confusing as the Asus bios describes it as 'additional' voltage, but instead one is supposed to fill in the desired max vcore in turbo mode.

I've set it to 1.30v and bumped up to 4.8Ghz so far, Ill push it further tonight.

My question however is; Where is LLC still used for now that we can set a desired turbo voltage (with new adaptive method)?
Im trying to reach 5Ghz or so, but im not aiming to go to the extreme. What level between 1
and 7 would be a decent balance? Or just keep it at auto these days?

Thanks!


----------



## MikeS3000

Every board is different but I can tell you on my Asus Maximums IX Hero I need LLC 5 or 6 to keep voltages from sagging under heavy load. I've never tried 7.


----------



## hayame

I have same motherboard and cpu, I use manual voltage setting with LLC=5 for 5.2ghz (works with 5.1ghz and 5.0ghz). Whenever I try to use adaptive voltage it seems to use a lot more voltage than needed, granted this is the first time I've even tried to consider using adaptive voltage for overclocking. Do note that I don't have any of the speedstep thing going on and usually just have the cpu at 5.2ghz/1.44v (1.46 in bios however it never or rarely exceeds 1.44v under load/OCCT).

I'm sure the more time you spend on tweaking the settings, the better you can have the voltage and LLC (or even on adaptive voltage settings), but just thought I'd give you my experiences with the same cpu and mobo, good luck!


----------



## Marctraider

Well, its the first time im dealing with adaptive voltage, it seems ideal for keeping standard voltages under
non turbo multipliers, power saving while having nice fixed volts on turbo boost!

Manual fixed clock/volt is out of the question for me.

I really like to undervolt a bit if possible, and attain stable 5Ghz on load.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> Hey boys.
> 
> Acquired an ASUS ROG Strix Z270G Gaming (m-atx) with 16GB Trident RGB 3866Mhz DDR4.
> 
> Together with a 7600K since my games wouldnt benefit from Hyperthreading.
> 
> First thing I did was delid it and put Coollaboratory Ultra between it. Using Flagship Noctua Air cooler!
> 
> But with new platforms come new challenges and questions.
> First of all, the Turboboost voltage was confusing as the Asus bios describes it as 'additional' voltage, but instead one is supposed to fill in the desired max vcore in turbo mode.
> 
> I've set it to 1.30v and bumped up to 4.8Ghz so far, Ill push it further tonight.
> 
> My question however is; Where is LLC still used for now that we can set a desired turbo voltage (with new adaptive method)?
> Im trying to reach 5Ghz or so, but im not aiming to go to the extreme. What level between 1
> and 7 would be a decent balance? Or just keep it at auto these days?
> 
> Thanks!


use LLC5. if adaptive s running high voltage, set IA DC and IA AC load line to 0.01 (folllow the OC guide linked in my sig).
Yeah.. additional is a bit confusing. I think that term is used since it is configured as an additional on top of the VID (hence, adaptive cannot be used to run below the VID request). The bios sets the total applied voltage as additional on top of the VID for that frequency so that you do not have to putz around with knowing the VID.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hayame*
> 
> I have same motherboard and cpu, I use manual voltage setting with LLC=5 for 5.2ghz (works with 5.1ghz and 5.0ghz). Whenever I try to use adaptive voltage it seems to use a lot more voltage than needed, granted this is the first time I've even tried to consider using adaptive voltage for overclocking. Do note that I don't have any of the speedstep thing going on and usually just have the cpu at 5.2ghz/1.44v (1.46 in bios however it never or rarely exceeds 1.44v under load/OCCT).
> 
> I'm sure the more time you spend on tweaking the settings, the better you can have the voltage and LLC (or even on adaptive voltage settings), but just thought I'd give you my experiences with the same cpu and mobo, good luck!


check IA AC and DC load line in the guide linked in my sig. Speed step (EIST) must be enabled in order for adaptive to adapt to anything.


----------



## hayame

I have used that guide for reference and both IA AC and DC load line are both at 0.01 (even with speedstep off).
And maybe it's just me, but I really like having my cpu run at full speeds always







. That being said, I did give adaptive voltage settings for turbo boost a try but I definitely had an easier time with manual voltage/overclocking.

Perhaps later on tonight I'll go back and see if I can get it working properly and save it to a profile for the rare moments of feeling like not using full speeds.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hayame*
> 
> I have used that guide for reference and both IA AC and DC load line are both at 0.01 (even with speedstep off).
> And maybe it's just me, but I really like having my cpu run at full speeds always
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . That being said, I did give adaptive voltage settings for turbo boost a try but I definitely had an easier time with manual voltage/overclocking.
> 
> Perhaps later on tonight I'll go back and see if I can get it working properly and save it to a profile for the rare moments of feeling like not using full speeds.


cool.. just pointing out that it makes no sense to use adaptive (or offset) voltage control and lock the clocks at max turbo settings by disabling EIST.


----------



## hayame

Oh my bad, I didn't mean to word the last few posts of mine where it made it seem like I tried to use adaptive voltage control in that way like you say it shouldn't be used


----------



## Marctraider

With adaptive, LLC 5 so far managed to get idle 800mhz at 0.540v~ stable, 4.9ghz boots at 1.28v but prime hangs pc.

Do these mainboards ever induce BSod's on Win 7? And what about WHEA Logger?

I have seen zero so far, just system lockups.

- 1.302v / 4.9ghz = prime95 15mins stable so far. Temps 75c at max fan speed.

I wonder if this is normal for delidded Kaby


----------



## MikeS3000

I posted this earlier today in the ROG Maximus IX mobo forum but nobody responded. This question is in line with the current discussion over here, so maybe someone can help me out.

I own the Maximus IX Hero and have some adaptive voltage questions. I've been dialing in my overclock on my 7700k for weeks and I think I know that this chip needs at certain frequencies and voltages.

I'm running 5.1 ghz with AVX offset of 1. So at 5.1 non-avx workload this chip needs about 1.408 to be stable. And, at 5.0 ghz AVX workload it also needs 1.408 to be stable. My current voltage settings are: 1.39v additional turbo voltage with adaptive and no other offsets. LLC 6. So at these settings my cpu usually hits 1.408v at 5.0 avx workload, yet at 5.1 non-avx it jumps around from 1.408 to 1.424v. I don't think that I need that much voltage at 5.1.

I have never messed around with adaptive's offset voltages yet. Would changing the offset affect 5.0 ghz AVX when the chip downclocks or is it because 5.0 is still considered a turbo frequency that offset would have no effect. What defines a turbo frequency for offset's purposes, 4.2 ghz and under?

Another adaptive setting that kind of works is 1.405v w/ LLC 5. This keeps the vcore closer to 1.408 at 5.1 but when it downclocks to 5.0 avx the vcore is just under 1.4 and I fail AVX stress tests because the 5.0 vcore is slightly too low.

That would be nice if a BIOS update could implement separate defined voltages when using AVX offset.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> With adaptive, LLC 5 so far managed to get idle 800mhz at 0.540v~ stable, 4.9ghz boots at 1.28v but prime hangs pc.
> Do these mainboards ever induce BSod's on Win 7? And what about WHEA Logger?
> I have seen zero so far, just system lockups.
> - 1.302v / 4.9ghz = prime95 15mins stable so far. Temps 75c at max fan speed.
> I wonder if this is normal for delidded Kaby


machine check erros (WHEA) are logged in all win OS's. If you insist on using prime.. either add vcore or lower your clocks (you can use AVX offset like Mike below!) Or drop prime as use something more rational.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*
> 
> I posted this earlier today in the ROG Maximus IX mobo forum but nobody responded. This question is in line with the current discussion over here, so maybe someone can help me out.
> I own the Maximus IX Hero and have some adaptive voltage questions. I've been dialing in my overclock on my 7700k for weeks and I think I know that this chip needs at certain frequencies and voltages.
> I'm running 5.1 ghz with AVX offset of 1. So at 5.1 non-avx workload this chip needs about 1.408 to be stable. And, at 5.0 ghz AVX workload it also needs 1.408 to be stable. My current voltage settings are: 1.39v additional turbo voltage with adaptive and no other offsets. LLC 6. So at these settings my cpu usually hits 1.408v at 5.0 avx workload, yet at 5.1 non-avx it jumps around from 1.408 to 1.424v. I don't think that I need that much voltage at 5.1.
> I have never messed around with adaptive's offset voltages yet. Would changing the offset affect 5.0 ghz AVX when the chip downclocks or is it because 5.0 is still considered a turbo frequency that offset would have no effect. What defines a turbo frequency for offset's purposes, 4.2 ghz and under?
> Another adaptive setting that kind of works is 1.405v w/ LLC 5. This keeps the vcore closer to 1.408 at 5.1 but when it downclocks to 5.0 avx the vcore is just under 1.4 and I fail AVX stress tests because the 5.0 vcore is slightly too low.
> 
> That would be nice if a BIOS update could implement separate defined voltages when using AVX offset.


I don;t think you need to offset the VID when using adaptive unless you were trying to run a voltage below the VID. the jumping around between 1.408 and 1.424 is simply caused by the 16mV resolution of the OS readout of vcore. The actual is probably right between. Honestly, focus less on small voltage changes and more on temperature and wattage.
Offset is applied across the entire VID stack: idle to max turbo multipliers, not only tuirbo. Adaptive voltage applies to turbo multipliers, below turbo multis, adaptive runs the VID.
to your last point, Use the asus thermal control tool inb bios to allow for separate voltages for AVX and non-AVX max turbo work loads. works like a charm.


----------



## MikeS3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> machine check erros (WHEA) are logged in all win OS's. If you insist on using prime.. either add vcore or lower your clocks (you can use AVX offset like Mike below!) Or drop prime as use something more rational.
> I don;t think you need to offset the VID when using adaptive unless you were trying to run a voltage below the VID. the jumping around between 1.408 and 1.424 is simply caused by the 16mV resolution of the OS readout of vcore. The actual is probably right between. Honestly, focus less on small voltage changes and more on temperature and wattage.
> Offset is applied across the entire VID stack: idle to max turbo multipliers, not only tuirbo. Adaptive voltage applies to turbo multipliers, below turbo multis, adaptive runs the VID.
> to your last point, Use the asus thermal control tool inb bios to allow for separate voltages for AVX and non-AVX max turbo work loads. works like a charm.


So HWinfo64 gave me an avg vcore of 1.417 during a 5.1 non-avx prime95 run. I understand the 16mv resolution thing, so would you say that 1.417 avg is pretty accurate in Hwinfo? My temps have always been under control since the delid. I max out at about 75 on a single core and average in the upper 60s across all cores and workloads under heavy stress testing. I did some reading with Raja Gill who wrote the Asus Kaby Lake overclocking guide and kind of get the point of thermal control. Seems like a heck of a lot of settings to run up to 3 different max frequencies depending on temperature and avx workloads. I'm not sure if I want to go that crazy with all of that. Maybe I'm not understanding it 100%. My goal is to run 1.408 at 5.1 ghz non-avx and 1.408 at 5.0 avx. I'm a little worried that pushing close to 1.42 at 5.1ghz is unsafe for the chip in the long run. Or, I just need to suck it up and not worry so much. I think I can get 5.1 avx workloads stable but I would be pushing near 1.45 vcore. What do you think?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*
> 
> So HWinfo64 gave me an avg vcore of 1.417 during a 5.1 non-avx prime95 run. I understand the 16mv resolution thing, so would you say that 1.417 avg is pretty accurate in Hwinfo? My temps have always been under control since the delid. I max out at about 75 on a single core and average in the upper 60s across all cores and workloads under heavy stress testing. I did some reading with Raja Gill who wrote the Asus Kaby Lake overclocking guide and kind of get the point of thermal control. Seems like a heck of a lot of settings to run up to 3 different max frequencies depending on temperature and avx workloads. I'm not sure if I want to go that crazy with all of that. Maybe I'm not understanding it 100%. My goal is to run 1.408 at 5.1 ghz non-avx and 1.408 at 5.0 avx. I'm a little worried that pushing close to 1.42 at 5.1ghz is unsafe for the chip in the long run. Or, I just need to suck it up and not worry so much. I think I can get 5.1 avx workloads stable but I would be pushing near 1.45 vcore. What do you think?


have you tried to lower the load vcore by using more vdroop? (a lower number LLC on your board). Other than that, focus on the high current AVX load, the light load voltage is less critical regarding the "long run". Current kills, not voltage (no matter how hard Edison tried to prove Tesla wrong







)


----------



## eXultanCe

Anyone help me out here. I got a 7700k, an MSI z270 Gaming M3, 2x8GB DDR4 at 3000mhz, and a Cryorig H5 Universal. Right off the bat I noticed temps were extremely high (before even OC'ing). I messed with some settings thinking maybe voltage was off. But temps didnt improve. Figured I'd OC it a bit just for the heck and see what temps I'd get. Right now I have it at 4600ghz, and 1.260Vcore, LLC at 2, XMP on. All other settings at default. And I'm getting temps of around 50-60 in BIOS. Strangely enough, my idle temps in OS are at a low of 44C (lower than BIOS).

I took PC apart, cleaned CPU and cooler, reapplied paste, and I'm getting the same ****ty results.

I did a RealBench of 15 minutes, and I'm getting max temps of 97C.



At this point I cant figure out if settings are just completely off, issue with CPU, or my cooler is not properly installed (though I've reinstalled).

Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## MikeS3000

So how do I calculate current? I see voltage and I see total watts in Hwinfo. If my memory serves me right under heavy prime95 or OCCT I think my wattage peaks in the 150s or even 160w.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eXultanCe*
> 
> Anyone help me out here. I got a 7700k, an MSI z270 Gaming M3, 2x8GB DDR4 at 3000mhz, and a Cryorig H5 Universal. Right off the bat I noticed temps were extremely high (before even OC'ing). I messed with some settings thinking maybe voltage was off. But temps didnt improve. Figured I'd OC it a bit just for the heck and see what temps I'd get. Right now I have it at 4600ghz, and 1.260Vcore, LLC at 2, XMP on. All other settings at default. And I'm getting temps of around 50-60 in BIOS. Strangely enough, my idle temps in OS are at a low of 44C (lower than BIOS).
> 
> I took PC apart, cleaned CPU and cooler, reapplied paste, and I'm getting the same ****ty results.
> 
> I did a RealBench of 15 minutes, and I'm getting max temps of 97C.
> 
> 
> 
> At this point I cant figure out if settings are just completely off, issue with CPU, or my cooler is not properly installed (though I've reinstalled).
> 
> Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated.


that's what I HATE about HWi .. it shows all sorts of stuff, but not all the important stuff. Some folks here have had problems with MSI boards overvolting CPU PLL (or CPU PLL OC) voltage which ever it is called. Lower this to 1.0 to 1.2V. Also check cpu standby/sustain or what ever the MSI mane is. should be 1.0v when below 5.2GHz.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*
> 
> So how do I calculate current? I see voltage and I see total watts in Hwinfo. If my memory serves me right under heavy prime95 or OCCT I think my wattage peaks in the 150s or even 160w.


Use AID64 or just recognize that 160W is what, more than 1.5x the chip's TDP?


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eXultanCe*
> 
> Anyone help me out here. I got a 7700k, an MSI z270 Gaming M3, 2x8GB DDR4 at 3000mhz, and a Cryorig H5 Universal. Right off the bat I noticed temps were extremely high (before even OC'ing). I messed with some settings thinking maybe voltage was off. But temps didnt improve. Figured I'd OC it a bit just for the heck and see what temps I'd get. Right now I have it at 4600ghz, and 1.260Vcore, LLC at 2, XMP on. All other settings at default. And I'm getting temps of around 50-60 in BIOS. Strangely enough, my idle temps in OS are at a low of 44C (lower than BIOS).
> 
> I took PC apart, cleaned CPU and cooler, reapplied paste, and I'm getting the same ****ty results.
> 
> I did a RealBench of 15 minutes, and I'm getting max temps of 97C.
> 
> 
> 
> At this point I cant figure out if settings are just completely off, issue with CPU, or my cooler is not properly installed (though I've reinstalled).
> 
> Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated.


You probably will need to delid your CPU, seems like you have a "pretty bad one".


----------



## MikeS3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eXultanCe*
> 
> Anyone help me out here. I got a 7700k, an MSI z270 Gaming M3, 2x8GB DDR4 at 3000mhz, and a Cryorig H5 Universal. Right off the bat I noticed temps were extremely high (before even OC'ing). I messed with some settings thinking maybe voltage was off. But temps didnt improve. Figured I'd OC it a bit just for the heck and see what temps I'd get. Right now I have it at 4600ghz, and 1.260Vcore, LLC at 2, XMP on. All other settings at default. And I'm getting temps of around 50-60 in BIOS. Strangely enough, my idle temps in OS are at a low of 44C (lower than BIOS).
> 
> I took PC apart, cleaned CPU and cooler, reapplied paste, and I'm getting the same ****ty results.
> 
> I did a RealBench of 15 minutes, and I'm getting max temps of 97C.
> 
> 
> 
> At this point I cant figure out if settings are just completely off, issue with CPU, or my cooler is not properly installed (though I've reinstalled).
> 
> Any suggestion would be greatly appreciated.


Maybe faulty CPU? I've read a few forums where people had severe temp issues at stock on the 7700k. They returned the cpu and things returned to normal. Can you return the cpu?


----------



## eXultanCe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> You probably will need to delid your CPU, seems like you have a "pretty bad one".


I honestly intended to delid eventually, but considering how ****ty my temps are, I may look into replacing it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*
> 
> Maybe faulty CPU? I've read a few forums where people had severe temp issues at stock on the 7700k. They returned the cpu and things returned to normal. Can you return the cpu?


Going to contact Newegg to see what they can do for me.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that's what I HATE about HWi .. it shows all sorts of stuff, but not all the important stuff. Some folks here have had problems with MSI boards overvolting CPU PLL (or CPU PLL OC) voltage which ever it is called. Lower this to 1.0 to 1.2V. Also check cpu standby/sustain or what ever the MSI mane is. should be 1.0v when below 5.2GHz.


I had changed my PLL OC voltage at one point to 1.15v, as I saw some people suggesting doing it to lower temps. While I did see lower temps, any time I ran any benchmark, any software that reported temperatures would completely stop measuring it. Core Temp would freeze, HWinfo would freeze on the temp. Could this be an indication of a bigger issue?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eXultanCe*
> 
> I honestly intended to delid eventually, but considering how ****ty my temps are, I may look into replacing it.
> Going to contact Newegg to see what they can do for me.
> I had changed my PLL OC voltage at one point to 1.15v, as I saw some people suggesting doing it to lower temps. While I did see lower temps, any time I ran any benchmark, any software that reported temperatures would completely stop measuring it. Core Temp would freeze, HWinfo would freeze on the temp. Could this be an indication of a bigger issue?


yeah, so leave PLL on auto.. it does affect the alignment of the DTS signal. Many people here see 20C and more lower temps after delid.


----------



## eXultanCe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, so leave PLL on auto.. it does affect the alignment of the DTS signal. Many people here see 20C and more lower temps after delid.


I'm not going to risk delidding it yet. Honestly did not want to spend any more money buying stuff to delid, with no guarantee that my issues will be completely gone. I really appreciate your suggestion though.

I just spoke with Newegg and they will be replacing it for me.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eXultanCe*
> 
> I'm not going to risk delidding it yet. Honestly did not want to spend any more money buying stuff to delid, with no guarantee that my issues will be completely gone. I really appreciate your suggestion though.
> 
> I just spoke with Newegg and they will be replacing it for me.


hopefully the next one works better.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eXultanCe*
> 
> I'm not going to risk delidding it yet. Honestly did not want to spend any more money buying stuff to delid, with no guarantee that my issues will be completely gone. I really appreciate your suggestion though.
> 
> I just spoke with Newegg and they will be replacing it for me.


yeah it's probably not worth delidding me thinks

keep in mind I have "only" a 7600K
but this was done before delidding with an air cooler










88 degrees on hottest core with 5.1Ghz with RealBench as well

again
run of the mill air cooler before delid


----------



## koji

Delidding here was worth it on my 7700k, broke the tempwall I ran in to at 4.9 to eventually conclude 4.9 was the max...


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, so leave PLL on auto.. it does affect the alignment of the DTS signal. Many people here see 20C and more lower temps after delid.


I thought Kaby PLL was 0.900v?

My bios says its standard anyway. I'm really scared to keep any relevant OC voltage on auto, as first time i started experimenting my VCCIO and Agent crap were higher than 1.4v right away!

Anyway, so far 0.900v ran stable on 4.9GHz, its the lowest setting I can pick









Guess ill keep it on that?


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> machine check erros (WHEA) are logged in all win OS's. If you insist on using prime.. either add vcore or lower your clocks (you can use AVX offset like Mike below!) Or drop prime as use something more rational.
> I don;t think you need to offset the VID when using adaptive unless you were trying to run a voltage below the VID. the jumping around between 1.408 and 1.424 is simply caused by the 16mV resolution of the OS readout of vcore. The actual is probably right between. Honestly, focus less on small voltage changes and more on temperature and wattage.
> Offset is applied across the entire VID stack: idle to max turbo multipliers, not only tuirbo. Adaptive voltage applies to turbo multipliers, below turbo multis, adaptive runs the VID.
> to your last point, Use the asus thermal control tool inb bios to allow for separate voltages for AVX and non-AVX max turbo work loads. works like a charm.


Actually, I think I found two WHEA errors related to PCI-E Root Express crap, but the thing is they dont correspond with unstable system, in fact there are exactly 2 of these messages at the exact same point just after booting into Windows. Seems I can replicate them every single boot.

I wonder if it could be related to a wrong bios setting, so far the 4.9GHz has been prime95 stable for 12 hours.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> Actually, I think I found two WHEA errors related to PCI-E Root Express crap, but the thing is they dont correspond with unstable system, in fact there are exactly 2 of these messages at the exact same point just after booting into Windows. Seems I can replicate them every single boot.
> 
> I wonder if it could be related to a wrong bios setting, so far the 4.9GHz has been prime95 stable for 12 hours.


the event may be a warning, informational, or critical. which is it. I doubt it's a bios setting unless you messed with PCIE or DMI settings in bios.


----------



## dirtyred

Dear overclockers! After 10 years using a laptop everything is pretty new for me. Before that I was an AMD user for many years resulting in 2 dead Athlon CPU's and 1 mobo because of overclocking. I'd really like to avoid that this time.

My new rig is the following:
ASUS PRIME Z270-K
Intel 7700K
G.Skill Ripjaws V F4-3200C16D-16GVK (16-16-16-36-2N)

Case:
Fractal Design Define C with stock coolers (1 front, 1 back)

CPU Cooler:
Arctic Freezer i32 with MX-4 thermal compound

So, I'm trying to overclock my 7700K (what a relief after using 10 years a laptop with Q9000 thermal throttling at 1.5 GHz or shutting down). So far I've managed to reach 4.8 GHz (AVX Offset 0) using 1.22 Volts and LLC 5, memory running at 2400 MHz and voltage is on auto. Passed the custom x264 2 hour stability test but using RealBench 2.44 stress test for 10 minutes got me BSOD.

During x264 (16 threads) my CPU temps are around 77-80 °C. During RealBench it gets up to 80-84 °C. The coolers are set to run on full speed: CPU fan @ 1400 RPM, case fans @ 1200 RPM. Ambient temperature is around 22-25 °C.

My questions are the following:
1. What stress tests are the closest to real life usage? Which one should I believe: custom x264 using 16 threads or RealBench stress test? I never multitask as hard as RealBench running 7-Zip, Blender, HandBrake and LuxMark at the same time. I mostly use my PC for Gaming (WoT, Armored Warfare, StarCraft 2, recently some GTA 5), 3D rendering using 3DS Max with Corona Renderer and Photoshop but only 1 of those is running at one time. So the CPU should be stable in these kind of situations.

2. I've read that up to 80 °C is safe but never mentioned if some cores pass it for some short period of time is it still safe. The difference between the coolest and hottest cores is 7-10 °C (77 - 85 °C). Is 85 °C for 1 core still safe?

3. What could I do to lower the CPU temps or increase stability at these temps using BIOS settings while still maintaining this overclock?

4. Seems like between 2133 and 2800 MHz RAM speed the CPU temps raise by almost 10 °C. Is this normal?


----------



## Pocketcow

Posting for the 7700k OC chart.

Username: Pocketcow
CPU Model: i7-7700k
Base Clock: 100 MHz
Core Multiplier: 51
Core Frequency: 5100 MHz
Cache Frequency: 4900 MHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.410v
Vcore: 1.409v
FCLK: 1000 MHz
Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-D15 + Arctic Silver 5. CPU was delidded.
Stability Test: Realbench for 8 hours using 16GB RAM.
Batch Number: L639G022
Ram Speed: 4000MHz - 18, 19, 19, 39
Ram Voltage: 1.4v
VCCIO: 1.2v
VCCSA: 1.225v
Motherboard: Z270 Asus Maximus IX Hero
LLC Setting: 6
Misc Comments: No AVX offset was used.


----------



## MaKeN

any one know how are these IA AC/dc Load Lines called on msi boards?


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pocketcow*
> 
> Posting for the 7700k OC chart.
> 
> Username: Pocketcow
> CPU Model: i7-7700k
> Base Clock: 100 MHz
> Core Multiplier: 51
> Core Frequency: 5100 MHz
> Cache Frequency: 4900 MHz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.410v
> Vcore: 1.409v
> FCLK: 1000 MHz
> Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-D15 + Arctic Silver 5. CPU was delidded.
> Stability Test: Realbench for 8 hours using 16GB RAM.
> Batch Number: L639G022
> Ram Speed: 4000MHz - 18, 19, 19, 39
> Ram Voltage: 1.4v
> VCCIO: 1.2v
> VCCSA: 1.225v
> Motherboard: Z270 Asus Maximus IX Hero
> LLC Setting: 6
> Misc Comments: No AVX offset was used.


Do you use the second fan on your Noctua? I cant cuz of my Trident RGB memory i believe.

Im not sure if my delid + coollaboratory ultra succeeded completely. I assume tho with 29c idle temps and all pretty equal on load.

My room ambient temp is like 4/5c higher than most people tho









Im getting 70/75c temps on 4.9ghz 1.32v

Grats on the clockspeed!

Edit; Im actually able to put the second fan at the other side of the noctua, not sure if it would be more efficient since there s not that much clearance vs the back case fan. Well i guess it would be beneficial either way


----------



## Pocketcow

Marctraider:

Yes, I am using both fans in pull mode. I had to seat them a good bit higher in order to fit.(probably a half inch to three quarters or so) On one side, you hit the RAM and on the other side I hit motherboard components. You just can't win. The only fan that can seat down all the way is the one in the middle. Either way, it didn't seem to hurt my cooling horribly.


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pocketcow*
> 
> Marctraider:
> 
> Yes, I am using both fans in pull mode. I had to seat them a good bit higher in order to fit.(probably a half inch to three quarters or so) On one side, you hit the RAM and on the other side I hit motherboard components. You just can't win. The only fan that can seat down all the way is the one in the middle. Either way, it didn't seem to hurt my cooling horribly.


Mhh, guess i seem to be lucky with the Z270G Gaming, it seems to fit and just barely touching my vrm heatsinks


----------



## eXultanCe

Does this look like properly applied thermal paste (obviously after I removed the cooler lol)? I'm taking the cooler off to return the CPU, but figured I'd ask, in case the issue really was with the cooler.

I'm seeing scratch marks on the cooler from contact with the CPU. Is this normal?


Edit: I cleaned everything. Used another thermal paste. Getting nearly the same results. Replacement this crap lol


----------



## Inelastic

Username: Inelastic
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: Bclk. 100MHz
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5GHz
Cache Frequency: 4.2GHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.35V (adaptive)
Vcore: 1.355V
FCLK: 1000MHz
Cooling Solution: Custom water cooled loop, not delidded
Stability Test: RealBench 2.54RC2, 8 hours, 16gb ram

Batch Number: L639G011 (Malaysia)
Ram Speed: 3200MHz (16-18-18-38)
Ram Voltage: 1.35V
VCCIO:
VCCSA:
Motherboard: Z270G
LLC Setting: 2
Misc Comments:


----------



## QQryQ

Hi guys I'm bit confused and dont know what to think is this look's good for you? Because I'm feeling that temps are terrible should I invest in better cooling?
ATM using Zalman z11 Neo (3 x 120mm fans + 2 x 80 fans ) with Rajintek Tisis ( similar to best Noctuna air cooling ) air cooling.
Any suggestions what should I change to lower my temps? Didnt ran any benchmark yet playing BDO and didnt crash but those temps confuses me little thermal paste Arctic MX-2. ANy suggestions would be greate.

CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: Bclk. 100MHz
Core Multiplier: 49
Core Frequency: 4,9GHz
Cache Frequency: 4.5GHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.3V
FCLK: 1000MHz
Cooling Solution: Air cooling Rajintek Tisis not delided

Motherboard ASRock Z170 K4 Gaming

Greetings


----------



## Marctraider

I'm having aome weird issue at the moment, trying to hit 5+ghz

At some point it appears my windows starts to freeze up. but it ls not a hard freeze.

It is almost as if my CPU is thermally throttled to like 50mhz because i can still regularly move my mouse, and sometimes (albeit extremely slow) some UI windows are still being redrawn etc.

It never BSOD's, no prime errors etc. Im 100% sure the temps never hit above 75/80c so im a bit clueless as to why its dojng this.

I mean systeem freezing fine, bsod fine, crash fine... but ive never seen this behavior when i overcloxked my Ivy.

Could it be some of the 'current' settings on my asus bios? I vaguely recall one of them 'shutting down the cpu if a certain threshold is reached'


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> I'm having aome weird issue at the moment, trying to hit 5+ghz
> 
> At some point it appears my windows starts to freeze up. but it ls not a hard freeze.
> 
> It is almost as if my CPU is thermally throttled to like 50mhz because i can still regularly move my mouse, and sometimes (albeit extremely slow) some UI windows are still being redrawn etc.
> 
> It never BSOD's, no prime errors etc. Im 100% sure the temps never hit above 75/80c so im a bit clueless as to why its dojng this.
> 
> I mean systeem freezing fine, bsod fine, crash fine... but ive never seen this behavior when i overcloxked my Ivy.
> 
> Could it be some of the 'current' settings on my asus bios? I vaguely recall one of them 'shutting down the cpu if a certain threshold is reached'


try lowering the cache multiplier if you have increased it.


----------



## Sazyk

Hi guys, i got a 7700k 2 days ago and i want to push to 5Ghz, the thing is that i had a Hyper 212 EVO and it barely handles the 4.5Ghz. The gives 1.264v for 4.5Ghz, isn't that a bit high?


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> try lowering the cache multiplier if you have increased it.


Nope, its already on 3.6 atm until i get a satisfied stable speed! I think ill settle on 4.9.

I have one more question, on my previous Ivy Bridge I was able to overclock to 4.5GHz without tuboboost.

I still had Speedstep on as i wanted to have clock control in windows, and disabled all C-states.

Is it possible to overclock to 4.9GHz with Speedstep, Adaptive Voltage, and without Turboboost? I dont see why Turboboost is required at all, seems more like it would interfere more than anything.

So end result would be infinite multiplier steps from 8 (800mhz) all the way to 49 (4900mhz) without any turboboost involved? Im not sure how i should set the bios it was quite a pain in the ass with my older board having differences in both 'disabled', 'auto', and 'enabled' sometimes for the relevant options. lol

Edit: nvm, i guess Turboboost is required if one uses 'adaptive' voltage. Duh. Actually i dont think its even possiblr anymore to have variable multiplier and overclock without turboboost on these boards


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QQryQ*
> 
> Hi guys I'm bit confused and dont know what to think is this look's good for you? Because I'm feeling that temps are terrible should I invest in better cooling?
> ATM using Zalman z11 Neo (3 x 120mm fans + 2 x 80 fans ) with Rajintek Tisis ( similar to best Noctuna air cooling ) air cooling.
> Any suggestions what should I change to lower my temps? Didnt ran any benchmark yet playing BDO and didnt crash but those temps confuses me little thermal paste Arctic MX-2. ANy suggestions would be greate.
> 
> CPU Model: 7700K
> Base Clock: Bclk. 100MHz
> Core Multiplier: 49
> Core Frequency: 4,9GHz
> Cache Frequency: 4.5GHz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.3V
> FCLK: 1000MHz
> Cooling Solution: Air cooling Rajintek Tisis not delided
> 
> Motherboard ASRock Z170 K4 Gaming
> 
> Greetings


4.9Ghz, 80ºC and not delided feels ok to me, i would say your temps are pretty good.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> Nope, its already on 3.6 atm until i get a satisfied stable speed! I think ill settle on 4.9.
> 
> I have one more question, on my previous Ivy Bridge I was able to overclock to 4.5GHz without tuboboost.
> 
> I still had Speedstep on as i wanted to have clock control in windows, and disabled all C-states.
> 
> Is it possible to overclock to 4.9GHz with Speedstep, Adaptive Voltage, and without Turboboost? I dont see why Turboboost is required at all, seems more like it would interfere more than anything.
> 
> So end result would be infinite multiplier steps from 8 (800mhz) all the way to 49 (4900mhz) without any turboboost involved? Im not sure how i should set the bios it was quite a pain in the ass with my older board having differences in both 'disabled', 'auto', and 'enabled' sometimes for the relevant options. lol
> 
> Edit: nvm, i guess Turboboost is required if one uses 'adaptive' voltage. Duh. Actually i dont think its even possiblr anymore to have variable multiplier and overclock without turboboost on these boards


so if the cache is at stock and the system is doing the screen slomo, download a copy of HCI memtest and test the ram. What you describe is typical of cache-IO-ram problems. (assuming that is a fresh install of windows.).

Turbo boost enables turbo multipliers... as you know. If you want to run sans turbo, you need to run a high BCLK so that the clock you want can be reached at non-turbu multis. So.. 200x25 for 5.0. ram and the rest aligns with this bclk as it does for 100, and since the bus is independent, it will not mess up the PCIE/DMI. But yes, it you want dynamic clociks and voltage, stick close to bclk 100 and use adaptive or Offset.


----------



## Spiriva

I delided my cpu today, and after refilling my loop and getting all the bubbles out:










Before the cpu could hit ~81c (at 5100mhz @ 1.350V) now i got it running at 5200mhz using 1.395v (in bios, altho cpuz report less) and my hottest core hits 54c

I would recommend everyone to delid the 7700k and put on Coollaboratory liquid ultra/pro.

Cpu z validation: http://valid.x86.fr/wh56fv


----------



## Jpmboy

5.0/4.6 using BCLK 200 (25x/23x). EIST disabled, c-states disabled, VCC Sustain 1.2V, Vcore 1.2V, CPU PLL 1.003V ram @ 3800c16








ASUS Apex



R15 running:



R15 Completed (yeah, I know it's not a stability test)


----------



## QQryQ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> so if the cache is at stock and the system is doing the screen slomo, download a copy of HCI memtest and test the ram. What you describe is typical of cache-IO-ram problems. (assuming that is a fresh install of windows.).
> 
> Turbo boost enables turbo multipliers... as you know. If you want to run sans turbo, you need to run a high BCLK so that the clock you want can be reached at non-turbu multis. So.. 200x25 for 5.0. ram and the rest aligns with this bclk as it does for 100, and since the bus is independent, it will not mess up the PCIE/DMI. But yes, it you want dynamic clociks and voltage, stick close to bclk 100 and use adaptive or Offset.


thanks for reply I worried about temps as you see its not 100% cpu used and 80C was higherst average with 50% cpu used is around 65C should I think about replacing it with AIO cooling ? or no point without deliding the cpu ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QQryQ*
> 
> thanks for reply I worried about temps as you see its not 100% cpu used and 80C was higherst average with 50% cpu used is around 65C should I think about replacing it with AIO cooling ? or no point without deliding the cpu ?


it's hard to judge the cooling from gaming. run something fairly gentle like x264 or better the encoding benchmark in realbench so we have a better handle on peak temps from something standard. if you see above 90C just move the mouse when RB is running to halt.
Basically, x264 should be under 80C. if not, either AIO, or delid.


----------



## hayame

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sazyk*
> 
> Hi guys, i got a 7700k 2 days ago and i want to push to 5Ghz, the thing is that i had a Hyper 212 EVO and it barely handles the 4.5Ghz. The gives 1.264v for 4.5Ghz, isn't that a bit high?


When you say "barely handles" do you mean that the temps get too hot for the overclock? Because I don't think your cooler wouldn't be able to handle it unless it's a really bad chip that gets insanely hot (even for a non-delidded chip), could you post your max temps under load?


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sazyk*
> 
> Hi guys, i got a 7700k 2 days ago and i want to push to 5Ghz, the thing is that i had a Hyper 212 EVO and it barely handles the 4.5Ghz. The gives 1.264v for 4.5Ghz, isn't that a bit high?


212 EVO isn't enough for 5ghz without delid. With delid + clu on the die + good paste between cooler and heat shield and you'll be able to get 5ghz provided the cpu doesn't want too much over 1.35v. At 1.4v you'd want a better cooler to keep temps in check but with a delid a 212 evo might be able to barely pull through.

Honestly i'd just stick to 4.8ghz can easily get that speed under 1.3v and dont need to delid and get 96% of the performance that 5ghz would give you but none of the added temps. Unless you're benchmarking you won't notice or care about the tiny tiny fps difference in games.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

I stuck at 4.8Ghz with my Kraken x61, temps don't go over 72c, I'm sure it'll be a heck of a lot better if I delid.


----------



## QQryQ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's hard to judge the cooling from gaming. run something fairly gentle like x264 or better the encoding benchmark in realbench so we have a better handle on peak temps from something standard. if you see above 90C just move the mouse when RB is running to halt.
> Basically, x264 should be under 80C. if not, either AIO, or delid.


here is from realbench test screenshoot how its look in your opinion and btw today after 36h of using cpu ( games , pages etc.. ) I got freez dunno its because of OC will test it for sure.


----------



## wholeeo

Is 50 passes of x264 enough for 8 hours? Need to know before I leave it running.


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> so if the cache is at stock and the system is doing the screen slomo, download a copy of HCI memtest and test the ram. What you describe is typical of cache-IO-ram problems. (assuming that is a fresh install of windows.).
> 
> Turbo boost enables turbo multipliers... as you know. If you want to run sans turbo, you need to run a high BCLK so that the clock you want can be reached at non-turbu multis. So.. 200x25 for 5.0. ram and the rest aligns with this bclk as it does for 100, and since the bus is independent, it will not mess up the PCIE/DMI. But yes, it you want dynamic clociks and voltage, stick close to bclk 100 and use adaptive or Offset.


I was just asking as on my Ivy system (Gigabyte Sniper m3) board you'd used to be able to run without Turbo Boost and WITH speedstep, and have all available multipliers from 16x to 45x (i.e.) with voltage ranging from 0.8v to 1.32v depending on load. (with dynamic dvid)

It seems impossible on these boards now. Its not that big of a deal, but Turbo boost does nothing more than should normally be possible without it, imho. Other than power limits and crap.

The real reason I'm asking is because with speedstep, i can control my clock speeds based on Windows power plan. On my old board, setting to High performance would simply lock my clock at 4500mhz and no questions asked.

I see a slight different behavior now with this board, running on High performance does put the clock to 4900mhz in this case, but when lets say running prime95 and move around some random windows in windows (in this case no DWM, simple classic theme, induces some CPU cycles), the clock instantly drops to 3.8ghz even if all cores are still 100% saturated, until i stop moving windows around. I suspect something is handles a bit differently here due to turbo boost. It should STAY locked at 4900mhz ideally. Im not sure whats causing this but again, suspecting something to do with turbo boost.

It should stay on 4900mhz at all times if merely speedstep was at play here, unless speedstep got an overhaul since Ivy?

Edit: what about a fixed multiplier with fixed vcore? is that also no longer possible without having TB enabled?


----------



## D13mass

Hi! Guys, I`m thinking about change my 6700K to 7700K (want to try something new) and my question about motherboard: can I leave current Z170A GAMING M5 for 7700K ?

It`s compatible, I know, but in our statistics I see only Asus and Asrock with Z270


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Hi! Guys, I`m thinking about change my 6700K to 7700K (want to try something new) and my question about motherboard: can I leave current Z170A GAMING M5 for 7700K ?
> 
> It`s compatible, I know, but in our statistics I see only Asus and Asrock with Z270


Its a kaby lake overclock thread right? I dont see why it wouldnt be allowed to use an older chipset. At the very most it could be a drawback for you. lol


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QQryQ*
> 
> here is from realbench test screenshoot how its look in your opinion and btw today after 36h of using cpu ( games , pages etc.. ) I got freez dunno its because of OC will test it for sure.


I think that's fine, 7C spread between cores.. maybe remount the cooler using a top-line TIM. Then run realbench stress/stability test for a couple of hours. select the total amount of installed ram. If it crashes, you probably need more vcore.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> Its a kaby lake overclock thread right? I dont see why it wouldnt be allowed to use an older chipset. At the very most it could be a drawback for you. lol


erm.. my entry is with a z170 board. (asrock MOCF). just update your bios and have at it.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Hi! Guys, I`m thinking about change my 6700K to 7700K (want to try something new) and my question about motherboard: can I leave current Z170A GAMING M5 for 7700K ?
> 
> It`s compatible, I know, but in our statistics I see only Asus and Asrock with Z270


you're counting skills man









I'm counting 14 z170 boards in the statistics


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Is 50 passes of x264 enough for 8 hours? Need to know before I leave it running.


if you want to leave it running for a while (unattended or checking from time to time)
why not use the stress testing part

it'll run for 8 hours
stresses the whole system (including RAM)
and if it runs into instbilty it'll just stop and tell you results didn't match (bsod is kinda unlikely here)


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> you're counting skills man
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm counting 14 z170 boards in the statistics










sorry my fault, ok thanks for reply !


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sorry my fault, ok thanks for reply !


no worries


----------



## QQryQ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I think that's fine, 7C spread between cores.. maybe remount the cooler using a top-line TIM. Then run realbench stress/stability test for a couple of hours. select the total amount of installed ram. If it crashes, you probably need more vcore.
> erm.. my entry is with a z170 board. (asrock MOCF). just update your bios and have at it.


actually im using top-line position maybe its time to check a front - back position


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Is 50 passes of x264 enough for 8 hours? Need to know before I leave it running.
> 
> 
> 
> if you want to leave it running for a while (unattended or checking from time to time)
> why not use the stress testing part
> 
> it'll run for 8 hours
> stresses the whole system (including RAM)
> and if it runs into instbilty it'll just stop and tell you results didn't match (bsod is kinda unlikely here)
Click to expand...

I think you're mistakenly thinking I'm asking about Real Bench. I'm asking about the x264 stress test. Thanks.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> I think you're mistakenly thinking I'm asking about Real Bench. I'm asking about the x264 stress test. Thanks.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


yeah I am









wasn't there an inifnte loop setting?
its been a month or 2 for me


----------



## Battou62

Here are the stats on my 7700K so far:

CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100MHz
Core Multiplier: 48
Core Frequency: 4.8GHz
Cache Frequency: 4.5GHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.275V / Actual 1.264
FCLK: 1000MHz
Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-U14S / No Delidding

Motherboard: Asus Strix Z270E
Stress Test: 30 Min ROG Realbench

Temps were peeking into the low 80's at 1.3 Vcore under stress test, so I decided to back off the voltage a little bit.


----------



## Swiper

Username: Swiper
CPU: 7700K
Base Clock: 100mHz
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5,000MHz
Cache Frequency: 4,500MHz
VCore in UEFI: 1.300
VCore: 1.284
FCLK: 1,000MHz
Cooling: Noctua NHD15
Stability Test: Realbench 8hrs

Batch #: L643G384 (Malaysia)
Ram Speed: 3,200 (14-14-14-34)
Ram Voltage: 1.360
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: Auto
Motherboard: Z270 (Asus Maximus IX Hero)
LLC: 5
Misc: No AVX offset


----------



## QQryQ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Swiper*
> 
> Username: Swiper
> CPU: 7700K
> Base Clock: 100mHz
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5,000MHz
> Cache Frequency: 4,500MHz
> VCore in UEFI: 1.300
> VCore: 1.284
> FCLK: 1,000MHz
> Cooling: Noctua NHD15
> Stability Test: Realbench 8hrs
> 
> Batch #: L643G384 (Malaysia)
> Ram Speed: 3,200 (14-14-14-34)
> Ram Voltage: 1.360
> VCCIO: Auto
> VCCSA: Auto
> Motherboard: Z270 (Asus Maximus IX Hero)
> LLC: 5
> Misc: No AVX offset


really nice temps my Raijintek Tisis is twin brother of Noctua NHD15 but my temps with 4,9OC are much higher than yours did u delided your CPU? what case do you use?


----------



## Swiper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QQryQ*
> 
> really nice temps my Rajintek Tisis is almost brother of Noctua NHD15 but my temps with 4,9OC are much higher than yours did u delided your CPU? what case do you use?


No delid...in a Fractal Design R5

This was the second of 2 8hr RB runs to try and bracket my normal ambient temps and this was on the lower end of things.

Run #1: Ambient 25-28°C with max core temps 82-86°C if I remember correctly.
Run #2: Ambient 18-21°C


----------



## wholeeo

So here's my handy work at MC in Jersey.







Here's most the batches available. Maybe it will be helpful to someone.



After purchasing a bunch of them it turned out the first one I got was the keeper.


----------



## rt123

Since when did the Jersey MC guys start doing this? I had to haggle the store associates to look at a couple of CPU & tell me the batch number. They'd be hesitant in doing that. And now they are displaying batch numbers for all the processors. Interesting...

Maybe too many of us overclockers asked to see the batch numbers & so they started to arrange them like this.


----------



## QQryQ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Swiper*
> 
> No delid...in a Fractal Design R5
> This was the second of 2 8hr RB runs to try and bracket my normal ambient temps and this was on the lower end of things.
> Run #1: Ambient 25-28°C with max core temps 82-86°C if I remember correctly.
> Run #2: Ambient 18-21°C



this is from today abient around 24-26C case Zalman Z11 dunno where I should look to get it better... and its 30min stress test.


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since when did the Jersey MC guys start doing this? I had to haggle the store associates to look at a couple of CPU & tell me the batch number. They'd be hesitant in doing that. And now they are displaying batch numbers for all the processors. Interesting...
> 
> Maybe too many of us overclockers asked to see the batch numbers & so they started to arrange them like this.


No, I forcefully asked them to do it for me. I'm just sharing the results.


----------



## rt123

And they listened?? Awesome. Thank you for sharing. +Rep









As I said, I have trouble getting Reps from that store to coordinate with me. They are quite the sticklers. Newer let me buy multiple CPUs either.


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And they listened?? Awesome. Thank you for sharing. +Rep
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I said, I have trouble getting Reps from that store to coordinate with me. They are quite the sticklers. Newer let me buy multiple CPUs either.


Yeah, a few of the guys back there give me hard times. I wasnt taking it the last time I went.


----------



## rt123




----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> So here's my handy work at MC in Jersey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's most the batches available. Maybe it will be helpful to someone.
> 
> 
> 
> After purchasing a bunch of them it turned out the first one I got was the keeper.


How many did you buy and return?


----------



## soccastar001

At 4.8GHz/1.3 Vcore I ran an 8-hour stress test overnight and woke up to black screens on my monitor. The computer and even the peripherals were all powered on but I couldn't get a picture. Is this normal and just indicative of a failed test or is something more going on?


----------



## dirtyred

Happened to me as well a few times. For 4.8 GHz I'd go lower than 1.3 Vcore to around 1.25 - 1.22 (2 hours x264 test passed) with LLC set to 4-5 (mine was on 5) and default 2133 MHz RAM speed. See if it's still stable in RealBench stress test as custom x264 for me seems a bit lighter. Also If you OC'd your GPU, set it back to default and test it.


----------



## skingun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *soccastar001*
> 
> At 4.8GHz/1.3 Vcore I ran an 8-hour stress test overnight and woke up to black screens on my monitor. The computer and even the peripherals were all powered on but I couldn't get a picture. Is this normal and just indicative of a failed test or is something more going on?


What monitor do you have? Could be a sleep setting that it's unable to wake from. Try disabling hardware sleep modes.


----------



## dirtyred

I think he ment black regions as he used plural ("black screens on my monitor"). I also got black regions with too much OC and I suspected Luxmark + GPU.


----------



## soccastar001

It actually was completely black screens, I said plural because I have a dual monitor set-up. I think hardware sleep is disabled, under normal use I've ran the computer overnight and was able to wake the screens with a mouse wiggle.

Sorry for not knowing the right terminology, I'm a bit new to OC in general but I"m sure that was obvious.


----------



## dirtyred

Sorry, my mistake. I thought you had the same issue as I did.

Try lowering the Vcore, I don't think 1.3 V is really needed for 4.8 GHz. Try 1.25 V and go down by 0.01 Volts to find the lowest stable voltage. Also check if your case fans are spinning enough to deliver fresh cool air for your GPU as well (if you were using RealBench, it stresses the GPU as well). You didn't say if you OC'd your GPU and RAM as well or not but if you did then set everything back to default and overclock only your CPU first and disable the turn off display and suspend feature in Windows Power Options.

Ps. Monitor your temps and Vcore with HWiNFO64. It has an option to Log all values for Report. Useful in case you end up with black screen and have to restart the PC so you don't lose the values.


----------



## soccastar001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Sorry, my mistake. I thought you had the same issue as I did.
> 
> Try lowering the Vcore, I don't think 1.3 V is really needed for 4.8 GHz. Try 1.25 V and go down by 0.01 Volts to find the lowest stable voltage. Also check if your case fans are spinning enough to deliver fresh cool air for your GPU as well (if you were using RealBench, it stresses the GPU as well). You didn't say if you OC'd your GPU and RAM as well or not but if you did then set everything back to default and overclock only your CPU first and disable the turn off display and suspend feature in Windows Power Options.
> 
> Ps. Monitor your temps and Vcore with HWiNFO64. It has an option to Log all values for Report. Useful in case you end up with black screen and have to restart the PC so you don't lose the values.


My GPU is indeed overclocked, I have a water block on it and the CPU and the GPU after overclocking is staying around 40-45 which I think is cool enough to eliminate cooling issues. It was also stable after OC in 3DMark (Time Spy Stress Test) and several days of gaming.

I haven't gotten far enough to OC the memory yet. I was just going to use the XMP profile but only after I settled with the CPU. I started at 4.9 and 1.3 Vcore but my stress test almost immediately told me "instability detected" so I lowered it to 4.8 and it was good after 1-2 hours then I went to bed and woke up to the dark screens. Very weird. Thanks for the advice on the monitor, I was using CPU-Z, if it has a logging option I wasn't aware.


----------



## dirtyred

Might not be a temperature issue but voltages on the GPU. Set it back to default (it's factory OC'd anyways most probably) just to eliminate the possibility. I don't know how the report is working in CPU-Z, never used it before but I checked now and it seems that the report only exports current values. You will need average and min/max values for Vcore and temps over time and HWiNFO can export these values in CSV file so you can analize it even after a crash. Use HWiNFO's GenericLogViewer with nice graphs or Google Spreadsheet, Excel to import these values and create a graph.


----------



## briank

Why limit your Vcore to 1.3V? Are your temps high at that voltage?


----------



## soccastar001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *briank*
> 
> Why limit your Vcore to 1.3V? Are your temps high at that voltage?


I was just following a guide that said to start at 4.9 and 1.3v, I'm new to this and needed hand-holding. Once I had a stable clock speed I was going to toy with the voltage to raise it like the guide suggests. My CPU temps seem to be staying around 40 C.


----------



## Marctraider

Guess delidding / applying coollaboratory first time failed, i had 30+c temps on idle and now 25~c


----------



## briank

You're probably looking at the Asus guide, which is great but a little more conservative. If you read the guide on page 1 of this thread, they recommend 1.35V as a starting point. I think that is a safe voltage. You can always back down later once you find your ceiling.


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> How many did you buy and return?


A few.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *briank*
> 
> You're probably looking at the Asus guide, which is great but a little more conservative. If you read the guide on page 1 of this thread, they recommend 1.35V as a starting point. I think that is a safe voltage. You can always back down later once you find your ceiling.


Why use such high voltages for 4.9 GHz? It's true that I only tested mine at max 4.8 GHz but was stable at 1.22 Vcore during a 2 hour custom x264 stability test (I know, not 8 hours and not RealBench but a pretty good indicator for daily usage). Can't imagine why would it need so much higher voltage for only 100 MHz more. It just stresses components more and raises temperatures which lead to fans generating more noise.

Is there any reason to use more voltage then needed for stability or am I missing something?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Why use such high voltages for 4.9 GHz? It's true that I only tested mine at max 4.8 GHz but was stable at 1.22 Vcore during a 2 hour custom x264 stability test (I know, not 8 hours and not RealBench but a pretty good indicator for daily usage). Can't imagine why would it need so much higher voltage for only 100 MHz more. It just stresses components more and raises temperatures which lead to fans generating more noise.
> 
> *Is there any reason to use more voltage then needed for stability* or am I missing something?


No... but stability is pretty subjective.


----------



## QQryQ

in those times position of cooler does matter ? dunno I should try front - back position or keep it like now bottom - top. It could help but not like 5C+ right ?


----------



## ParanoidZoid

Want to update my entry:

Motherboard died prematurely. RMA'd and received a new replacement. Bought new 4133MHz RAM. New CPU cooler.

Somehow, it affected my overclocks to fully stabilise 5.0GHz (no AVX offset), even with ridiculously fast memory. I was expecting to run only 3600MHz, but I'm quite happy









Username: ParanoidZoid
CPU: 7700K
Base Clock: 100mHz
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5,000MHz
Cache Frequency: 4,500MHz
VCore in UEFI: 1.360
VCore: 1.376
FCLK: 1,000MHz
Cooling: Corsair Hydro H105
Stability Test: Realbench 8hrs, HCL Memtest.

Batch #: L640G777 (Malaysia)
Ram Speed: 4133MHz (19-21-21-41)
Ram Voltage: 1.350
VCCIO: 1.2150 (Actual 1.2400)
VCCSA: 1.2375 (Actual 1.2640)
Motherboard: Z170 (Asus Maximus VIII Impact)
LLC: 6
Misc: Adaptive Voltage with IA DC/AC at 0.01 and no AVX offset.

http://valid.x86.fr/g1pzgp


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QQryQ*
> 
> in those times position of cooler does matter ? dunno I should try front - back position or keep it like now bottom - top. It could help but not like 5C+ right ?


I'm guessing here you could turn the cooler making the fans exhaust in different ways

either front to back

or

bottom to top

I'd recommend just working with the air flow in you're case


----------



## briank

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Why use such high voltages for 4.9 GHz? <<snipped>>
> 
> Is there any reason to use more voltage then needed for stability or am I missing something?


If you see Soccastar's post below, you'll see Socca intends to shoot for higher than 4.8/4.9. In this case, then I think absolutely start at 1.35V and see what stable frequency you can hit.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *soccastar001*
> 
> I was just following a guide that said to start at 4.9 and 1.3v, I'm new to this and needed hand-holding. Once I had a stable clock speed I was going to toy with the voltage to raise it like the guide suggests. My CPU temps seem to be staying around 40 C.


----------



## Scotty99

Quick question for you guys, about where does the thermal wall start on kaby lake?

For example what would be considered a moderate all core overclock for a 7700k before the temps and volts started climbing fast, 4.7 all core?


----------



## rt123

Thermals start becoming a concern around 1.32-1.35V on non delidded chips.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Thermals start becoming a concern around 1.32-1.35V on non delidded chips.


Cool ty, can most chips do 4.7 with 1.3? Or are we talking 4.5 or 4.6 on all cores.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *briank*
> 
> If you see Soccastar's post below, you'll see Socca intends to shoot for higher than 4.8/4.9. In this case, then I think absolutely start at 1.35V and see what stable frequency you can hit.


Yes, my bad. Didn't notice the "start".
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Cool ty, can most chips do 4.7 with 1.3? Or are we talking 4.5 or 4.6 on all cores.


For 4.7 GHz you don't need 1.3 Vcore.

For 4.7 GHz my Vcore settings are around 1.18 in UEFI and under load is around 1.168.
For 4.8 GHz my Vcore settings are around 1.22 in UEFI. Forgot to write down what's under load but using LLC 5 so probably drops to around 1.2 or could go up until 1.24. It passed a 2 hour x264 test without crash but my temps were around 80 °C and fans on 100%.

*Suggestion:* Light OC should also be included in the spreadsheet (maybe a separate one) because not everybody wants or can push to 5+ GHz. As a comment case, fans, temperatures could be mentioned. Would be a nice guide for beginners, for those who are afraid to push to the limits or for those with medium performance coolers.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> A few.


What was wrong with them that you had to return?


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Cool ty, can most chips do 4.7 with 1.3? Or are we talking 4.5 or 4.6 on all cores.


4.8 @ 1.3V all cores for below average chips. Good ones will do better.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Cool ty, can most chips do 4.7 with 1.3? Or are we talking 4.5 or 4.6 on all cores.


You can also run an AVX offset, so that if a chip is too hot running at 5ghz stress testing it will downclock to whatever you set the offset to. So at a minus 2 offset it will run stress tests at 4.8. Meaning that for all tasks that dont use AVX instructions like games it will run at 5 GHZ.

I think with a top air cooler 1.3 volts is probably the limit in perfect conditions though. Anything less then the best big dual towers will struggle without delidding. At least going by my chip, it may just have a really bad IHS mount though.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> You can also run an AVX offset, so that if a chip is too hot running at 5ghz stress testing it will downclock to whatever you set the offset to. So at a minus 2 offset it will run stress tests at 4.8. Meaning that for all tasks that dont use AVX instructions like games it will run at 5 GHZ.
> 
> I think with a top air cooler 1.3 volts is probably the limit in perfect conditions though. Anything less then the best big dual towers will struggle without delidding. At least going by my chip, it may just have a really bad IHS mount though.


Very cool to know, ty.

I still am undecided on if im gonna make switch back to intel, would have been an easier decision if they used solder like my 2500k had! Cheap bastards lol.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> 4.8 @ 1.3V all cores for below average chips. Good ones will do better.


I don't know if mine is better or worse then the average as I still don't know it's limits. For 4.8 GHz 1.22 V is the lowest I could go with LLC 5 while maintaining 80 °C average, 83 °C on the hottest core during a 2 hours x264 test.

I'm still researching what could I upgrade the cheapest way and achieve the highest gain for cooling. Right now I have an Arctic Freezer i32 in a Fractal Design Define C with 1 intake and 1 outtake fan. Was thinking about adding 1 more intake fan and one more on the cooler block like is on the i32 Plus. I don't know if a push-pull cooler would perform measurably better.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I still am undecided on if im gonna make switch back to intel, would have been an easier decision if they used solder like my 2500k had! Cheap bastards lol.


Yeah, makes me furious when I think of how much would it cost if they would have used better thermal compound for their flagship product. Maybe $5 more?

I've waited with my purchase until the Ryzen benchmarks arrived. I had really high hopes and was disappointed in a way. The prices in Hungary were much higher then the 7700K after the release, now the 1700 costs the same while the 1700X is still more expensive. Performance is really application dependent. In games the 7700K is still faster by 5-10 FPS. In multi-core apps like rendering is where the Ryzen shines. But for overclocking is not like Kaby Lake. Even going from 3.6 to 4 GHz was a bit too much and produced quite alot of heat. Maybe the next generation will be better. Right now I'd still go with Kaby Lake for most users.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I don't know if mine is better or worse then the average as I still don't know it's limits. *For 4.8 GHz 1.22 V is the lowest I could go with LLC 5* while maintaining 80 °C average, 83 °C on the hottest core during a 2 hours x264 test.
> 
> I'm still researching what could I upgrade the cheapest way and achieve the highest gain for cooling. Right now I have an Arctic Freezer i32 in a Fractal Design Define C with 1 intake and 1 outtake fan. Was thinking about adding 1 more intake fan and one more on the cooler block like is on the i32 Plus. I don't know if a push-pull cooler would perform measurably better.
> Yeah, makes me furious when I think of how much would it cost if they would have used better thermal compound for their flagship product. Maybe $5 more?
> 
> I've waited with my purchase until the Ryzen benchmarks arrived. I had really high hopes and was disappointed in a way. The prices in Hungary were much higher then the 7700K after the release, now the 1700 costs the same while the 1700X is still more expensive. Performance is really application dependent. In games the 7700K is still faster by 5-10 FPS. In multi-core apps like rendering is where the Ryzen shines. But for overclocking is not like Kaby Lake. Even going from 3.6 to 4 GHz was a bit too much and produced quite alot of heat. Maybe the next generation will be better. Right now I'd still go with Kaby Lake for most users.


Slightly above I'd say.
The 7700K is their flagship mainstream product. HEDT (6950X) is their flagship desktop pdt.


----------



## dirtyred

With 1.22 in UEFI I was getting 1.248 Vcore under load if I remember correctly. Not tested for 8 hours, only for 2 but was stable
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> The 7700K is their flagship mainstream product. HEDT (6950X) is their flagship desktop pdt.


True but still a flagship product on the newest platform with crappy thermal compound. For this money I expect more. For the price of the cooler they did not include (a crappy one but still) they could have done this part better. They would have bought the thermal compound in bulk so the price for them probably would have raised by few cents resulting in happier consumers. And a happy consumer is really important especially when AMD is "ryzing" from the grave.


----------



## rt123

You need a better cooler (AIO) & a delid. Those temps are too high.


----------



## dirtyred

Yeah, I realised that. With the Arctic Freezer i32 reaching 4.7 GHz is possible and to stay below 80 °C but only with RAM running on 2666 MHz. Managed to get timing to 14-14-14-28-1T which seems stable so far on 1.2 V.
4.8 GHz is only possible with 2133 MHz to stay below 80 °C.

Was thinking to switch to Cryorig H7 as it improves temperatures by 5-10 °C at the same noise level on an overclocked 7700K. Right now I don't have the cash for an AIO which is also silent. Was looking at a few for good price/performance ratio, have a few on my wishlist.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Yeah, I realised that. With the Arctic Freezer i32 reaching 4.7 GHz is possible and to stay below 80 °C but only with RAM running on 2666 MHz. Managed to get timing to 14-14-14-28-1T which seems stable so far on 1.2 V.
> 4.8 GHz is only possible with 2133 MHz to stay below 80 °C.
> 
> Was thinking to switch to Cryorig H7 as it improves temperatures by 5-10 °C at the same noise level on an overclocked 7700K. Right now I don't have the cash for an AIO which is also silent. Was looking at a few for good price/performance ratio, have a few on my wishlist.


Im not sure a H7 is going to give you 5-10 lower temps, its not much bigger then your current cooler. I had an Arctic I30 a few years ago on my 3570k, and the temperature difference between that and my current Cryorig R1 Ultimate was only a matter of 5-8C better at 1.32 volts for 4.4.. Any AIO short of a 280 or 240mm with the fans running very fast I dont think is going to be that much better then that either, in quiet fan profiles theyre not that far ahead of big air coolers if at all.

I honestly think the only way to go significantly higher with these chips is to delid. I'm still deciding whether to do that myself.


----------



## OutlawII

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> With 1.22 in UEFI I was getting 1.248 Vcore under load if I remember correctly. Not tested for 8 hours, only for 2 but was stable
> True but still a flagship product on the newest platform with crappy thermal compound. For this money I expect more. For the price of the cooler they did not include (a crappy one but still) they could have done this part better. They would have bought the thermal compound in bulk so the price for them probably would have raised by few cents resulting in happier consumers. And a happy consumer is really important especially when AMD is "ryzing" from the grave.


Then go buy a Ryzen,good luck with availability and overclcoking.


----------



## QQryQ

changed air flow rotation in my case into front - back and did a few 15min tests on some speeds here are results from 5GHz
I wonder why my RAM clocks doesnt go higher if I turned ON XMP Profile for my Corsair Vengance 3200MHz.. on hwinfo still I see 1600mhz speed hmm... and those temps for 5ghz are bit high right ?


here is from 4,8GHz


----------



## briank

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QQryQ*
> 
> changed air flow rotation in my case into front - back and did a few 15min tests on some speeds here are results from 5GHz
> I wonder why my RAM clocks doesnt go higher if I turned ON XMP Profile for my Corsair Vengance 3200MHz.. on hwinfo still I see 1600mhz speed hmm... and those temps for 5ghz are bit high right ?


Notice HWinfo says "Memory clock". DDR = Double Data Rate. Data is clocked on the rising and falling edges of that 1600MHz clock so therefore data is transferring at 3200MHz.


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QQryQ*
> 
> changed air flow rotation in my case into front - back and did a few 15min tests on some speeds here are results from 5GHz
> I wonder why my RAM clocks doesnt go higher if I turned ON XMP Profile for my Corsair Vengance 3200MHz.. on hwinfo still I see 1600mhz speed hmm... and those temps for 5ghz are bit high right ?
> 
> 
> here is from 4,8GHz


1600Mhz is what it's supposed to show when running at 3200.







DDR, Double Data Rate.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Then go buy a Ryzen,good luck with availability and overclcoking.


No need to be harsh. I'm just furious that the 7700K's quality is questionable and it's like playing the lottery whether you get a better or worse one. It's K series, so it's ment to be overclocked yet they use crappy thermal compound. And it's not like it's a cheap product either. Are my standards too high and am I the only one? No. Many overclockers complain about the same issue recommending delidding, voiding varranty. All I'm saying is that for $1 more this CPU could have been so much better.

Availibility is not an issue at all. But if you would have read the previous page, you would have seen what I wrote:
Quote:


> I've waited with my purchase until the Ryzen benchmarks arrived. I had really high hopes and was disappointed in a way. The prices in Hungary were much higher then the 7700K after the release, now the 1700 costs the same while the 1700X is still more expensive. Performance is really application dependent. In games the 7700K is still faster by 5-10 FPS. In multi-core apps like rendering is where the Ryzen shines. But for overclocking is not like Kaby Lake. Even going from 3.6 to 4 GHz was a bit too much and produced quite alot of heat. Maybe the next generation will be better. Right now I'd still go with Kaby Lake for most users.


----------



## QQryQ

funny think have tried to change it and after it my mobo wont boot me to windows activacting profile XMP for 3200mhz causing that I cannot start because of startup test where should I look to fix it up?







I even tried restore to defaults and do it again but still dont want to boot at 3200 why?







with 3000 I can ran te cpu dunno what happend that I cant use 3200 again ^_^


----------



## dmo580

Getting back into the game with OC (it's been 7 years and every time the whole scene changes entirely!)

It looks like I should've stuck with ASUS as they're the most popular option and its easy to find support. With that said I jumped into Gigabyte land again and am a bit confused with Vcore settings.

1. I understand that for hitting max overclocks, I'll have cstates turned off and likely vcore set manually to figure out what works best.

2. However after I find my overclock I'd like to go for a more 24/7 setting (e.g. find my max overclock at 5ghz, but run 4.8 for 24/7 settings), how do I go about setting up the vcore to handle cstates and EIST? After all I don't want my chip running full speed the whole time. Without Adaptive Voltage on my Gigabyte board I'm not sure what I should be using? Can anyone explain the difference between normal and auto?


----------



## Ziver

What is safe voltaje for daily usage for my ram ? Currently using 1.35v. Whats the upper limit of daily safe ?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QQryQ*
> 
> funny think have tried to change it and after it my mobo wont boot me to windows activacting profile XMP for 3200mhz causing that I cannot start because of startup test where should I look to fix it up?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I even tried restore to defaults and do it again but still dont want to boot at 3200 why?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> with 3000 I can ran te cpu dunno what happend that I cant use 3200 again ^_^


Had same issue, XMP setting at 3200 did not post. Had to manually raise the dram voltage to 1.35 V. It solved the problem.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ziver*
> 
> What is safe voltaje for daily usage for my ram ? Currently using 1.35v. Whats the upper limit of daily safe ?


I've seen people running G.Skill Jipjaws V on 1.5 Volts...


----------



## QQryQ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Had same issue, XMP setting at 3200 did not post. Had to manually raise the dram voltage to 1.35 V. It solved the problem.
> I've seen people running G.Skill Jipjaws V on 1.5 Volts...


actually my voltage is set correctly but something doesnt want to pass


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *QQryQ*
> 
> actually my voltage is set correctly but something doesnt want to pass


I dont know if it helps but I found that the XMP profile was setting my VCCSA and VCCIO very high. It was stable enough at the XMP settings weirdly but in order to get any further I had to reduce both of these voltages below 1.2 and raise my Vdimm to just over 1.4.


----------



## Scotty99

Would a stock cooler from a 2500k cool a stock 7700k in games? Just need to test a bit tonite, dont feel like removing the hyper 212 from my old rig lol.

Its at least one of the better models with a copper core, should be ok right?


----------



## bowman

Not having overclocked for years, do we still disable Speedstep, Turbo and all that nonsense, or has it improved to the point where it can be left on?


----------



## Marctraider

Guys, do you think a core temp diff on load around 6-7c means improper mounting?

I've delidded and saturated both the Die and inside of DHS with plenty of CL Ultra, and locked the IHS nicely into the mobo socket, Its almost unimaginable that this part has failed, even if IHS doesnt lie completely flat on the Die it is well saturated.

Also used CL ultra between IHS top and NH-D15 cooler, on stock ram, all stock volts except cpu
at 4.9ghz 1.35v I get temperatures of 75-73-83-78 with one core always highest...

Idles around 30~

Using Prime95 non-avx.
Is this normal or should i expect way lower/equalized temps?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Would a stock cooler from a 2500k cool a stock 7700k in games? Just need to test a bit tonite, dont feel like removing the hyper 212 from my old rig lol.
> 
> Its at least one of the better models with a copper core, should be ok right?


I dont belive it will







if it fits .
possibly but expect temps arround 90+


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> Guys, do you think a core temp diff on load around 6-7c means improper mounting?
> 
> I've delidded and saturated both the Die and inside of DHS with plenty of CL Ultra, and locked the IHS nicely into the mobo socket, Its almost unimaginable that this part has failed, even if IHS doesnt lie completely flat on the Die it is well saturated.
> 
> Also used CL ultra between IHS top and NH-D15 cooler, on stock ram, all stock volts except cpu
> at 4.9ghz 1.35v I get temperatures of 75-73-83-78 with one core always highest...
> 
> Idles around 30~
> 
> Using Prime95 non-avx.
> Is this normal or should i expect way lower/equalized temps?


My temps on core also sometimes differe by almost same amount . But i had never hade core 3 to have higher temp then 1st or 2nd . Usually 1 or second is higher in temps. Can you try using LM under ihs and non LM compaund on top of ihs?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I dont belive it will
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if it fits .
> possibly but expect temps arround 90+


90+ with stock settings in games? Im not going to be running stress tests or anything.


----------



## becks

There are plenty of OM PC's out there running stock cooler or even worse coolers just fine. Stock is stock...even if its a K series cpu or not . You should be Just fine...but don't expect 40's under load


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> My temps on core also sometimes differe by almost same amount . But i had never hade core 3 to have higher temp then 1st or 2nd . Usually 1 or second is higher in temps. Can you try using LM under ihs and non LM compaund on top of ihs?


Yeah gonna try that. Im not sure if LM between IHS / heatsink is ideal, it also eats away the IHS after a year imho.

Will be a few days though, ill try Grizzly Cryonaut next.


----------



## QQryQ

Changed air flow in my cooler, OC 4,9GHz 1,31Vcore


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 90+ with stock settings in games? Im not going to be running stress tests or anything.


Well depends on games you will play ....
My bet is , you will get really high temps. Also depends on the chip you have , i had tested 4 chips, they all run on diff temps at stock.
Try it bro, interesting to see the resoults. If you report them


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Would a stock cooler from a 2500k cool a stock 7700k in games? Just need to test a bit tonite, dont feel like removing the hyper 212 from my old rig lol.
> 
> Its at least one of the better models with a copper core, should be ok right?


With stock settings and XMP enabled I was hitting mid-late 60's (21c ambient) in Xcom 2 with a Cryorig R1 Ultimate. XMP adds a lot of heat from somewhere, there must be some auto voltage it ups because it adds about 6-8 C to my temps at the exact same multi and core voltage and I haven't been able to find where from yet. Basically on my chip I'd be close to not being comfortable using an EVO 212 at stock with XMP. I'm not sure if my chip is just a particularly bad one though








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bowman*
> 
> Not having overclocked for years, do we still disable Speedstep, Turbo and all that nonsense, or has it improved to the point where it can be left on?


I've left everything enabled and it works.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> Yeah gonna try that. Im not sure if LM between IHS / heatsink is ideal, it also eats away the IHS after a year imho.
> 
> Will be a few days though, ill try Grizzly Cryonaut next.


Try anything you have ( if you have) the temps between all those non LM are really not as big. Just for a try before you buy the grizzly...

I have tested nh-1 and mx-4 with no difference. The noctua one ran out, still have half of a tube of mx-4 , after this one runs out my i gues ill go with noctua again, just because it's easier to apply for me.

i guess all depends on the way you cool your cpu, im on water so maybe this is why i cant see temp difference between compaunds.... nothing as delliding and LM on the die , would drop temps with an impressive resoult


----------



## briank

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bowman*
> 
> Not having overclocked for years, do we still disable Speedstep, Turbo and all that nonsense, or has it improved to the point where it can be left on?


Entirely possible to leave all that nonsense on. I'm still tweaking but have reached a stable 5.1GHz with all the power savings left on. LLC seems to be making that possible.

Features like Asus's adaptive voltage control also allow idle voltage and current to get down to the minimum just like a stock chip.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> My temps on core also sometimes differe by almost same amount . But i had never hade core 3 to have higher temp then 1st or 2nd . Usually 1 or second is higher in temps. Can you try using LM under ihs and non LM compaund on top of ihs?


My CPU does exactly the opposite. Core 0 is the lowest and Core 3 is the highest while Core 1 and 2 between. Difference in lowest and highest is around 8-10 °C.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> XMP adds a lot of heat from somewhere, there must be some auto voltage it ups because it adds about 6-8 C to my temps at the exact same multi and core voltage and I haven't been able to find where from yet.


Probably the intergrated memory controller has to work harder. XMP changes memory timings, frequency and voltage for ram. More voltage for ram results in higher CPU temps.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> My CPU does exactly the opposite. Core 0 is the lowest and Core 3 is the highest while Core 1 and 2 between. Difference in lowest and highest is around 8-10 °C.
> Probably the intergrated memory controller has to work harder. XMP changes memory timings, frequency and voltage for ram. More voltage for ram results in higher CPU temps.


So you would logically think. But unfortunately it's not.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> So you would logically think. But unfortunately it's not.


What board you own ?
On msi boards you get extra hear after xpm enabling just because it would rai you pll oc voltage.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 90+ with stock settings in games? Im not going to be running stress tests or anything.


If your are running stock on the i7 7700k it will work just fine, even stress testing with a stock i5 2500k cooler.


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Try anything you have ( if you have) the temps between all those non LM are really not as big. Just for a try before you buy the grizzly...
> 
> I have tested nh-1 and mx-4 with no difference. The noctua one ran out, still have half of a tube of mx-4 , after this one runs out my i gues ill go with noctua again, just because it's easier to apply for me.
> 
> i guess all depends on the way you cool your cpu, im on water so maybe this is why i cant see temp difference between compaunds.... nothing as delliding and LM on the die , would drop temps with an impressive resoult


I'd try, as its easy pie to take the cooler off, but I'm out of grease!!









I'm still not entirely sure if these temps are at all consistent with 4.9ghz @ 1.35v~ with a CL Die <-> IHS de-lid job. I mean if they are, those small differences in core temp are probably not really interesting to look at.


----------



## Scotty99

Have any of you guys used asus's auto tuner software?

For example i want sort of a mid level overclock on an air cooler, could i just use that and set the max volts i want at say 1.29 and see how far that takes me? I like that the software keeps all power savings enabled and clocks/volts all come down at idle.

From what i gather, 1.29v should be capable with a cryorig H5 ultimate aye?

An even better question i guess would be, do all z270 board manufacturers allow the option to use offset voltage for overclocking? I remember back in the p67 days MSI actually only had fixed voltage.

I also kind of like the idea that in the asus auto OC software you can pick "per core" so maybe 1 core will clock to 5.0ghz and the rest at 4.7 or 4.8 etc.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> My CPU does exactly the opposite. Core 0 is the lowest and Core 3 is the highest while Core 1 and 2 between. Difference in lowest and highest is around 8-10 °C.
> Probably the intergrated memory controller has to work harder. XMP changes memory timings, frequency and voltage for ram. More voltage for ram results in higher CPU temps.


Sorry if I seemed a bit short, I was actually just about to go to sleep








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> What board you own ?
> On msi boards you get extra hear after xpm enabling just because it would rai you pll oc voltage.


Its an Asus z270 Prime -A so its lacking a few of the BIOS options of the R.O.G boards. It also reports the System Agent, VCCCIO and DRAM voltage at various levels of inaccuracy compared to what I set in the BIOS both by the readings in BIOS and in HWINFO. VCCSA is set to 1.175 and reports 1.208 VCCIO set to 1.1631 reports at 1.136 and DRAM voltage set to 1.426 reports 1.408.

Before I've written in my notes putting XMP on raised temps 8 C, it turns out some of that may have been due to raised temperatures inside my case and changing ambients. My apartment is not temperature controlled and I hadnt taken in to account ambient temps and other factors.


Spoiler: Boring numbers



Had some time this morning to run a few tests, I took the side door off the case and used a thermometer over the CPU cooler intake to measure temps. Dont know if this is useful to anyone but I'll share it anyway just in case. Temps taken from Realtemp which reports the same as HWINFO but is easier to see on the desktop. Voltages from CPUz for the same reason. I waited for the CPU to settle to completely idle before I began each test after booting. Fans set to run full speed at all times.

At the optimized defaults DRAM V 1.184, VCCSA 1.080, VCCIO 0.936

Deltas of 35 35 35 35 across all cores.

Loading XMP 3200 16 18 18 38 2T. DRAM 1.328 VCCSA 1.232, VCCIO 1.120 Everything else at Auto

delta T is 39.8, 39.8, 40.8, 40.8.

Disabling XMP RAM at 2133 15 15 15 36 2T in manual mode setting VCCSA VCCIO and DRAM voltage to the same as XMP above all else Auto

Delta T. 37.4, 40.4, 41.4, 40.4.

Manually setting RAM to known stable 500% HCI Memtest timings and voltages of 3333 15 17 17 36 1T DRAM 1.392, VCCSA 1.216, VCCIO 1.128

Delta T 38.5, 39.5, 41.5, 39.5

Vcore across all tests stayed at 1.136 with occasional dips to 1.120.



So it seems to me all things being as equal as I can practically make them here, enabling XMP only raises core temps 3-5 C and in fact in my case it does seem to be mostly down to VCCSA going up.

On Ivy bridge there was a setting called CPU PLL which you could lower from 1.9 IIRC on auto to about 1.5 which would save you a few degrees from temps and not affect stability. I was hoping there was something like that that could shave a bit off, I'm not too keen to delid as I might want to sell this chip locally in a year or 2.

All this talk of CPU PLL reminded me of that. I only have one setting labelled Internal CPU PLL in BIOS which has a minimum setting of 0.900 but is currently set to auto. Is the conclusion that lowering this on boards outside of MSI is not going to help, or if it does seem to lower temps that its because it throws the sensors out?


----------



## peter2k

on temp issue running stock

maybe I should link to this thread

Ways to Better Cooling; Airflow, Cooler & Fan Data

it shows some tipps on how to apply TIM, how much is too much, about convex and concave and so on


I'm sure some i7's have way too much glue attached, but @stock it should not get too hot, except with a stock cooler (which the K ones don't come with anyway)
but it does sound more like a too low performance cooler or too much TIM/ mounting issue

my 7600K @5.1 had 80ish degrees in RealBench *before* delid, *on Air* (ARCTIC Freezer XTREME Rev. 2)
btw which was not the most perfect










on differences in TIM

thats the most comprehensive I found, ever


note how a Overclock.net user highlighted the differences
at some point (as in quality of TIM) there really is barely any difference









however, *under* the IHS Liquid Metal is definitely required



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> eats away the IHS after a year imho.


I have never seen anyone claim such a thing
the IHS is Nickel plated, does not react with it

it reacts with copper a bit, which leaves a stain


which can be removed (if it does happen) with the scrubbing pad that comes with the Liquid Metal

I mean sure I had to be more thorough in removing the stuff from the IHS but its not like it actually "ate" into it, or reacted with it at all

used it on my Skylake before, had it on for nearly 2 years

used it in a before and after test (delid) on my 7600K (on Air)
and again when I got my AiO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Stock is stock...even if its a K series cpu or not


K CPU's don't come with a cooler btw (since Skylake), its expected that K CPU's are for overclocking and the User has some kind of appropriate cooling solution in mind

It also seems that Intel put the money saved straight into a way on how to make temps go up artificially high using glue and not solder









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Have any of you guys used asus's auto tuner software?
> 
> ... I like that the software keeps all power savings enabled and clocks/volts all come down at idle.
> 
> ... I remember back in the p67 days MSI actually only had fixed voltage.
> 
> I also kind of like the idea that in the asus auto OC software you can pick "per core" so maybe 1 core will clock to 5.0ghz and the rest at 4.7 or 4.8 etc.


If you want to use the software, OK

If you do it in the Bios it works the same
stuff like speed step doesn't get disabled just because you set some OC

if you like to use it, sure

I found the Software a bit on the bloaty side personally

I think these days all Manufacturers have the offset option

btw, it might be that only Asus has the adaptive option (also there might be a problem in terminology going from Manufacturer to Manufacturer)
where the CPU uses standard voltages for all normal frequencies, and applies additional (the user set) once OC kicks in

the per core overclocking can be neat

but it doesn't work properly on my Z170 with the latest bios I have

if i set it one core to 5.4 Ghz and the others at 5.2/5.3 then all cores get boosted to 5.4 when stress testing
jus saying

also remember to stress test when you play with that


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I have never seen anyone claim such a thing
> the IHS is Nickel plated, does not react with it


You dont hear me say that.

Im just expreasing my own experiences with my old 3770k The letters and texture were all gone after a year.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> on temp issue running stock
> 
> maybe I should link to this thread
> 
> Ways to Better Cooling; Airflow, Cooler & Fan Data
> 
> it shows some tipps on how to apply TIM, how much is too much, about convex and concave and so on


Yea Doylls guide is very useful, first step when you're having trouble with temps possibly after a remount is your fan setup with an air cooler.









I'm pretty sure the only thing Doyll wouldnt like about my fan setup is the fact I have shoe horned a CLC in there on the GPU







In fact that might just put him off the whole thing, but you cant argue with results, its a lot cooler and a lot quieter under load then a heatsink and high speed tiny fans and the heat all goes out the case and not sucked into my CPU cooler with no need to use baffles or anything. This is the third setup Ive tried, the R1 doesn't like facing downwards for some reason, probably picking up some heat from the backplate on the GPU. Unfortunately for me better airflow isnt going to help me out a great deal.

Ignore the thermometer it was just there for testing.



Couldn't get the front fan on the R1 with the RAM that came with the bundle I bought so there's one on the top front blowing in, behind the 5.25 bays works a bit better but its awkward to zip tie one there with my HDD in it. I'll probably replace the RAM with something a bit better and low profile at some point anyway.

I've seen a few posts from people being surprised at their temps on 7700K's with decent coolers at stock voltages. I think a lot of it has to do with variation between the glue jobs on the IHS and also some people having VID's over 1.2V at stock. At least mine seems to have fairly consistent temps across all cores for a change, I'd kind of got used to having one core always 8 C cooler then the hottest one and 2 randomly somewhere in between.


----------



## soccastar001

Hey guys, I'm having a weird issue I'm wondering if anyone might be able to offer enlightenment on. I have a 7700K that I went ahead and overclocked. I got it at 4.9GHz on 3.1v with 4.5 cache and used the XMP profile for my 3200 RAM. Everything ran great and I even succeeded at an 8-hour overnight Realbench, the max temp of the CPU was 63 C. Everything ran fine and stable but I have this weird sporadic issue where if the computer has been sitting for 6+ hours it won't boot and I get a Q-code 00 on my Asus mobo. If I turn off the PSU and then back on it boots without issue and will run fine the rest of the night, even shutting down and back on with no problem.

In troubleshooting I reset the CPU and memory to auto and the problem went away so it seems like even though the OC was stable this was the cause. So I tried lowering the OC and the issue was still happening at 4.7GHz. I should certainly be able to OC this processor higher than that with a custom loop and triple radiator. My CPU temp under normal load is 28 C


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *soccastar001*
> 
> Hey guys, I'm having a weird issue I'm wondering if anyone might be able to offer enlightenment on. I have a 7700K that I went ahead and overclocked. I got it at 4.9GHz on 3.1v with 4.5 cache and used the XMP profile for my 3200 RAM. Everything ran great and I even succeeded at an 8-hour overnight Realbench, the max temp of the CPU was 63 C. Everything ran fine and stable but I have this weird sporadic issue where if the computer has been sitting for 6+ hours it won't boot and I get a Q-code 00 on my Asus mobo. If I turn off the PSU and then back on it boots without issue and will run fine the rest of the night, even shutting down and back on with no problem.
> 
> In troubleshooting I reset the CPU and memory to auto and the problem went away so it seems like even though the OC was stable this was the cause. So I tried lowering the OC and the issue was still happening at 4.7GHz. I should certainly be able to OC this processor higher than that with a custom loop and triple radiator. My CPU temp under normal load is 28 C


you can't guarantee an overclock just because of good cooling

there was a thread of a dud 7700k that couldn't be made stable above 4.6 or 4.7 no matter what voltage

that being said

did you try you're OC but with standard memory frequency (which by Intel and JEDEC is 2400)?

could be a memeroy issue
yes even if the memory is rated for that speed, it's still technically an OC
could be the voltages for RAM and VCCIO and so on need a bit of raising

but it should use a different code
still worth a try

also something I found using Google fu from Asus RoG forum
Quote:


> nothing, debug still was showing 00 code. I started to search on google for that problem, and get to see some cases that they had to return the mobo for a replacement.
> After almost trying everything, I watched all the mobo switches, and pressed the Q-Reset switch, and right after that I changed the LN2 mode to off, and voilá, started up showing debug normal numbers and letters, and booted up right away. I want to share this because I also saw a member at asus forums that had to RMA his max. iv ext. around february because a problem almost equal to mine.


----------



## soccastar001

Thanks for the advice. I'll try the lower memory setting and look for this LN2 switch.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> You dont hear me say that.
> 
> Im just expreasing my own experiences with my old 3770k The letters and texture were all gone after a year.


well mine too
and then I started to scrub a lot with paper towels and they came back out


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *soccastar001*
> 
> Thanks for the advice. I'll try the lower memory setting and look for this LN2 switch.


well usually it's set to not using LN2

but who knows

worth a look right?









if it's fine with lower memeroy settings then voltages need some adjustments to hit those rated speeds

some merory controllers are a bit weaker then others, needing a bit of a bump

but giving the RAM a bit more voltage would be preferable


----------



## bowman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *briank*
> 
> Entirely possible to leave all that nonsense on. I'm still tweaking but have reached a stable 5.1GHz with all the power savings left on. LLC seems to be making that possible.
> 
> Features like Asus's adaptive voltage control also allow idle voltage and current to get down to the minimum just like a stock chip.


Nice, thanks.

Starting to wish I had bought a delid kit, it looks like I'm unlikely to break the magical 5GHz marker without delidding.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> Sorry if I seemed a bit short, I was actually just about to go to sleep
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its an Asus z270 Prime -A so its lacking a few of the BIOS options of the R.O.G boards. It also reports the System Agent, VCCCIO and DRAM voltage at various levels of inaccuracy compared to what I set in the BIOS both by the readings in BIOS and in HWINFO. VCCSA is set to 1.175 and reports 1.208 VCCIO set to 1.1631 reports at 1.136 and DRAM voltage set to 1.426 reports 1.408.
> 
> Before I've written in my notes putting XMP on raised temps 8 C, it turns out some of that may have been due to raised temperatures inside my case and changing ambients. My apartment is not temperature controlled and I hadnt taken in to account ambient temps and other factors.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Boring numbers
> 
> 
> 
> Had some time this morning to run a few tests, I took the side door off the case and used a thermometer over the CPU cooler intake to measure temps. Dont know if this is useful to anyone but I'll share it anyway just in case. Temps taken from Realtemp which reports the same as HWINFO but is easier to see on the desktop. Voltages from CPUz for the same reason. I waited for the CPU to settle to completely idle before I began each test after booting. Fans set to run full speed at all times.
> 
> At the optimized defaults DRAM V 1.184, VCCSA 1.080, VCCIO 0.936
> 
> Deltas of 35 35 35 35 across all cores.
> 
> Loading XMP 3200 16 18 18 38 2T. DRAM 1.328 VCCSA 1.232, VCCIO 1.120 Everything else at Auto
> 
> delta T is 39.8, 39.8, 40.8, 40.8.
> 
> Disabling XMP RAM at 2133 15 15 15 36 2T in manual mode setting VCCSA VCCIO and DRAM voltage to the same as XMP above all else Auto
> 
> Delta T. 37.4, 40.4, 41.4, 40.4.
> 
> Manually setting RAM to known stable 500% HCI Memtest timings and voltages of 3333 15 17 17 36 1T DRAM 1.392, VCCSA 1.216, VCCIO 1.128
> 
> Delta T 38.5, 39.5, 41.5, 39.5
> 
> Vcore across all tests stayed at 1.136 with occasional dips to 1.120.
> 
> 
> 
> So it seems to me all things being as equal as I can practically make them here, enabling XMP only raises core temps 3-5 C and in fact in my case it does seem to be mostly down to VCCSA going up.
> 
> On Ivy bridge there was a setting called CPU PLL which you could lower from 1.9 IIRC on auto to about 1.5 which would save you a few degrees from temps and not affect stability. I was hoping there was something like that that could shave a bit off, I'm not too keen to delid as I might want to sell this chip locally in a year or 2.
> 
> All this talk of CPU PLL reminded me of that. I only have one setting labelled Internal CPU PLL in BIOS which has a minimum setting of 0.900 but is currently set to auto. Is the conclusion that lowering this on boards outside of MSI is not going to help, or if it does seem to lower temps that its because it throws the sensors out?


I have an ASUS PRIME Z270-K so probably very similar or exactly the same BIOS (0610). If you figure out some ways to reduce the temperatures, that would be great! Right now I'm running my CPU on 4.8 GHz and 1.24 Vcore. Under RealBench and x264 my temps reach 85 °C and sometimes 92 °C which is way too high for my comfort. But under 3ds Max while rendering a 1920x1080 scene using 10 GB RAM it seems stable and temps stay at 76 °C and sometimes reaching 80 °C. Under GTA V benchmark (3 iterations) my temps were on 61 °C average and 73 °C max. So I won't be stress testing this setup and we'll see how stable it is under daily usage.


----------



## dmo580

Hey guys, just taking my first stab at overclocking in years but my understanding of VID is the voltage a CPU is requesting vs VCORE which is the measured voltage.

So before I go too far into different settings I ran at stock and auto to see what my board was pumping out and it was delivering 1.28V at load on my 7700k with enhanced turbo at 4.5ghz. Meanwhile I see VID running around 1.2.

So here's my question-*-what's the relation between VID and what I should be supplying the CPU? How well does the CPU know in terms of how much voltage it actually needs? Should I pay attention to VID as somewhat of a guideline as I experiment with different frequencies?*


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I have an ASUS PRIME Z270-K so probably very similar or exactly the same BIOS (0610). If you figure out some ways to reduce the temperatures, that would be great! Right now I'm running my CPU on 4.8 GHz and 1.24 Vcore. Under RealBench and x264 my temps reach 85 °C and sometimes 92 °C which is way too high for my comfort. But under 3ds Max while rendering a 1920x1080 scene using 10 GB RAM it seems stable and temps stay at 76 °C and sometimes reaching 80 °C. Under GTA V benchmark (3 iterations) my temps were on 61 °C average and 73 °C max. So I won't be stress testing this setup and we'll see how stable it is under daily usage.


That's pretty warm! I'm hitting low 70s peak in games that are hard on the CPU @ 1.264 V like TW: Warhammer thats if I keep fans at max. Realbench is mostly around 80, but the peak was actually 87.

Ive got the 0801 BIOS at the moment myself, but I doubt there's too much difference apart from a bit under the hood. Sure if I find some magic of course I'll share it. Dont hold your breath though I'm afraid








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Hey guys, just taking my first stab at overclocking in years but my understanding of VID is the voltage a CPU is requesting vs VCORE which is the measured voltage.
> 
> So before I go too far into different settings I ran at stock and auto to see what my board was pumping out and it was delivering 1.28V at load on my 7700k with enhanced turbo at 4.5ghz. Meanwhile I see VID running around 1.2.
> 
> So here's my question-*-what's the relation between VID and what I should be supplying the CPU? How well does the CPU know in terms of how much voltage it actually needs? Should I pay attention to VID as somewhat of a guideline as I experiment with different frequencies?*


Well as far as Kaby Lake is concerned I'm pretty new at this. But VID is the amount of voltage the CPU is requesting from the motherboard. If you dont apply LLC then you will get droop also applied to the real voltage as you would read as Vcore in HWinfo/CPUz. As most people now are using adaptive voltage/ additional turbo voltage it doesnt seem to be as important.

VID is important if you are using an offset voltage. Once you've found what the voltage is you need to be stable in manual mode if you do it like that. Then you find out what the VID is at the multiplier youre at and add a positive or even at lower multis a negative offset in order to get the VID + offset to match the volts youre stable at. Offset voltage is applied down the stack, so you will get slightly higher voltages in the lower power modes as well, so youll idle with a slightly higher voltage. You can also use different LLC levels to fine tune the volts under load you get if you need to.

I havent come across it so far with this chip, but with my old one there would sometimes be a point where it would be stable at full load but not at idle or a partial load, and you would need to add an offset for that reason. Not sure how much that applies to Kaby Lake but I imagine when you reach higher clocks you may need to add a small offset for that reason. I could be wrong about that one though just an assumption.

I believe that if you are experiencing the voltage jumping around you can set IA AC and IA DC Load line both to 0.01 apparently this keep the volts closer to what you set in BIOS


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> VID is important if you are using an offset voltage. Once you've found what the voltage is you need to be stable in manual mode if you do it like that. Then you find out what the VID is at the multiplier youre at and add a positive or even at lower multis a negative offset in order to get the VID + offset to match the volts youre stable at. Offset voltage is applied down the stack, so you will get slightly higher voltages in the lower power modes as well, so youll idle with a slightly higher voltage. You can also use different LLC levels to fine tune the volts under load you get if you need to.
> 
> I havent come across it so far with this chip, but with my old one there would sometimes be a point where it would be stable at full load but not at idle or a partial load, and you would need to add an offset for that reason. Not sure how much that applies to Kaby Lake but I imagine when you reach higher clocks you may need to add a small offset for that reason. I could be wrong about that one though just an assumption.
> 
> I believe that if you are experiencing the voltage jumping around you can set IA AC and IA DC Load line both to 0.01 apparently this keep the volts closer to what you set in BIOS


But does VID matter at all when you use manual Vcore? I would assume not because your CPU could be requesting lower voltages but you're just feeding it a constant voltage.

How I'm interpreting it is VID being a kid asking his parents for money (i.e. I need $10 per week of an allowance). The parent might say yeah $50 is enough, I'll give you only $5 (Vcore setting) or no that's not enough I'll give you $20). Maybe my analogy is wrong because it sounds like you're telling me I should pay closer attention to VID.

*Edit:* Also it's unfortunate but Gigabyte's voltage controls are probably the worst in the industry


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> But does VID matter at all when you use manual Vcore? I would assume not because your CPU could be requesting lower voltages but you're just feeding it a constant voltage.


If youre using manual its not relevant no. Whatever you set will override it.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> That's pretty warm! I'm hitting low 70s peak in games that are hard on the CPU @ 1.264 V like TW: Warhammer thats if I keep fans at max. Realbench is mostly around 80, but the peak was actually 87.
> 
> Ive got the 0801 BIOS at the moment myself, but I doubt there's too much difference apart from a bit under the hood. Sure if I find some magic of course I'll share it. Dont hold your breath though I'm afraid


I know. Too damn warm but I'm not using a top tier cooler either. I'm on air with Arctic Freezer i32. Thinking about switching to Noctua NH-D15, apparently it beats many 240 mm and 280 mm AIO's while being more silent. Also it's not water so less points of failure. But so did I thought about the i32 before buying it. In several reviews the difference between the Noctua and the Arctic was only a couple of degrees on full load and overclocked 4770K. So from now on I will take those numbers with a grain of salt.

Currently I'm using the settings with bold: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uvilouFlKzC1Pn9-eWOUzKVHLF8NxMaUiBBgjYI00EI/edit?usp=sharing Temp values are average/max.

After these tests I've put the rear fan in the front for push only and seems like it's not hurting at all. Temperatures on CPU seems to be the same, on the GPU improved 2-3 degrees.

The only difference in the 0610 vs the 0601 is the Optane support according to Asus.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Hey guys, just taking my first stab at overclocking in years but my understanding of VID is the voltage a CPU is requesting vs VCORE which is the measured voltage.
> 
> So before I go too far into different settings I ran at stock and auto to see what my board was pumping out and it was delivering 1.28V at load on my 7700k with enhanced turbo at 4.5ghz. Meanwhile I see VID running around 1.2.
> 
> So here's my question-*-what's the relation between VID and what I should be supplying the CPU? How well does the CPU know in terms of how much voltage it actually needs? Should I pay attention to VID as somewhat of a guideline as I experiment with different frequencies?*


to get your stock vid, clrcmos enter bios and hte vcore should is the stock VID (range is 1.150 to 1.2 or so. Ideally a low stock VID is a good sign but not a guaranty of OC headroom.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> But does VID matter at all when you use manual Vcore? I would assume not because your CPU could be requesting lower voltages but you're just feeding it a constant voltage.
> 
> How I'm interpreting it is VID being a kid asking his parents for money (i.e. I need $10 per week of an allowance). The parent might say yeah $50 is enough, I'll give you only $5 (Vcore setting) or no that's not enough I'll give you $20). Maybe my analogy is wrong because it sounds like you're telling me I should pay closer attention to VID.
> 
> *Edit:* Also it's unfortunate but Gigabyte's voltage controls are probably the worst in the industry


if you go manual override, VID is not used.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> With Adaptive offset or DVID the Vcore is adjusted with CPU temperature, load, multiplier, using the VID for reference and adding more voltage that folks have set.
> 
> When you use Adapted+ offset or DVID with different programs the voltage will vary according to load. VID (voltage Identification) is the reference for the change in Vcore.
> 
> Example DVID =+0.075 4.5GHz Prime95 1.332v RealBench 1.296v


Hey it seems like you are the expert with regards to Gigabyte DVID mode around here so I'll ask you my questions... is this pretty much "offset mode?" in Asus speak? Is it applying an offset to the entire VID curve or just the turbo voltage? This is what I'm struggling to understand.

Also if I just run Normal Vcore + DVID of 0, should VCORE = VID?


----------



## lestat2212

Hi all i have a delidded 7600k, how far i can go with 24/7 voltage?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Hey it seems like you are the expert with regards to Gigabyte DVID mode around here so I'll ask you my questions... is this pretty much "offset mode?" in Asus speak? Is it applying an offset to the entire VID curve or just the turbo voltage? This is what I'm struggling to understand.
> 
> Also if I just run Normal Vcore + DVID of 0, should VCORE = VID?


Gigabyte uses Dynamic DVID -or+ 0.070 voltage, so it adds voltage off of turbo core clock change with VID guidance. Adaptive for Asus is the same as DVID for Gigabyte. Asus offset mode scales with clock speed not using VID and Gigabyte does not have just a offset option. These are all power saving options that I use for less wear and tear.

If you run DVID of 0 the Vcore will =VID with the subtraction of Load Line when on Auto = LL enabled.



I find on Gigabyte if you use LLC with DVID it will set the Vcore above settings in BIOS.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Gigabyte uses Dynamic DVID -or+ 0.070 voltage, so it adds voltage off of turbo core clock change with VID guidance. Adaptive for Asus is the same as DVID for Gigabyte. Asus offset mode scales with clock speed not using VID and Gigabyte does not have just a offset option. These are all power saving options that I use for less wear and tear.
> 
> If you run DVID of 0 the Vcore will =VID with the subtraction of Load Line when on Auto = LL enabled.


But my understanding of Asus' Adaptive is that adaptive only touches the turbo mode voltage, allowing the rest of the curve to follow the normal VID curve, whereas Offset is taking the entire VID curve and shifting it in a +/- direction. Where does it say that Gigabyte's DVID option only touches the turbo vcore?

I'm just curious because a lot of people mention Gigabyte's DVID tweaking is just like Asus' Offset mode whereas you're saying it's more like Adaptive mode.

Quote:


> I find on Gigabyte if you use LLC with DVID it will set the Vcore above settings in BIOS.


What LLC settings do you recommend? Or do you recommend dealing with this additional "bump" and trying to correct for it with DVID offset?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lestat2212*
> 
> Hi all i have a delidded 7600k, how far i can go with 24/7 voltage?


now if we just knew what 24/7 voltage is?
something below 1.4?

or below 1.3?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> But my understanding of A*sus' Adaptive is that adaptive only touches the turbo mode voltage, allowing the rest of the curve to follow the normal VID curve*, whereas Offset is taking the entire VID curve and shifting it in a +/- direction. Where does it say that Gigabyte's DVID option only touches the turbo vcore?
> 
> I'm just curious because a lot of people mention Gigabyte's DVID tweaking is just like Asus' Offset mode whereas you're saying it's more like Adaptive mode.
> What LLC settings do you recommend? Or do you recommend dealing with this additional "bump" and trying to correct for it with DVID offset?


This is correct. ASUS adaptive mode runs the stock voltage until a turbo multiplier is requested, then the adaptive (turbo) voltage is applied. "Additional" is a confusing term.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> But my understanding of Asus' Adaptive is that adaptive only touches the turbo mode voltage, allowing the rest of the curve to follow the normal VID curve, whereas Offset is taking the entire VID curve and shifting it in a +/- direction. Where does it say that Gigabyte's DVID option only touches the turbo vcore?
> 
> I'm just curious because a lot of people mention Gigabyte's DVID tweaking is just like Asus' Offset mode whereas you're saying it's more like Adaptive mode.
> What LLC settings do you recommend? Or do you recommend dealing with this additional "bump" and trying to correct for it with DVID offset?


Gigabyte is DVID (Dynamic voltage identification digital). ASUS is adaptive that uses VID also. When I use DVID it vary's the Vcore according to load, clock speed, temp just like Asus Adaptive. Example Prime95 Vcore 1.332v then gaming and RealBench 1.260v with DVID.

Asus offset mode is fixed to clock speed, it is not dynamic or adaptive with the voltage.

I just use LLC on Auto for CPU protection with DVID and just set my maximum voltage during stress testing. The only settings I change from optimized default is multiplier 50 and DVID +0.070.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Gigabyte is DVID (Dynamic voltage identification digital). ASUS is adaptive that uses VID also. When I use DVID it vary's the Vcore according to load, clock speed, temp just like Asus Adaptive. Example Prime95 Vcore 1.332v then gaming and RealBench 1.260v with DVID.
> 
> Asus offset mode is fixed to clock speed, it is not dynamic or adaptive with the voltage.
> 
> I just use LLC on Auto for CPU protection with DVID and just set my maximum voltage during stress testing. The only settings I change from optimized default is multiplier 50 and DVID +0.070.


Hmm it's just super confusing for me still.

So today I wanted to test 4.8 GHz out just to understand this whole voltage deal. My settings:

Vcore: Normal, which shows 1.28.
DVID: 0.000
LLC: High

So I figure this means my turbo voltage will be 1.28 right? Since I'm disabling EIST and C-States as a part of OCing, I boot and I see my voltage at 1.296. Not too bad. So I fire up Prime 95 doing small FFT trying to look for Vdroop. Guess what? As soon as I start it, my Vcore jumps to 1.35V! Why is that? I'm completely confused. You can see the graph below from HWInfo64. The vcore shoots up in the middle when I start Prime and my temps shoot into the 90s. I turned it off very quickly.



I then tried putting the Vcore in manual mode at 1.27V and I recorded an idle vcore of 1.284 and a load vcore of 1.272. Somehow this DVID + Normal is just throwing everything off.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Hmm it's just super confusing for me still.
> 
> So today I wanted to test 4.8 GHz out just to understand this whole voltage deal. My settings:
> 
> Vcore: Normal, which shows 1.28.
> DVID: 0.000
> LLC: High
> 
> So I figure this means my turbo voltage will be 1.28 right? Since I'm disabling EIST and C-States as a part of OCing, I boot and I see my voltage at 1.296. Not too bad. So I fire up Prime 95 doing small FFT trying to look for Vdroop. Guess what? As soon as I start it, my Vcore jumps to 1.35V! Why is that? I'm completely confused. You can see the graph below from HWInfo64. The vcore shoots up in the middle when I start Prime and my temps shoot into the 90s. I turned it off very quickly.
> 
> 
> 
> I then tried putting the Vcore in manual mode at 1.27V and I recorded an idle vcore of 1.284 and a load vcore of 1.272. Somehow this DVID + Normal is just throwing everything off.


Did you try load line Calibration on Auto? You are making it confusing for your self, just decide if you want to use fixed voltage or DVID.

If you want to use DVID leave everything on optimized default and change the multiplier to 48.


----------



## lestat2212

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> now if we just knew what 24/7 voltage is?
> something below 1.4?
> 
> or below 1.3?


i have no temps issues, i must stay under 1.4? At 1.344 under prime 95 i have a max temp of 57°


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Did you try load line Calibration on Auto? You are making it confusing for your self, just decide if you want to use fixed voltage or DVID.
> 
> If you want to use DVID leave everything on optimized default and change the multiplier to 48.


Just gave Auto a shot and auto results in a large ~0.050V Vdroop. I played around with Auto, High, Turbo, Standard and documented my results in terms of measuring Load and Idle Vcores.

Sorry if I was being confusing with regards to fixed voltage or DVID. My plan is the following:

1. Use fixed voltage overclocking to find the minimum Vcore necessary for each frequency level (going from 4500 - 5000).
2. Once I obtain a good Vcore, I plan to punch that in using Normal + DVID.

The issue is that before even embarking on #1 and #2, i wanted to get an understanding of how my board is performing. Part of my investigation is to understand the effects of LLC on Vdroop and also to understand how well DVID allows me to adjust the voltage curve. That's why I'm just playing around taking some preliminary measurements before I start doing #1.

Anyhow, this is what I've found tonight.



The results seem very odd, but anything aside from Auto, Standard results in vcore shooting UP when initializing Prime 95. That's quite dangerous especially when my load voltage was over 1.3V and my temperatures spiked to 90C. And as I said in my previous post, this is VERY different compared to using a fixed voltage, where Vdroop is ~0.08 for Auto/Standard, 0.02 for High and close to 0 for Turbo. I'll post on the Gigabyte Forum to let their team know but I suspect this LLC behavior is buggy at the moment when using Normal + DVID mode.


----------



## koji

I submitted a result here, 8hour Realbench stable 7700k 4.9ghz @ 1.344, crapped out on me in a game a couple days ago after two weeks of usage. Started messing around with Prime 28.10 to dig deeper in to the stability issue, my 8 hour realbench stable OC lasts me around 7 minutes on small FFTs (rounding errors/workers halting)...
















Upped it to around 1.382 (quite the bump, 38mv...) and it now takes over two hours on small FFTs before the first worker halts on me. Gonna leave it at that for now, hope that's enough, would suck if I had to drop it down to 4.8, might as well use my old Pentium 3 Tualatin if that was the case!


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lestat2212*
> 
> i have no temps issues, i must stay under 1.4? At 1.344 under prime 95 i have a max temp of 57°


is that at stock clocks?

anyway
you gotta find you're chips sweet spot

if you want you can leave the voltage at 1.344 and try increasing you're frequency until prime gives you rounding errors

then, if you feel like, you could bumb voltage a bit higher and try again

you'll notice once you're going over the comfort zone of you're chip

mine runs fine 5.2 with 1.376v

but getting 5.3 stable I need at least 1.44
quite a bumb in voltage
and 5.4 isn't stable with 1.5v (only tested out of interest)

5.2 is the sweet spot for mine found through testing

methinks 5 Ghz should be manageable by an i5


----------



## lestat2212

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> is that at stock clocks?
> 
> anyway
> you gotta find you're chips sweet spot
> 
> if you want you can leave the voltage at 1.344 and try increasing you're frequency until prime gives you rounding errors
> 
> then, if you feel like, you could bumb voltage a bit higher and try again
> 
> you'll notice once you're going over the comfort zone of you're chip
> 
> mine runs fine 5.2 with 1.376v
> 
> but getting 5.3 stable I need at least 1.44
> quite a bumb in voltage
> and 5.4 isn't stable with 1.5v (only tested out of interest)
> 
> 5.2 is the sweet spot for mine found through testing
> 
> methinks 5 Ghz should be manageable by an i5


i'm at 4.8 ghz at 1.344v but at 4.9 occt give me errore even at 1.36v seems Thatcher i can't handle 4.9:/ what build of prime? And what settings?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lestat2212*
> 
> i'm at 4.8 ghz at 1.344v but at 4.9 occt give me errore even at 1.36v seems Thatcher i can't handle 4.9:/ what build of prime? And what settings?


well aside from testing it out there's nothing really to be done

a really high OC can not be guaranteed

I'm guessing RealBench (or the x264 custom loop, under tools) would let you pass with some more voltage at 5Ghz
but OCCT and Prime are not so easy to pass
you still have headroom voltage and especially temp wise









to quote from the first post
Quote:


> x264 is the recommended and the default go-to stress test for this thread. If you feel the need to use a hotter test that is your right, but know that your overclock may be hampered by that choice.


Quote:


> 'I must pass all stress tests!'
> So if I made a program that crashes you at stock clocks, you would feel compelled to underclock your CPU, even if that application in no way represents real-world usage?


----------



## lestat2212

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> well aside from testing it out there's nothing really to be done
> 
> a really high OC can not be guaranteed
> 
> I'm guessing RealBench (or the x264 custom loop, under tools) would let you pass with some more voltage at 5Ghz
> but OCCT and Prime are not so easy to pass
> you still have headroom voltage and especially temp wise
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> to quote from the first post


i will try to achieve 5 ghz tested with x264, i hope for 1.37v


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Gigabyte is DVID (Dynamic voltage identification digital). ASUS is adaptive that uses VID also. When I use DVID it vary's the Vcore according to load, clock speed, temp just like Asus Adaptive. Example Prime95 Vcore 1.332v then gaming and RealBench 1.260v with DVID.
> 
> *Asus offset mode is fixed to clock speed, it is not dynamic or adaptive with the voltage.*
> 
> I just use LLC on Auto for CPU protection with DVID and just set my maximum voltage during stress testing. The only settings I change from optimized default is multiplier 50 and DVID +0.070.


Jibberish.
Offset voltage is applied to the entire VID stack... adding voltage to the request by the amount you offset (or subtracting if using a negative offset). Offset functions the same regardless of manufacturer.
On any platform.. going back generations, as long as speedstep is enabled, clocks are dynamic, and as long as voltage change with clocks, voltage is dynamic. Gigabyte DVID is a misnomer. There is no such thing as dynamic VID. VID is coded by intel into the cpu. YOu can either add to it, substract from it, or override it with manual or override it using "Adaptive" voltage for turbo multipliers.

Here's the test... Adaptive will not work if you run BCLK = 200 since turbo multipliers will not be used (eg.. 5.0 GHz uses multiplier 25). It is the same as on x99 using strap 125.


----------



## dmo580

I have another stupid question with regards to Vcore--it seems like with some boards (incl my Gigabyte board and it seems for Asus boards as well?) that even if you set manual Vcore, if you have EIST/C-states on, your clock speeds and voltages will still ramp down during idle. How's that different from Adaptive Mode then?

Per Hard OCP's Z270 review of tmux IX Formula:
Quote:


> In any case, a manual voltage setting still has the same effect in which the actual voltage depends on the CPU workload with the manually set voltage seemingly acting as a voltage cap.


If manual vcore is acting as a voltage cap only and allowing voltage to drop, isn't that the same as adaptive? Shrug.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Jibberish.
> Offset voltage is applied to the entire VID stack... adding voltage to the request by the amount you offset (or subtracting if using a negative offset). Offset functions the same regardless of manufacturer.
> On any platform.. going back generations, as long as speedstep is enabled, clocks are dynamic, and as long as voltage change with clocks, voltage is dynamic. Gigabyte DVID is a misnomer. There is no such thing as dynamic VID. VID is coded by intel into the cpu. YOu can either add to it, substract from it, or override it with manual or override it using "Adaptive" voltage for turbo multipliers.
> 
> Here's the test... Adaptive will not work if you run BCLK = 200 since turbo multipliers will not be used (eg.. 5.0 GHz uses multiplier 25). It is the same as on x99 using strap 125.


So I guess if I treat DVID in Gigabyte as a simple offset mode, I just need to be wary of the typical issues with Offset voltages right? The only one I can think of off the top of my head is if you use a negative offset, it could potentially screw your idle voltages up a lot such that you get instability? It's just kinda annoying given how Asus has had adaptive modes for years now.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> I have another stupid question with regards to Vcore--it seems like with some boards (incl my Gigabyte board and it seems for Asus boards as well?) that even if you set manual Vcore, if you have EIST/C-states on, your clock speeds and voltages will still ramp down during idle. How's that different from Adaptive Mode then?
> 
> Per Hard OCP's Z270 review of tmux IX Formula:
> If manual vcore is acting as a voltage cap only and allowing voltage to drop, isn't that the same as adaptive? Shrug.
> So I guess if I treat DVID in Gigabyte as a simple offset mode, I just need to be wary of the typical issues with Offset voltages right? The only one I can think of off the top of my head is if you use a negative offset, it could potentially screw your idle voltages up a lot such that you get instability? It's just kinda annoying given how Asus has had adaptive modes for years now.


manual is supposed to override any other settings

it even gets that description in my Formula VIII

this behaviour can be written off as a simple thing needing fixing with a newer bios

in fact no matter what setting I use (adaptive or offset) my board never gives my CPU less voltage

it sure clocks down to 800Mhz, but never gets less volts

its still a beta bios

and even on stable releases things need fixing
sometimes get carried over for generations it seems (like CPU standby voltage getting set to 1.6v if left on auto once you hit 5.3 Ghz, normal is 1v, I think this has been "plaguing" Asus bios for some time now)

or features go missing

and the end of the day, disregarding bugs, missing features and different terminology among manufacturers

manual:
supplies always that voltage
no matter the CPU's frequency

offset:
provides the voltage that Intel thinks is right (VID) + or - a value the user sets
1v for 800Mhz +0.15v
making 1.15v (just an example)

1.2v at max load +0.15v
making 1.35v

adaptive
gives normal voltage that Intel thinks is right (VID) and only gives additional voltages once the turbo multipliers kick in (OC)

the last one is the nicest off them all
most energy saving and easiest on the CPU
and even easy to work with

all I have to do is specify what kind of max voltage I want (under load) and the board does the rest for me

still have to play with LLC of course

its also a thing from Asus as far as I know

and doesn't work at all with the bios I have

on negative things about offset

well you have to find the LLC and voltage combination that works best for you're OC

I had to bumb my voltage slightly up for the board to provide enough under load
but since it doesn't provide less volts while idle I stopped playing with it and hence didn't look into if I could find a better fitting LLC level

its also hard to mess up that setting going negative by accident

if you don't specify a + or - the bios assumes you mean +

also some people like to undervolt a CPU
for temps and noise reason (HTPC I guess)


----------



## dmo580

@peter2k yeah thank you for your help. A lot of it makes sense to me from all my reading but it sounds like BIOS is always buggy and some things don't work the way they do. Especially like my investigation last night where I found LLC causes load voltages to actually spike up (perhaps thats a bug?)

Anyhow, onto a topic more people may be familiar with which is simply 7700k and temperatures. In the midst of chaos last night I did run through a few Prime 95 runs just to understand how what temps I'm getting.

My setup is:


Noctua NH-D14 with Noctua paste
Fractal Define R5 with 3 case fans (2x Fractal fans in front + 1x Noctua 140mm in rear)


I'm just really surprised with these temperatures I'm getting. 4.5ghz which is stock turbo speeds at 1.15v is already giving me upper 70s and pushing 1.2v for 4.6 GHz (which isn't even stable) is giving me mid 80s. I imagine going to 1.22 or 1.25 might make it stable but even then temperatures are going to cross into the 90s.

Things I will do once I get home for a new round of troubleshooting tonight:

Remount the Heat Sink although I've used this on my old i7 930 and I can't imagine I'm doing mounting and TIM application wrong.
Wipe off the Noctua TIM and try MX-4. That stuff is dirt cheap anyway so I picked up some on Amazon a few days ago.
But even then I'm a bit in shock by these temperatures. Could it be that I really need a delid? I don't see myself even hitting 4.8 ghz (much less 5ghz) with these abysmal numbers. With that said I realize I'm pushing my chip a lot harder than others are with Prime 95, but still! My Core i7 930 was drawing far more power and staying cooler back in the day. Maybe its the soldered IHS that really makes that big of a difference? Everyone always says "Nah it's not my chip" when it comes to having the dud in the CPU lottery, but it just seems like mine heats up like no other.

With Rockit down right now, I am just on a holding pattern. So if there's an expert delidder out in the SF Bay Area, please let me know


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> in fact no matter what setting I use (adaptive or offset) my board never gives my CPU less voltage
> it sure clocks down to 800Mhz, but never gets less volts


Use Adaptive with no offset, just enter the voltage in additional turbo, check that EIST (speedstep) is enabled. also verify that in windows, advanced power plan > min proc state = 0%, and that your min cache ratio is set to Auto. if none of these result in downclock and downvolt, I'd reflash the board or start a service ticket.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> @peter2k yeah thank you for your help. A lot of it makes sense to me from all my reading but it sounds like BIOS is always buggy and some things don't work the way they do. Especially like my investigation last night where *I found LLC causes load voltages to actually spike up (perhaps thats a bug?)*
> 
> Anyhow, onto a topic more people may be familiar with which is simply 7700k and temperatures. In the midst of chaos last night I did run through a few Prime 95 runs just to understand how what temps I'm getting.
> 
> My setup is:
> 
> 
> Noctua NH-D14 with Noctua paste
> Fractal Define R5 with 3 case fans (2x Fractal fans in front + 1x Noctua 140mm in rear)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just really surprised with these temperatures I'm getting. 4.5ghz which is stock turbo speeds at 1.15v is already giving me upper 70s and pushing 1.2v for 4.6 GHz (which isn't even stable) is giving me mid 80s. I imagine going to 1.22 or 1.25 might make it stable but even then temperatures are going to cross into the 90s.
> 
> Things I will do once I get home for a new round of troubleshooting tonight:
> 
> Remount the Heat Sink although I've used this on my old i7 930 and I can't imagine I'm doing mounting and TIM application wrong.
> Wipe off the Noctua TIM and try MX-4. That stuff is dirt cheap anyway so I picked up some on Amazon a few days ago.
> But even then I'm a bit in shock by these temperatures. Could it be that I really need a delid? I don't see myself even hitting 4.8 ghz (much less 5ghz) with these abysmal numbers. With that said I realize I'm pushing my chip a lot harder than others are with Prime 95, but still! My Core i7 930 was drawing far more power and staying cooler back in the day. Maybe its the soldered IHS that really makes that big of a difference? Everyone always says "Nah it's not my chip" when it comes to having the dud in the CPU lottery, but it just seems like mine heats up like no other.
> 
> With Rockit down right now, I am just on a holding pattern. So if there's an expert delidder out in the SF Bay Area, please let me know


depending on that board's implementation of LLC, one end of the setting range may add voltage above what you set in bios when the load is insufficient to cause vdroop... the other end of the LLC range may allow too much droop (which can only be the native vdroop... LLC does not increase vdroop, it adds voltage to COMPENSATE for droop below the LOAD LINE (=VID), hence "LLC").

p95 small FFTs with AVX enabled will ruin VERY hot and require you to lower your OC unnecessarily. Use x264 or realbench to get a reasonable reflection of real-world load voltages and temperatures. Once stable to that, if you need to simulate a very high current load, use IBT for 5 or so loops. Basically if your rig will be subjected to a p95 small FFT or IBT load for hours at a time, use stock or a very slight OC.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> depending on that board's implementation of LLC, one end of the setting range may add voltage above what you set in bios when the load is insufficient to cause vdroop... the other end of the LLC range may allow too much droop (which can only be the native vdroop... LLC does not increase vdroop, it adds voltage to COMPENSATE for droop below the LOAD LINE (=VID), hence "LLC").
> 
> p95 small FFTs with AVX enabled will ruin VERY hot and require you to lower your OC unnecessarily. Use x264 or realbench to get a reasonable reflection of real-world load voltages and temperatures. Once stable to that, if you need to simulate a very high current load, use IBT for 5 or so loops. Basically if your rig will be subjected to a p95 small FFT or IBT load for hours at a time, use stock or a very slight OC.


I understand what LLC is and your explanation I agree with. My situation was that LLC seems to be working properly in Manual Vcore mode where the delta between idle and load is ~0.08 in auto/standard, 0.02 with High, and maybe even 0.01 higher when using Turbo. The issue is when switching to "Normal+DVID" voltage mode where auto now gives a more reasonable delta of 0.04, but in "High", Vcore under load increases by almost 0.05 and in Turbo it increases by 0.07. In that case my system is giving the CPU more volts than I even asked for in the BIOS which is dangerous.

I suspect this is a bug and perhaps someone fatfingered something in the code, but that's why its frustrating when you need such fine details to work out but they don't.

Also, I understand about Prime 95, but are those temperatures still on the high end? It seems higher than what other users are getting even with Prime 95 or OCCT with AVX. The practical check for me is out of the wall power draw. Sure Prime 95 uses a lot of power, but if the CPU is drawing less power than my i7 930 and still staying hotter, then I'm almost suspecting its the terrible glue Intel used between the IHS and die.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> I understand what LLC is and your explanation I agree with. My situation was that LLC seems to be working properly in Manual Vcore mode where the delta between idle and load is ~0.08 in auto/standard, 0.02 with High, and maybe even 0.01 higher when using Turbo. The issue is when switching to "Normal+DVID" voltage mode where auto now gives a more reasonable delta of 0.04, but in "High", Vcore under load increases by almost 0.05 and in Turbo it increases by 0.07. In that case my system is giving the CPU more volts than I even asked for in the BIOS which is dangerous.
> 
> I suspect this is a bug and perhaps someone fatfingered something in the code, but that's why its frustrating when you need such fine details to work out but they don't.
> 
> Also, I understand about Prime 95, but are those temperatures still on the high end? It seems higher than what other users are getting even with Prime 95 or OCCT with AVX. The practical check for me is out of the wall power draw. Sure Prime 95 uses a lot of power, but if the CPU is drawing less power than my i7 930 and still staying hotter, then I'm almost suspecting its the terrible glue Intel used between the IHS and die.


cpu temps in the 80s is a personal call... all Si "ages" in relation to the voltage and temperatures it experiences over time, whether constant or via "excursions". But, if that is a peak temp when using the most recent version of p95 @ 70-80Watts current draw, then that is normal for your cooling. Bottom line is... these cpus really need to be delidded in order to uncork them.,


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Jibberish.
> Offset voltage is applied to the entire VID stack... adding voltage to the request by the amount you offset (or subtracting if using a negative offset). Offset functions the same regardless of manufacturer.
> On any platform.. going back generations, as long as speedstep is enabled, clocks are dynamic, and as long as voltage change with clocks, voltage is dynamic. Gigabyte DVID is a misnomer. There is no such thing as dynamic VID. VID is coded by intel into the cpu. YOu can either add to it, substract from it, or override it with manual or override it using "Adaptive" voltage for turbo multipliers.
> 
> Here's the test... Adaptive will not work if you run BCLK = 200 since turbo multipliers will not be used (eg.. 5.0 GHz uses multiplier 25). It is the same as on x99 using strap 125.


You are the one that is talking gibberish. Dynamic DVID is not a misnomer, I cant believe you think you know better than Gigabyte engineers.







When I use DVID it adjusts the Vcore according to CPU load, temp, clock seed. Example using DVID prime95 1.332v then running games or RealBench ~1.260v. It is Dynamic or With Asus it is Adaptive. Give it a try for your self and see the voltage adjust with CPU load because it works off of VID that is why it is called DVID.

Also Gigabyte does not have any offset mode on Z270 motherboard.



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Gigabyte is DVID (Dynamic voltage identification digital). ASUS is adaptive that uses VID also. When I use DVID it vary's the Vcore according to load, clock speed, temp just like Asus Adaptive. Example Prime95 Vcore 1.332v then gaming and RealBench 1.260v with DVID.
> 
> Asus offset mode is fixed to clock speed, it is not dynamic or adaptive with the voltage.
> 
> I just use LLC on Auto for CPU protection with DVID and just set my maximum voltage during stress testing. The only settings I change from optimized default is multiplier 50 and DVID +0.070.


Asus offset is fixed to clock speed and is not dynamic or adaptive with the voltage according to CPU load.

Read the ASUS quote below it backs up what I'm saying to you.

Offset Mode: In Offset Mode, we can add or subtract voltage from the CPU's default voltage for a given CPU core ratio. The default voltage scales according to the active multiplier ratio. This provides power saving when application loading is light. The side effect to using offset mode is that any offset value we select will be applied to all core ratios. This can result in too much or too little voltage being applied for a given ratio, which leads to instability.

If you wish to use Offset Mode, then bear in mind that the Vcore displayed in the UEFI is simply a snapshot of the offset voltage stack; the firmware interface only places a partial load on the CPU. The full-load voltage in the operating system will be different, so you will need to check the voltage by running a suitable application within the OS. Use Ai Suite to monitor the voltage when the system is under full load. Also, bear in mind that the default voltage receiving the offset changes with the applied CPU ratio.

Adaptive Mode: Adaptive Mode was developed to account for the inadequacies of Offset Mode for overclocking. We use it to specify the voltage used when the CPU is faced with a heavy application load. The voltage we set is the maximum voltage the PCU is allowed to apply, which takes all the load-related guesswork hampering Offset Mode out of the equation. The other boon of Adaptive Mode is that it does not alter voltages for non-Turbo CPU ratios, allowing us to enjoy the benefits of power saving without the voltage adjustment range issues presented by the Offset Mode function. We recommend Adaptive Mode for all normal overclocking. http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/5/


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You are the one that is talking gibberish. Dynamic DVID is not a misnomer, I cant believe you think you know better than Gigabyte engineers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I use DVID it adjusts the Vcore according to CPU load, temp, clock seed. Example using DVID prime95 1.332v then running games or RealBench ~1.260v. It is Dynamic or With Asus it is Adaptive. Give it a try for your self and see the voltage adjust with CPU load because it works off of VID that is why it is called DVID.
> 
> Also Gigabyte does not have any offset mode on Z270 motherboard.
> 
> 
> Asus offset is fixed to clock speed and is not dynamic or adaptive with the voltage according to CPU load.
> 
> Read the ASUS quote below it backs up what I'm saying to you.
> 
> Offset Mode: In Offset Mode, we can add or subtract voltage from the CPU's default voltage for a given CPU core ratio. The default voltage scales according to the active multiplier ratio. This provides power saving when application loading is light. The side effect to using offset mode is that any offset value we select will be applied to all core ratios. This can result in too much or too little voltage being applied for a given ratio, which leads to instability.
> 
> If you wish to use Offset Mode, then bear in mind that the Vcore displayed in the UEFI is simply a snapshot of the offset voltage stack; the firmware interface only places a partial load on the CPU. The full-load voltage in the operating system will be different, so you will need to check the voltage by running a suitable application within the OS. Use Ai Suite to monitor the voltage when the system is under full load. Also, bear in mind that the default voltage receiving the offset changes with the applied CPU ratio.
> 
> Adaptive Mode: Adaptive Mode was developed to account for the inadequacies of Offset Mode for overclocking. We use it to specify the voltage used when the CPU is faced with a heavy application load. The voltage we set is the maximum voltage the PCU is allowed to apply, which takes all the load-related guesswork hampering Offset Mode out of the equation. The other boon of Adaptive Mode is that it does not alter voltages for non-Turbo CPU ratios, allowing us to enjoy the benefits of power saving without the voltage adjustment range issues presented by the Offset Mode function. We recommend Adaptive Mode for all normal overclocking. http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/5/


So now I hope after you read your own copy-paste post, you understand what adaptive and offset voltage control is.
Gigabyte just calls it DVID. NO BIOS CAN CHANGE the voltage identification table. geeze. c'mon man, you profess to know this stuff.. so you must know that.
And voltage scaling with multiplier is dynamic voltage as ASUS describes in your copy-paste on offset. "scales with multiplier". What don't you understand about that?? I have, or have had all these boards at one time or another. Don;t confuse bios nomenclature with function when crossing brands.
Actually, I'm done trying to educate you on this...
out.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Just gave Auto a shot and auto results in a large ~0.050V Vdroop. I played around with Auto, High, Turbo, Standard and documented my results in terms of measuring Load and Idle Vcores.
> 
> Sorry if I was being confusing with regards to fixed voltage or DVID. My plan is the following:
> 
> 1. Use fixed voltage overclocking to find the minimum Vcore necessary for each frequency level (going from 4500 - 5000).
> 2. Once I obtain a good Vcore, I plan to punch that in using Normal + DVID.
> 
> The issue is that before even embarking on #1 and #2, i wanted to get an understanding of how my board is performing. Part of my investigation is to understand the effects of LLC on Vdroop and also to understand how well DVID allows me to adjust the voltage curve. That's why I'm just playing around taking some preliminary measurements before I start doing #1.
> 
> Anyhow, this is what I've found tonight.
> 
> 
> 
> The results seem very odd, but anything aside from Auto, Standard results in vcore shooting UP when initializing Prime 95. That's quite dangerous especially when my load voltage was over 1.3V and my temperatures spiked to 90C. And as I said in my previous post, this is VERY different compared to using a fixed voltage, where Vdroop is ~0.08 for Auto/Standard, 0.02 for High and close to 0 for Turbo. I'll post on the Gigabyte Forum to let their team know but I suspect this LLC behavior is buggy at the moment when using Normal + DVID mode.


I like your chart mine does the same, however if you have all the power saving features on Auto including speed step there will be no need to use LLC with DVID. You can leave LLC on Auto because the voltage will adjust correctly, when using DVID and all power saving options on Auto.

DVID and LLC is working correctly. My board does the same thing when I don't use the power saving features with DVID.

From my testing when using DVID use Auto LLC and all power saving features on Auto and the voltage will be just fine, it won't under volt or over volt and it will adjust for CPU load variation.

DVID does not work correctly with speed step off and power saving features off and LLC not on Auto.

Gigabyte makes so easy to overclock with DVID. Just use optimized default settings then change DVID for desired max voltage on a stress test with multiplier setting. You wont see voltage droop with load or over voltage at idle.

Since you are going to use DVID just skip testing with fixed Vcore and save some time, unless you just like to play around with it like I do all the time for years.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Read the ASUS quote below it backs up what I'm saying to you.
> 
> Offset Mode: In Offset Mode, we can add or subtract voltage from the CPU's default voltage for a given CPU core ratio. The default voltage scales according to the active multiplier ratio. This provides power saving when application loading is light. The side effect to using offset mode is that any offset value we select will be applied to all core ratios. This can result in too much or too little voltage being applied for a given ratio, which leads to instability.
> 
> If you wish to use Offset Mode, then bear in mind that the Vcore displayed in the UEFI is simply a snapshot of the offset voltage stack; the firmware interface only places a partial load on the CPU. The full-load voltage in the operating system will be different, so you will need to check the voltage by running a suitable application within the OS. Use Ai Suite to monitor the voltage when the system is under full load. Also, bear in mind that the default voltage receiving the offset changes with the applied CPU ratio.
> 
> Adaptive Mode: Adaptive Mode was developed to account for the inadequacies of Offset Mode for overclocking. We use it to specify the voltage used when the CPU is faced with a heavy application load. The voltage we set is the maximum voltage the PCU is allowed to apply, which takes all the load-related guesswork hampering Offset Mode out of the equation. The other boon of Adaptive Mode is that it does not alter voltages for non-Turbo CPU ratios, allowing us to enjoy the benefits of power saving without the voltage adjustment range issues presented by the Offset Mode function. We recommend Adaptive Mode for all normal overclocking. http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/5/


It's all tied to EIST at the end of the day. When your load goes up, your clock speed goes up and so does your voltage. I don't think Asus worded it well becauuse in one they mention "Scales according to active multiplier ratio" and the other says "faced with a heavy application load." Because your multiplier is controlled by EIST, it's effectively dependent on load.

If you imagine a Vcore vs frequency curve as the VID, essentially offset mode (which is what Gigabyte's DVID sounds like) is a vertical shift (remember doing this stuff in Geometry/Algebra?). Asus' adaptive mode allows for this shift in addition to a peak turbo voltage (imagine an extra point added to the curve at the peak to whatever voltage that you want.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I like your chart mine does the same, however if you have all the power saving features on Auto including speed step there will be no need to use LLC with DVID. You can leave LLC on Auto because the voltage will adjust correctly, when using DVID and all power saving options on Auto.
> 
> DVID and LLC is working correctly. My board does the same thing when I don't use the power saving features with DVID.
> 
> From my testing when using DVID use Auto LLC and all power saving features on Auto and the voltage will be just fine, it won't under volt or over volt and it will adjust for CPU load variation.
> 
> DVID does not work correctly with speed step off and power saving features off and LLC not on Auto.
> 
> Gigabyte makes so easy to overclock with DVID. Just use optimized default settings then change DVID for desired max voltage on a stress test with multiplier setting. You wont see voltage droop with load or over voltage at idle.
> 
> Since you are going to use DVID just skip testing with fixed Vcore and save some time, unless you just like to play around with it like I do all the time for years.


I mean "Auto" mode in DVID isn't bad. It's still a 0.05 V drop in load which is... not great but not terrible too. I just wish I could get closer like 0.02 or 0.01 which is possible. Also as I said before I'm not a huge fan of Offset mode given that you run into potential instabilities at lower speeds esp if your DVID < 0. I suspect that's why my i7 930 was struggling because back in the day BIOSes didn't have Adaptive mode.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> So now I hope after you read your own copy-paste post, you understand what adaptive and offset voltage control is.
> Gigabyte just calls it DVID. NO BIOS CAN CHANGE the voltage identification table. geeze. c'mon man, you profess to know this stuff.. so you must know that.
> And voltage scaling with multiplier is dynamic voltage as ASUS describes in your copy-paste on offset. "scales with multiplier". What don't you understand about that?? I have, or have had all these boards at one time or another. Don;t confuse bios nomenclature with function when crossing brands.
> Actually, I'm done trying to educate you on this...
> out.


I'm trying to educate you. The VID from the CPU sends voltage commands to the VRM according to CPU load, temp, clock speed. DVID and Adaptive increase voltage with using a offset from VID command.

Serial Voltage Identification "SVID": A few generations back, Intel introduced serial voltage identification (SVID) which is a protocol the CPU uses to communicate with the voltage regulator. The power control unit inside the CPU uses SVID to communicate with the PWM controller that controls the voltage regulator. This allows the CPU to pick its optimum voltage depending on current conditions (temperature, frequency, load, etc.). You can actually use a combination of SVID and LLC to get an optimal VCore instead of manually setting it. If you start your system without making any changes, your VID (which some refer to as the stock voltage) might be 1.25v, but if you lower your CPU multiplier and restart, you will find your VID has dropped automatically. The reverse happens if you increase your clock and do not set any VCore. Intel's latest CPUs are able to pick their own voltage

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/guides/7481/tweaktowns-ultimate-intel-skylake-overclocking-guide/index5.html


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> It's all tied to EIST at the end of the day. When your load goes up, your clock speed goes up and so does your voltage. I don't think Asus worded it well becauuse in one they mention "Scales according to active multiplier ratio" and the other says "faced with a heavy application load." Because your multiplier is controlled by EIST, it's effectively dependent on load.
> 
> If you imagine a Vcore vs frequency curve as the VID, essentially offset mode (which is what Gigabyte's DVID sounds like) is a vertical shift (remember doing this stuff in Geometry/Algebra?). Asus' adaptive mode allows for this shift in addition to a peak turbo voltage (imagine an extra point added to the curve at the peak to whatever voltage that you want.
> I mean "Auto" mode in DVID isn't bad. It's still a 0.05 V drop in load which is... not great but not terrible too. I just wish I could get closer like 0.02 or 0.01 which is possible. Also as I said before I'm not a huge fan of Offset mode given that you run into potential instabilities at lower speeds esp if your DVID < 0. I suspect that's why my i7 930 was struggling because back in the day BIOSes didn't have Adaptive mode.


If you use all the power saving features you will not see Vdroop with DVID. I can't see Vdroop when using DVID, at idle my Vcore drops and Vcore for prim95 is 1.332v, then when I run games and RealBench ~1.260v. When using DVID correctly folks should not have a problem.

Vdroop is part of the processor specification for longevity.

This link is from Elmor at Asus http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5


----------



## Vipu

Ordered some 7700K, STRIX Z270F and 16gb 3200mhz ddr4 that I will get next week at some point I hope.

My current cpu and mobo are about 8y old (xeon x5670 @ 4,2) and im trying to learn just some basic OC since things have changed I would guess since then, I will aim like 4,8ghz without delidding for now and maybe more in future.

How easy is it to get 4,8?
Is there many things I have to fiddle with?

If possible I want to change as little things as possible to just have stable and working oc, still with not too high vcore etc
Should I use xmp?


----------



## hayame

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Ordered some 7700K, STRIX Z270F and 16gb 3200mhz ddr4 that I will get next week at some point I hope.
> 
> My current cpu and mobo are about 8y old (xeon x5670 @ 4,2) and im trying to learn just some basic OC since things have changed I would guess since then, I will aim like 4,8ghz without delidding for now and maybe more in future.
> 
> How easy is it to get 4,8?
> Is there many things I have to fiddle with?
> 
> If possible I want to change as little things as possible to just have stable and working oc, still with not too high vcore etc
> Should I use xmp?


For hitting 4.8ghz before delidding: I say very easily, unless you get really unlucky with a bad chip.
As for learning what to fiddle with: This helpful guide will be of use http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/ (especially for when you want turbo clocks/adaptive voltage)

Personally I can't tell you much about xmp but I'm sure someone with more experience with it will come around


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hayame*
> 
> For hitting 4.8ghz before delidding: I say very easily, unless you get really unlucky with a bad chip.
> As for learning what to fiddle with: This helpful guide will be of use http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/ (especially for when you want turbo clocks/adaptive voltage)
> 
> Personally I can't tell you much about xmp but I'm sure someone with more experience with it will come around


FWIW, I can hit 4.8 ghz at 1.28 volts but I get temps into the 90s. My chip is pretty bad I guess, but hoping once I delid the thermal wall won't be holding me back


----------



## hayame

whoa that's toasty, I ran my 7600k at those same speeds and voltages prior to a delid but it never went above 75c, hopefully once you delid you'll see more than 20c drop


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Ordered some 7700K, STRIX Z270F and 16gb 3200mhz ddr4 that I will get next week at some point I hope.
> 
> My current cpu and mobo are about 8y old (xeon x5670 @ 4,2) and im trying to learn just some basic OC since things have changed I would guess since then, I will aim like 4,8ghz without delidding for now and maybe more in future.
> 
> How easy is it to get 4,8?
> Is there many things I have to fiddle with?
> 
> If possible I want to change as little things as possible to just have stable and working oc, still with not too high vcore etc
> Should I use xmp?


For 4.8 GHz I used 1.24 Vcore with AC & DC Load Line is set to 0.01 and LLC set to Level 4 (Auto was not enough for stable Vcore). Under load the Vcore was 1.216 V.

The memory (G.Skill Ripjaws 5 3200 16-16-16-36 2x8) was set to 2800 MHz, this is the highest I could go with 1.2 Volts. 3000 MHz needs 1.3 V already for some reason and 3200 needs 1.35 V. Timings are on 15-15-15-35-2T but on 2666 MHz I could go as low as 14-14-14-28-1T without adding extra voltage. The latency with these 2 different speeds is roughly the same tested with Hyper Pi 0.99.

XMP sets the memory on 16-16-16-36-2T and 3200 MHz using 1.35 V resulting in my CPU overheating. I don't mind using a bit slower memory speeds as I'm not going to win any OC competitions anyways.

I should note that I am pretty much forced to use low voltages in order to get 4.8 GHz because I don't have a top tier CPU cooler (Arctic Freezer i32 in a Fractal Design C case) and I wouldn't call the system really stable as I couldn't test it for too long. Under RealBench my CPU temps were between 84-92 °C but for single tasks such as 3d rendering (3ds Max with Corona) or gaming (GTA V and Hitman) it stays below 80 °C and seems stable ever after hours.

So yes, *it is possible to use not too high Vcore* but it depends on what you use your PC for. Many forum members will disagree with such low voltages and they wouldn't use them because instability reasons. *But they also have much better coolers than I do*. I will probably switch to a Noctua NH-D14 as I'm skeptic about AIO's (leaking, durability and noise/performance ratio).


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Use Adaptive with no offset, just enter the voltage in additional turbo, check that EIST (speedstep) is enabled. also verify that in windows, advanced power plan > min proc state = 0%, and that your min cache ratio is set to Auto. if none of these result in downclock and downvolt, I'd reflash the board or start a service ticket.


it clocks down when idle

it just doesn't provide less voltage

I'm good with it for now
I'm writing it off as a beta UEFI problem

there's a newer version out, still beta

might fix this behaviour, but some users (something like half of them) are reporting trouble with memeroy OC

gonna wait for next stable release

my guess is Asus has it's hands full with back support for z170, newer version for Z270 AND Ryzen falling all into the same time frame (like botched CH6 update process killing many boards)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Vdroop is part of the processor specification for longevity.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This link is from Elmor at Asus http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5


Kris is not Elmor.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Ordered some 7700K, STRIX Z270F and 16gb 3200mhz ddr4 that I will get next week at some point I hope.
> 
> My current cpu and mobo are about 8y old (xeon x5670 @ 4,2) and im trying to learn just some basic OC since things have changed I would guess since then, I will aim like 4,8ghz without delidding for now and maybe more in future.
> 
> How easy is it to get 4,8?
> Is there many things I have to fiddle with?
> 
> If possible I want to change as little things as possible to just have stable and working oc, still with not too high vcore etc
> Should I use xmp?


should be no problem getting 4.8 or higher... read the guide from Raja that hayame linked to.
You can try XMP, but you'll probably do better manually entering timings and voltages. You can read Michal's DDR4 write up for one opinion regrading XMP. or post in this thread for help getting the ram tuned up.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> it clocks down when idle
> it just doesn't provide less voltage
> I'm good with it for now
> I'm writing it off as a beta UEFI problem
> there's a newer version out, still beta
> might fix this behaviour, but some users (something like half of them) are reporting trouble with memeroy OC
> gonna wait for next stable release
> my guess is Asus has it's hands full with back support for z170, newer version for Z270 AND Ryzen falling all into the same time frame (like botched CH6 update process killing many boards)


Are you on the M8F in your sig? if yes, i'd need to see bios screen shots or, with a USb stick in, post to bios and on the profiles menu scroll down to the USB stick, open it and hit cntrl-F2. this wil drop a txt file of all bios settings to the stick. post that here or in this thread

Lastly... for gigabyte board owners, if you can lure sin0822 into the thread, he'd be very helpful.


----------



## dbmsts

After achieving a stable CPU overclock, can I use the XMP profile on my RAM? My sig specs are old as I recently upgraded to a 7700K. RAM is Corsair Vengeance 16GB 3200 and timing 16. Or should I manually tweak the RAM in which I have no experience at all? If possible I would like to avoid that and simply use the XMP profile.


----------



## seven7thirty30

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dbmsts*
> 
> After achieving a stable CPU overclock, can I use the XMP profile on my RAM? My sig specs are old as I recently upgraded to a 7700K. RAM is Corsair Vengeance 16GB 3200 and timing 16. Or should I manually tweak the RAM in which I have no experience at all? If possible I would like to avoid that and simply use the XMP profile.


If the CPU overclock is stable, then the XMP settings will work. It may require tweaking the RAM, System Agent, and VCCIO voltages. I had to increase them on my Asus Maximus IX Extreme mobo.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> it clocks down when idle
> 
> it just doesn't provide less voltage
> 
> I'm good with it for now
> I'm writing it off as a beta UEFI problem
> 
> there's a newer version out, still beta
> 
> might fix this behaviour, but some users (something like half of them) are reporting trouble with memeroy OC
> 
> gonna wait for next stable release
> 
> my guess is Asus has it's hands full with back support for z170, newer version for Z270 AND Ryzen falling all into the same time frame (like botched CH6 update process killing many boards)


Same issues with my M8F particularly with adaptive voltage, it just doesn't work correctly. I know Asus UEFI engineers have been busy with Ryzen,Optane,Z270 etc. etc. but its NO excuse to not have a proper relatively bug free UEFI for the M8F after 4 months given every other ROG Z170 board except the Extreme already have a stable Kaby Lake UEFI. ASUS is not looking after its customers with the more expensive premium boards, why should they? They already have our money! Very disappointed customer!









Edit: I stand corrected FINALLY UEFI 3401 available for download








Edit 2: Finally adaptive voltage works properly yay







[email protected] [email protected] with memory @3333Mhz gets through Bitdender AV with adaptive voltage which on previous UEFI I couldn't unless I used Manual voltage....time will tell but so far so good.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Kris is not Elmor.


I asked Elmor from Asus why do the manufacturers use load-line calibration for the CPU and what does load line do and how does load line work? And he gave me this link: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5

If you don't believe what the article is saying ask Elmor some questions.


----------



## exploiteddna

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rampage24*
> 
> Is it normal for 3200mhz ram to cause the CPU to run 10 degrees hotter than 2133?
> 
> Also core #2 goes from the coldest at 2133 to the hottest at 3200. It runs 3 degrees cooler than the hottest core on average at 2133, to 3 degrees hotter on average at 3200.


mine does the exact same thing. I think the temp increase is due to increased IO and SA voltages.. and the core-specific relative increase is perhaps due to the physical location of the IMC relative to that core??


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *michaelrw*
> 
> mine does the exact same thing. I think the temp increase is due to increased IO and SA voltages.. and the core-specific relative increase is perhaps due to the physical location of the IMC relative to that core??


Shrug... 2133 vs XMP (3200) for me made no difference in temperatures. The 2133 was a degree or two cooler but that's because I only ran Prime for 10 minutes whereas the XMP test I had ran for 45 minutes.


----------



## dmo580

Also just re-tested 4800 @ 1.28V. Got a failure 15 minutes in and my max temps are hitting 96. I think that's the wall for me. I ordered a Rockit Cool this morning.

*Edit:* Looked up this @Sin0822 guy and his past guides look pretty good. I'll take a deeper look.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Also just re-tested 4800 @ 1.28V. Got a failure 15 minutes in and my max temps are hitting 96. I think that's the wall for me. I ordered a Rockit Cool this morning.
> 
> *Edit:* Looked up this @Sin0822 guy and his past guides look pretty good. I'll take a deeper look.


What cooler are you using to get temps that high? That does not seem right.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> What cooler are you using to get temps that high? That does not seem right.


I have tested 4 cpus ... on water. I have had one that would get 90c+ using prime and not oc'd. 7700k 's are sos so different in all specs. Im simply not surprised of temps he does report


----------



## Spiriva

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I have tested 4 cpus ... on water. I have had one that would get 90c+ using prime and not oc'd. 7700k 's are sos so different in all specs. Im simply not surprised of temps he does report


delid is a must


----------



## SweWiking

What do you guys think of 5.2Ghz @1.415V for 24/7 ? The cpu gets around 50-55c (delided) while gaming at 5.2Ghz @1.415V.


----------



## Battou62

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> For 4.8 GHz I used 1.24 Vcore with AC & DC Load Line is set to 0.01 and LLC set to Level 4 (Auto was not enough for stable Vcore). Under load the Vcore was 1.216 V.
> 
> The memory (G.Skill Ripjaws 5 3200 16-16-16-36 2x8) was set to 2800 MHz, this is the highest I could go with 1.2 Volts. 3000 MHz needs 1.3 V already for some reason and 3200 needs 1.35 V. Timings are on 15-15-15-35-2T but on 2666 MHz I could go as low as 14-14-14-28-1T without adding extra voltage. The latency with these 2 different speeds is roughly the same tested with Hyper Pi 0.99.
> 
> XMP sets the memory on 16-16-16-36-2T and 3200 MHz using 1.35 V resulting in my CPU overheating. I don't mind using a bit slower memory speeds as I'm not going to win any OC competitions anyways.
> 
> I should note that I am pretty much forced to use low voltages in order to get 4.8 GHz because I don't have a top tier CPU cooler (Arctic Freezer i32 in a Fractal Design C case) and I wouldn't call the system really stable as I couldn't test it for too long. Under RealBench my CPU temps were between 84-92 °C but for single tasks such as 3d rendering (3ds Max with Corona) or gaming (GTA V and Hitman) it stays below 80 °C and seems stable ever after hours.
> 
> So yes, *it is possible to use not too high Vcore* but it depends on what you use your PC for. Many forum members will disagree with such low voltages and they wouldn't use them because instability reasons. *But they also have much better coolers than I do*. I will probably switch to a Noctua NH-D14 as I'm skeptic about AIO's (leaking, durability and noise/performance ratio).


Thanks for this info. I was able to get my ram to run 2800 14-14-14-34 at 1.2V


----------



## briank

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> What do you guys think of 5.2Ghz @1.415V for 24/7 ? The cpu gets around 50-55c (delided) while gaming at 5.2Ghz @1.415V.


Sounds like a nice overclock!

I like to drop it down 0.1GHz and see how low you can take the voltage. Let's say it something like 1.35V. Then you have to ask yourself, is with worth running the voltage that much higher for just 0.1GHz?

Also, are you allowing the CPU to clock down and voltage to drop (speed step enabled)? If so that would make be feel better about running 1.4V, assuming you're not running something all the time that's pushing the processor to 100%.


----------



## Scotty99

I understand 7700k's get hot....but 1.28v 96c sounds like something is off there.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I understand 7700k's get hot....but 1.28v 96c sounds like something is off there.


Noctua NH-D14 here. It's unusually high I agree, but I'm also using Prime 95.

Where I'm suspicious is just looking at power draw numbers. There's no way my CPU should be this hot when my i7 930 was drawing even MORE power and staying cooler. I've been lazy about taking it apart, but I'll take a look right now and reapply TIM with my fresh tube of MX-4.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Noctua NH-D14 here. It's unusually high I agree, but I'm also using Prime 95.
> 
> Where I'm suspicious is just looking at power draw numbers. There's no way my CPU should be this hot when my i7 930 was drawing even MORE power and staying cooler. I've been lazy about taking it apart, but I'll take a look right now and reapply TIM with my fresh tube of MX-4.


You should use water cooling.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You should use water cooling.


That's an option too. Also keep in mind my temps I'm recording are MAX temps so on average it's probably a few degrees lower. Still, it seems on the high end.


----------



## dmo580

Ok well I pulled off my CPU cooler to take a look.

*From my previous applicaiton of Noctua NT-H1:*
TIM on Noctua D14: https://i.imgur.com/wmyG7qV.jpg
TIM on 7700k: https://i.imgur.com/q7vV1sl.jpg

*Next I pulled out a new tube of MX-4.*
Fresh MX-4 applied: https://i.imgur.com/amDSBxZ.jpg
Putting it back together: https://i.imgur.com/7DWUSce.jpg

Temps are more or less the same. I did a 20 minute bench on Prime 95 @ 4700 MHz, 1.25V and my max temps are 94


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Ok well I pulled off my CPU cooler to take a look.
> 
> *From my previous applicaiton of Noctua NT-H1:*
> TIM on Noctua D14: https://i.imgur.com/wmyG7qV.jpg
> TIM on 7700k: https://i.imgur.com/q7vV1sl.jpg
> 
> *Next I pulled out a new tube of MX-4.*
> Fresh MX-4 applied: https://i.imgur.com/amDSBxZ.jpg
> Putting it back together: https://i.imgur.com/7DWUSce.jpg
> 
> Temps are more or less the same. I did a 20 minute bench on Prime 95 @ 4700 MHz, 1.25V and my max temps are 94


Man i dont own a 7700k but those numbers still seem off. I asked earlier in this thread what thermal wall was for kaby and for the most part people said staying under 1.3 is the best idea. You are at 1.28v and 95c, is it possible your NH-D14 is warped and not making proper contact or maybe some of its heatpipes are leaking/broken?

Your thermal paste application is fine, i really dont know what to tell you. Shame you dont have an AIO or different cooler on hand just to test.


----------



## eXultanCe

Guys, help me out here. I sent my CPU for a replacement as I thought I got a bad one. Got new one in, bought some Arctic MX4, added another fan to my Cryorig H5. Temps seem to have gone down a few degrees 5-6 from my previous CPU, but I am still reaching 90C with no OC using RealBench (15m test, w/ 8GB RAM). Should I go in BIOS and mess with voltages? (Maybe auto is whats causing the issue?). Or maybe a cooler issue?


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eXultanCe*
> 
> Guys, help me out here. I sent my CPU for a replacement as I thought I got a bad one. Got new one in, bought some Arctic MX4, added another fan to my Cryorig H5. Temps seem to have gone down a few degrees 5-6 from my previous CPU, but I am still reaching 90C with no OC using RealBench (15m test, w/ 8GB RAM). Should I go in BIOS and mess with voltages? (Maybe auto is whats causing the issue?). Or maybe a cooler issue?


Like i said before, delid is the way to go. You could try messing around with CPU PLL Voltage, maybe you can get a few degrees lower, but thats not the real issue.
The TIM Intel used between die and IHS is pretty bad.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eXultanCe*
> 
> Guys, help me out here. I sent my CPU for a replacement as I thought I got a bad one. Got new one in, bought some Arctic MX4, added another fan to my Cryorig H5. Temps seem to have gone down a few degrees 5-6 from my previous CPU, but I am still reaching 90C with no OC using RealBench (15m test, w/ 8GB RAM). Should I go in BIOS and mess with voltages? (Maybe auto is whats causing the issue?). Or maybe a cooler issue?


Couple of things I can see.

Can you post a pic of your case? Might be an airflow issue that could help you save a few degrees.

VCCSA/System Agent and VCCIO are quite high. XMP sets them there. You may be able to reduce them both to save a few degrees, doing so will take a bit of time and testing with HCI Memtest. How to use that is detailed in the Asus OC guide.

Your Vcore is already at 1.24 at stock. That's quite high. It may be that you can use a negative offset to reduce that some way which would also save some temps.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Man i dont own a 7700k but those numbers still seem off. I asked earlier in this thread what thermal wall was for kaby and for the most part people said staying under 1.3 is the best idea. You are at 1.28v and 95c, is it possible your NH-D14 is warped and not making proper contact or maybe some of its heatpipes are leaking/broken?
> 
> Your thermal paste application is fine, i really dont know what to tell you. Shame you dont have an AIO or different cooler on hand just to test.


Yeah I mean you could be right my whole cooler is borked but I should've really done some tests on my i7 930 before pulling it off. I re-examined the heatpipes and it doesn't seem like anything has leaked out otherwise there should be a bunch of residue right? I took a look at my notes from 2010 when I did overclocking on my i7 930 and it said this:

_1.35 VCore @ 4.20 (200x21)
OCCT Linpack pass 08:11:28
Max Temps: 74/71/70/67_

I mean if an i7 930 with a much higher TDP which is pulling far more watts at 1.35V than my chip right now and yet the max temps are only in the 70s, then yeah something's definitely changed (either my cooler is screwed up over 7 years or my 7700k is just terrible). I'll report back in the next few days once I delid. I'm just pretty disappointed the I ran into this thermal wall so fast.


----------



## dmo580

In the meantime I'm still contemplating if I want to keep my Gigabyte board. I'm diving into looking at other Z270 options and as I was reading the MSI Z270 Gaming M7 manual (geez can these names sound any more similar? e.g. Gigabyte/Aorus Z270 Gaming K7), I found some interesting Vcore settings. Not only do they allow the standard Auto, Manual/Override, Offset, and Adaptive modes, they also allow Adaptive + Offset (similar to what ASUS has), but the last one really intrigued me--*Override + Offset*.

My understanding is MSI calls manual vcore mode Override, which is fine, but why would you need an Offset then? If the idea of Override is setting a fixed Vcore across all frequencies, why would you need an Offset? Wouldn't you just key in another value? Maybe an MSI owner can help chime in here.


----------



## MikeS3000

Here is my overclock submission for the chart:

Username: MikeS3000
CPU Model: i7-7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 51
Core Frequency: 5100 MHz
Cache Frequency: 4200 MHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.39v
Vcore: 1.409v
FCLK: 1000 MHz
Cooling Solution: Delid and Relid with H100i v2
Stability Test: OCCT 4.4.3 Large 1hr, x264 16T 8 hrs
Batch Number: Malaysia L639G045
Ram Speed: 3600 MHz 16-18-18-36 2T
Ram Voltage: 1.38v
VCCIO: 1.2v
VCCSA: 1.225v
Motherboard: z270 Asus Hero
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: No AVX Offset.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*
> 
> Here is my overclock submission for the chart:
> 
> Username: MikeS3000
> CPU Model: i7-7700k
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 51
> Core Frequency: 5100 MHz
> Cache Frequency: 4200 MHz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.39v
> Vcore: 1.409v
> FCLK: 1000 MHz
> Cooling Solution: Delid and Relid with H100i v2
> Stability Test: OCCT 4.4.3 Large 1hr
> Batch Number: Malaysia L639G045
> Ram Speed: 3600 MHz 16-18-18-36 2T
> Ram Voltage: 1.38v
> VCCIO: 1.2v
> VCCSA: 1.225v
> Motherboard: z270 Asus Hero
> LLC Setting: 5
> Misc Comments: No AVX Offset.


Very nice overclock, have to love Sandy Lake lol Congrats


----------



## Kera1984

Hello everyone!!!

I recently bought i7 7700k. Made it stable at 4,9GHz and 1.325V, memory 3466mhz

i recieved around 2450 to 2500 in CPU-Z and around 216 cinebench r15 single core scores

CPU-z multy is around 10800 and CR15 is around 1090

i can't get stable 5 ghz because of temps so i went to change cpu bus speed

it was set at 110 clock 4.95ghz, 1.35V, memory set to 3410mhz

scores were almost similar CPU-Z at 2556 max and cinebench r15 219 in single core

temps were high 80's at aida64 no throtteling.

Now after sometime of using my PC i wanted to check the scores

Now i get CPU-Z multy around 11000 and CR15 multy around 1110, BUT!!!!

single core is lower

CPU-Z is around 2280 to 2300 its like stock i7 7700k and in cr15 is always at 204

when i return the bios to stock settings single in CPU-Z is same as oced and cr15 is 197, but multy drops to stock lvls (CPU-z multy 9800, cr15 multy 992)

i don't get it what is holding on my single core performance when i oc my i7 7700k, it was not like that, are there some kind of options in windows or in bios??

is my cpu wrong should i return it??

how is it that mutly scores are increasing but single is not that much any more?? At the begining it was alright.

maybe i should reinstall windows??

what do you think it is, or has anyone had the same problem?

p.s. cpu is not yet delided.

my config is:

board: MSI Z270 gaming titanium
CPU: i7 7700k
cooling: corsair h115i
memory: corsair vengeance 3466mhz
graphic: MSI r9 390 8gb at 1165mhz
PSU: corsair 750w gold 92% efficency


----------



## areczek1987

Anyone have a Vietnam chip here? X....B846 is the one ive got... On the time its only Malesian posted?


----------



## rt123

This is the first I've heard of any Vietnam Kabylake CPU existing. Very curious about the results now. The Vietnam Devil's Canyons that I saw, were better on average when compared to their Malaysian counterparts. Will be interesting to see how it turns out on Kaby.


----------



## areczek1987




----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *areczek1987*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


nice pic. put the whip to 'er and see how she runs.


----------



## areczek1987

1.312 stock vid


----------



## rt123

What board, how did you measure stock VID?
Try doing a few Cinebench runs (quick way to bin chips).


----------



## areczek1987

On first boot of m8gene in bios. She doing problem with only post on 5hgz with 1.37v llc5. Frezz after show cb score on 4.9 of the same votage







Worst what i've got. Whana fry that potato...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the first I've heard of any Vietnam Kabylake CPU existing. Very curious about the results now. The Vietnam Devil's Canyons that I saw, were better on average when compared to their Malaysian counterparts. Will be interesting to see how it turns out on Kaby.


Should be interesting to see how good the Vietnam chips will be. According to silicon lottery the Vietnam Skylake chips were no better than the Malay ones, though as previously stated the Vietnam Devils Canyon were better on a average.


----------



## embrion

Hi guys,

I've managed to run x264 16T over the entire night while OCCT (default settings) is failing after <1h. [email protected] @1.26V. On the other hand OCCT run fine for a few hours @4.9GHz @1.33V but I didn't like temperatures reaching 80-85C so I decided to try 4.8GHz. So, how representative x264 is if OCCT is finding error pretty quickly?


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *areczek1987*
> 
> On first boot of m8gene in bios. She doing problem with only post on 5hgz with 1.37v llc5. Frezz after show cb score on 4.9 of the same votage
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Worst what i've got. Whana fry that potato...


On Asus, first boot after new CPU does not give you the VID. Load optimized defaults, then reboot & enter BIOS, now you have your VID.

But yes, chip seems bad. Sorry.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *areczek1987*
> 
> 1.312 stock vid


Dang. I'm stable at 5.1 with 1.312.


----------



## areczek1987

here is stock +xmp 3600cl16 under linx 0.7
Rma on it?

Prime 28,10 give me instant errors on two cores on 4.7 1.3v llc lv5
water cooling but its only on full noctua d14 level/potencial(sory english is not my native language)... what the hell going on?









tomorrow i'll will try to put a once more new termal compound...


----------



## rt123

What cooler you have? Those temps are atrocious.


----------



## areczek1987

That potato require 1.33(1.312 vdroop) for 1h rog realbench on 4.8ghz....
Nope bsod after 1h 12 mins...XD

My secound i7 is much less vcore hungry on 5ghz after delide...


----------



## FuriousReload

My 7700k runs 4.8 at 1.264, with an H100i V2 the temps are at 78C AFTER the delid. If I go any higher with voltage I am well over 80C in RealBench.

My wife's 7600k runs 5.1GHz at 1.312v at 67C, H100i V2. Super stable too.


----------



## Dantrax

OP, thanks for the super information in this thread. I wanted to stick with the 2011-v3 cpus when I upgraded but I cheaped out & bought a 7700k & Asus Code mobo based on the $$$ I would save. I also looked at the Z270 chip features vs what the X99 chip features. I really didn't check out all the specs. So thanks for the specs & some O/C info as well.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *areczek1987*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> here is stock +xmp 3600cl16 under linx 0.7
> Rma on it?
> 
> Prime 28,10 give me instant errors on two cores on 4.7 1.3v llc lv5
> water cooling but its only on full noctua d14 level/potencial(sory english is not my native language)... what the hell going on?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tomorrow i'll will try to put a once more new termal compound...


Its not the compaund ... its the cpu you have is like that


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *canna*





> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*





> Originally Posted by *koji*





> Originally Posted by *Inelastic*





> Originally Posted by *Swiper*





> Originally Posted by *ParanoidZoid*





> Originally Posted by *MikeS3000*



Sample Size36  Average OC5.07Median OC5.10Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.36


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *areczek1987*
> 
> 
> here is stock +xmp 3600cl16 under linx 0.7
> Rma on it?
> 
> Prime 28,10 give me instant errors on two cores on 4.7 1.3v llc lv5
> water cooling but its only on full noctua d14 level/potencial(sory english is not my native language)... what the hell going on?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tomorrow i'll will try to put a once more new termal compound...


I've been researching for about 2 weeks now about air coolers and it seems that the Noctua NH-D15 (and D14 in some degree) still beats many 240&280 mm AIO water coolers, some of them by 5-10 °C. And it does that on lower noise levels...

Stability problem could be because of high temperatures. Der8auer recommends 85 °C, others 80 °C.

Try lower ram speed & voltage (try even 2133 MHz @ 1.2 V), lower Vcore. I can get away with 1.24 V with LLC 5 for 4.7 GHz. It doesn't mean yours will not crash but maybe because of high voltages you have high temperatures and it's not the voltage that's causing the errors (directly) but the temperatures.


----------



## OutlawII

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I've been researching for about 2 weeks now about air coolers and it seems that the Noctua NH-D15 (and D14 in some degree) still beats many 240&280 mm water coolers, some of them by 5-10 °C. And it does that on lower noise levels...
> 
> Stability problem could be because of high temperatures. Der8auer recommends 85 °C, others 80 °C.
> 
> Try lower ram speed & voltage (try even 2133 MHz @ 1.2 V), lower Vcore. I can get away with 1.24 V with LLC 5 for 4.7 GHz. It doesn't mean yours will not crash but maybe because of high voltages you have high temperatures and it's not the voltage that's causing the errors (directly) but the temperatures.


Lets correct this statement by saying AIO water coolers not custom loops


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Lets correct this statement by saying AIO water coolers not custom loops


there are several threads here at OCN that have the data comparing AIO and air. (d14 and 15).


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> Lets correct this statement by saying AIO water coolers not custom loops


Sorry, didn't mean to offend anyone. Edited my post. A custom loop is only as good as the components used so it's dependent. But I agree, a well built custom loop is superior.


----------



## BoredErica

Guys, as the thread states, please don't PM me. Overclocking belongs in this thread, that's what this thread is for. Charting goes in this thread. PM me if something is seriously wrong or you have reason to think I missed your entry.

No, I can't give Skype support for your overclock or email you.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Guys, as the thread states, please don't PM me. Overclocking belongs in this thread, that's what this thread is for. Charting goes in this thread. PM me if something is seriously wrong or you have reason to think I missed your entry.
> 
> No, I can't give Skype support for your overclock or email you.


lol...


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Guys, as the thread states, please don't PM me. Overclocking belongs in this thread, that's what this thread is for. Charting goes in this thread. PM me if something is seriously wrong or you have reason to think I missed your entry.
> 
> No, I can't give Skype support for your overclock or email you.


Would you be willing to answer questions via ol regular paper and stamp mail if we provide the return postage?


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Would you be willing to answer questions via ol regular paper and stamp mail if we provide the return postage?


Yeah I've got a lot of questions that I need answered but it can only be by PM or snail mail. Get @ me Wizzie


----------



## areczek1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I've been researching for about 2 weeks now about air coolers and it seems that the Noctua NH-D15 (and D14 in some degree) still beats many 240&280 mm AIO water coolers, some of them by 5-10 °C. And it does that on lower noise levels...
> 
> Stability problem could be because of high temperatures. Der8auer recommends 85 °C, others 80 °C.
> 
> Try lower ram speed & voltage (try even 2133 MHz @ 1.2 V), lower Vcore. I can get away with 1.24 V with LLC 5 for 4.7 GHz. It doesn't mean yours will not crash but maybe because of high voltages you have high temperatures and it's not the voltage that's causing the errors (directly) but the temperatures.


Custom cheap wc 360 with reservour and pomp away of the cpu. Thanks for the timps but im not a total noob(or im think soo) this is one of my six 7700k ill tested ,and its the worse of anything ive got. Simply whana share of the informaction







ihs difrent but nothing to really mention about(before we got any others vietnam chips







) its going to sale.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jameyscott*
> 
> Yeah I've got a lot of questions that I need answered but it can only be by PM or snail mail. Get @ me Wizzie


ur mum


----------



## Jpmboy

I know this doesn't qualify for a table entry, but delidding this 2 core just transforms it. Prior it would hit 90C running realbench at 5.0 (yeah it's a crap 7350K, but many are). Now, 5.0 at 1.48V is well within temperature tolerance!
ASUS M9 Apex, [email protected], 3866c15 ram @ 1.45V. iGPU @ stock.


----------



## dirtyred

Sorry for posting about this issue here but I'm nervous as hell. I'm hoping that especially Kaby Lake enthusiasts could help me out: Black screen, no POST, possibly bent socket pins.. Sorry for being off-topic and thank you for your understanding!


----------



## Dude970

Yep, many bent pins


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Sorry for posting about this issue here but I'm nervous as hell. I'm hoping that especially Kaby Lake enthusiasts could help me out: Black screen, no POST, possibly bent socket pins.. Sorry for being off-topic and thank you for your understanding!


Theres a lot of bent pins and the socket is pretty dirty.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Sorry for posting about this issue here but I'm nervous as hell. I'm hoping that especially Kaby Lake enthusiasts could help me out: Black screen, no POST, possibly bent socket pins.. Sorry for being off-topic and thank you for your understanding!


fuzz, pins bent into a crop circle... get out your high-power fly tying glasses, some Jack Daniels, and a 0.5mm mechanical pencil or VERY fine tweezers and straighten them out. then air can that socket. looks like criminal mischief.









oh...no reason to be nervous the damage is done.... just calmly fix it.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> oh...no reason to be nervous the damage is done.... just calmly fix it.


Easy to say. Was my dream for more than 20 years to have a high end PC one day. Had this PC for 1 month. Just tried to reapply thermal paste since I had a feeling that I applied too much the previous time. I was right. Way too much. So I removed the CPU to clean it and all around it. No idea how did the pins bend as I was as gentle as possible when removing and reinstalling the CPU. Could try to fix it but I've never done it. I hope I don't brake any of the pins. Maybe I'll send it back under warranty to the shop and hope they won't notice and get a new one.

Btw can the CPU be damaged as I powered the PC on like this multiple times trying to figure out what is wrong?


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Easy to say. Was my dream for more than 20 years to have a high end PC one day. Had this PC for 1 month. Just tried to reapply thermal paste since I had a feeling that I applied too much the previous time. I was right. Way too much. So I removed the CPU to clean it and all around it. No idea how did the pins bend as I was as gentle as possible when removing and reinstalling the CPU. Could try to fix it but I've never done it. I hope I don't brake any of the pins. Maybe I'll send it back under warranty to the shop and hope they won't notice and get a new one.


I think its a no go. They will check your board and see the bent pins. Even if they dont see anything, they wont give you a new board. They will send the "broken" one to RMA, and bent pins wont pass RMA, 100% sure about it.
I wish you good luck.


----------



## dirtyred

On the AUS ROG forums somebody mentioned that bent pins don't fall under warranty but were cases when ASUS fixed the pins for free. No clue if ASUS Hungary would do that for me, even if I'd have to pay for the fixing, will talk with them tomorrow.

How hard would you describe it to bend pins back successfully for somebody who's never done it before?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> On the AUS ROG forums somebody mentioned that bent pins don't fall under warranty but were cases when ASUS fixed the pins for free. No clue if ASUS Hungary would do that for me, even if I'd have to pay for the fixing, will talk with them tomorrow.
> 
> How hard would you describe it to bend pins back successfully for somebody who's never done it before?


no manufacturer covers bent socket pins under warranty. It's not difficult, steady your hand on a rest use magnifiers and align neighbors in the same direction. No different from rewiring Spock's Brain (just kidding). Many folks here have successfully fixed bent pins. regarding whether the CPU has been shorted... certain voltage rail pins can do this, but they are not located in that quadrant afaik. Only way to know for sure is to test the chip in the fixed socket or another MB. If the cpu is bad, INtel will likely replace it for you. "It just failed" and you know of no reason why it would.


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> On the AUS ROG forums somebody mentioned that bent pins don't fall under warranty but were cases when ASUS fixed the pins for free. No clue if ASUS Hungary would do that for me, even if I'd have to pay for the fixing, will talk with them tomorrow.
> 
> How hard would you describe it to bend pins back successfully for somebody who's never done it before?


If you have a steady hand and the "right tools", its not that hard. Take your time, breathe deeply and try to bend back one pin. If you think you did the first one well enough, keep going on.

Also you asked if theres a chance of a damaged CPU, its not impossible, but probably the CPU is ok.


----------



## dirtyred

I was thinking and it probably happened when I was cleaning around the socket with a round cotton pad. Probably it got stuck in the pins as after that I had to remove some cotton parts from the pins. Didn't notice right away that some got bent. Got suspicious only after removing, cleaning the CPU, applying thermal compound and putting everything back several times. I was suspecting the CPU at first, then the graphics card as the screen was black, then I was hoping for the 24 pin connection to not be properly connected, then the BIOS for some reason. Even took out the battery just to be sure. At least it's not the CPU (hopefully, we'll see after fixing pins) as it's the most expensive component in my build. The motherboard while not cheap for my pocket, I could live with buying a new one after drinking half a bottle of rakia to feel the pain even more (because whiskey is not strong enough).

Alright then, will get back soon with either good or bad news. Until then thank you very much for your fast and helpful feedback! Also, sorry for being off-topic.


----------



## Malinkadink

7700k 4.8ghz 1.25v, Prime95 2 threads immediately throw fatal errors, no BSOD.

7700k 4.8ghz 1.3v, took 51 minutes for 1 thread to errors, and 1 hour 35 minutes for second thread to error.

Do i have a garbage chip or what?

This problem has been causing Overwatch to crash infrequently, but still a crash nonetheless.

It seems i have a very high leakage cpu, and i'm well within my return window so i may be going that route. Can't say im not disappointed.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> 7700k 4.8ghz 1.25v, Prime95 2 threads immediately throw fatal errors, no BSOD.
> 
> 7700k 4.8ghz 1.3v, took 51 minutes for 1 thread to errors, and 1 hour 35 minutes for second thread to error.
> 
> Do i have a garbage chip or what?
> 
> This problem has been causing Overwatch to crash infrequently, but still a crash nonetheless.
> 
> It seems i have a very high leakage cpu, and i'm well within my return window so i may be going that route. Can't say im not disappointed.


Did you try more voltage above 1.3v. returning a CPU because it does not overclock the way you want is theft from Intel and us, they don't sell used CPUs.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I was thinking and it probably happened when I was cleaning around the socket with a round cotton pad. Probably it got stuck in the pins as after that I had to remove some cotton parts from the pins. Didn't notice right away that some got bent. Got suspicious only after removing, cleaning the CPU, applying thermal compound and putting everything back several times. I was suspecting the CPU at first, then the graphics card as the screen was black, then I was hoping for the 24 pin connection to not be properly connected, then the BIOS for some reason. Even took out the battery just to be sure. At least it's not the CPU (hopefully, we'll see after fixing pins) as it's the most expensive component in my build. The motherboard while not cheap for my pocket, I could live with buying a new one after drinking half a bottle of rakia to feel the pain even more (because whiskey is not strong enough).
> 
> Alright then, will get back soon with either good or bad news. Until then thank you very much for your fast and helpful feedback! Also, sorry for being off-topic.


Rakia it is then.


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Did you try more voltage above 1.3v. returning a CPU because it does not overclock the way you want is theft from Intel and us, they don't sell used CPUs.


I paid for a K CPU i expect it to overclock a decent amount, if i didn't care to OC i wouldn't buy a K CPU. The fact that 1.3v is giving me errors at 4.8ghz where others have no issues running 4.8ghz at much lower voltages, hell some even got 5ghz at or around 1.3v if they got lucky. I don't have sufficient cooling to try more than 1.3v, but i've dropped down to 4.5ghz at 1.3v and its fine now. I don't know where you're getting the idea that returning a product you're not satisfied with is theft, but that's really close minded.

Point is i paid for an overclockable CPU with intentions of overclocking it and got a dud. I wasn't expecting a golden chip, something in the middle would suffice, but this chip is bottom of the barrel.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> I paid for a K CPU i expect it to overclock a decent amount, if i didn't care to OC i wouldn't buy a K CPU. The fact that 1.3v is giving me errors at 4.8ghz where others have no issues running 4.8ghz at much lower voltages, hell some even got 5ghz at or around 1.3v if they got lucky. I don't have sufficient cooling to try more than 1.3v, but i've dropped down to 4.5ghz at 1.3v and its fine now. I don't know where you're getting the idea that returning a product you're not satisfied with is theft, but that's really close minded.
> 
> Point is i paid for an overclockable CPU with intentions of overclocking it and got a dud. I wasn't expecting a golden chip, something in the middle would suffice, but this chip is bottom of the barrel.


Here in the EU we can send back the product for full refund without giving any reason in the first 14 days of purchase. I don't know where you're from but if you can get your money back and you're not satisfied, don't think about it. Get a new one from somewhere else and hope to get lucky. Or if you still have some money left, first get a new one, compare the two and decide which one is better. Rinse & repeat until you find the best one.

---

In case I have to get a new motherboard, do you think any of these would offer any advantage in overclocking over my Z270-*K*?


PRIME Z270-K (DIGI+ VRM: 7 Phase digital power design)
TUF Z270 MARK 2 (4 +2 Digital Phase Power Design)
PRIME Z270-A (DIGI+ VRM: 8 Phase digital power design)
ASUS ROG STRIX Z270H (DIGI+ VRM, no mention about phases)
ASUS ROG STRIX Z270F (DIGI+ VRM, no mention about phases)

I'm guessing those phase levels are the ones that I can adjust in UEFI as well. Considering that so far I've found level 4-5 to be more than enough, level 5 giving rougly the same voltage under load that I've set. Level 6 is already giving Vboost so 6 different levels should be enough and not really a deciding factor?

The looks are not so important as my current case doesn't have a side window. What's important is durability (maybe stronger socket pins







) and stability for OC @ 4.8-5 GHz.

Am I missing something in the specs sheets or the more expensive boards are only better looking and offer some extra unneded features for OC or they are actually better for OC as well?


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Btw can the CPU be damaged as I powered the PC on like this multiple times trying to figure out what is wrong?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> regarding whether the CPU has been shorted... certain voltage rail pins can do this, but they are not located in that quadrant afaik. Only way to know for sure is to test the chip in the fixed socket or another MB. If the cpu is bad, INtel will likely replace it for you. "It just failed" and you know of no reason why it would.


Killed 2x 6700K a night before an OC comp with 2 bent pins that I thought I had fixed.









On the other hand, have ran a few mobos in the past for around 1 year with straightened bent pins.









So yes, depends what you bend.


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Here in the EU we can send back the product for full refund without giving any reason in the first 14 days of purchase. I don't know where you're from but if you can get your money back and you're not satisfied, don't think about it. Get a new one from somewhere else and hope to get lucky. Or if you still have some money left, first get a new one, compare the two and decide which one is better. Rinse & repeat until you find the best one.
> 
> ---


Yeah its the same for me i have 10 days left or so. I might just go for a Ryzen build, should last me longer. I've already played around with some 1700s, only thing thats been a PITA is getting 16gb sticks to run at 3200Mhz. Got them to run at 2933 with loose timings.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Killed 2x 6700K a night before an OC comp with 2 bent pins that I thought I had fixed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the other hand, have ran a few mobos in the past for around 1 year with straightened bent pins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So yes, depends what you bend.


Cut the yellow wire, not the red wire!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Killed 2x 6700K a night before an OC comp with 2 bent pins that I thought I had fixed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the other hand, have ran a few mobos in the past for around 1 year with straightened bent pins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So yes, depends what you bend.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Cut the yellow wire, not the red wire!


"Venkman, never cross the streams"... Why Egon?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> I paid for a K CPU i expect it to overclock a decent amount, if i didn't care to OC i wouldn't buy a K CPU. The fact that 1.3v is giving me errors at 4.8ghz where others have no issues running 4.8ghz at much lower voltages, hell some even got 5ghz at or around 1.3v if they got lucky. I don't have sufficient cooling to try more than 1.3v, but i've dropped down to 4.5ghz at 1.3v and its fine now. I don't know where you're getting the idea that returning a product you're not satisfied with is theft, but that's really close minded.
> 
> Point is i paid for an overclockable CPU with intentions of overclocking it and got a dud. I wasn't expecting a golden chip, something in the middle would suffice, but this chip is bottom of the barrel.


Intel does not support overclocking, I don't have the cooling for 4.8GHz only 4.5GHz so it's not lintels fault. Just because you pay for a overclockable chip does not mean there is entitlement for what you receive for overclocking, Intel only guarantees stock clock speeds. When people get there money back or exchange the processor, it is discarded at a loss.
Quote:


> Does this mean that Intel is supporting or encouraging overclocking?
> No. While we will, under the Plan, replace an eligible processor that fails while running outside of Intel's specifications, we will not provide any assistance with configuration, data recovery, failure of associated parts, or any other activities or issues associated with the processor or system resulting from overclocking or otherwise running outside of Intel's published specifications. https://click.intel.com/tuningplan/faq


----------



## Mr-Dark

Hello

I just build small gaming pc this week







for sure based on the I7 7700k..

got 2 7700k.. but both same batch--- L703D271..

First one need 1.36v for 5Ghz.. ( gaming stable and some asus RB ).. while second one is stable at 1.28v..



Today i will push my memory to 3.2Ghz and maybe the cache over the stock 4.2ghz..









Thanks


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel does not support overclocking, I don't have the cooling for 4.8GHz only 4.5GHz so it's not lintels fault. Just because you pay for a overclockable chip does not mean there is entitlement for what you receive for overclocking, Intel only guarantees stock clock speeds. When people get there money back or exchange the processor, it is discarded at a loss.


"Does this mean that Intel is supporting or encouraging overclocking?
No. *While we will, under the Plan, replace an eligible processor that fails while running outside of Intel's specifications*"

Seems contradictory to me if they dont support it but will replace a CPU that dies if you pay them even more on top of the CPU to get on that plan. I'm not going to lose any sleep over returning an Intel CPU because i'm not happy with its performance. They've been making money hand over fist for over 5 years with the lack of competition, providing minimal 5-10% IPC increases with each new release.


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> "Does this mean that Intel is supporting or encouraging overclocking?
> No. *While we will, under the Plan, replace an eligible processor that fails while running outside of Intel's specifications*"
> 
> Seems contradictory to me if they dont support it but will replace a CPU that dies if you pay them even more on top of the CPU to get on that plan. I'm not going to lose any sleep over returning an Intel CPU because i'm not happy with its performance. They've been making money hand over fist for over 5 years with the lack of competition, providing minimal 5-10% IPC increases with each new release.


You said your chip cant be stable at 4.8Ghz 1.3V, but you also said that you dont have sufficient cooling.
Quote:


> I paid for a K CPU i expect it to overclock a decent amount, if i didn't care to OC i wouldn't buy a K CPU. The fact that 1.3v is giving me errors at 4.8ghz where others have no issues running 4.8ghz at much lower voltages, hell some even got 5ghz at or around 1.3v if they got lucky. *I don't have sufficient cooling to try more than 1.3v, but i've dropped down to 4.5ghz at 1.3v and its fine now.* I don't know where you're getting the idea that returning a product you're not satisfied with is theft, but that's really close minded.
> 
> Point is i paid for an overclockable CPU with intentions of overclocking it and got a dud. I wasn't expecting a golden chip, something in the middle would suffice, but this chip is bottom of the barrel.


Please, could you tell us what motherboard, ram and cooler are you using? Also, could you tell us if the chip has been delid? Max core temp while stressing the cpu at 4.8ghz?
Keep in mind that Kaby Lake pretty much need to be delid to overclock well, and lower temperature means more stability, which could mean less voltage.


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> You said your chip cant be stable at 4.8Ghz 1.3V, but you also said that you dont have sufficient cooling.
> Please, could you tell us what motherboard, ram and cooler are you using? Also, could you tell us if the chip has been delid? Max core temp while stressing the cpu at 4.8ghz?
> Keep in mind that Kaby Lake pretty much need to be delid to overclock well, and lower temperature means more stability, which could mean less voltage.


At 4.8ghz with XMP using x2 16GB sticks 3200Mhz CL14 im getting SA and IO voltage of 1.35 and 1.3 which is adding a decent amount to the temps as i've just learned after loading BIOS default and not enabling XMP, 5-7C difference with XMP off. When i was stressing 4.8ghz 1.3v with XMP i was hitting 79C. Don't want to push it over 80C is all, had i not delidded it'd be well over 80C.

I'm using a 212 evo for a cooler, thinking of getting NH-D15 that should drop me 10C under load. Mobo is a MSI Z270 Gaming M3, RAM is G.Skill 32GB 16GBx2 3200Mhz CL14 Ripjaws V.

I have 0 issues running the chip at 1.25v 4.8ghz and doing something like the x264 test, doesn't BSOD, but when i tried Prime95 i immediately got errors. Ran memtest86 and got 5 errors a few minutes in. Dropped OC to 4.5ghz and ran memtest again and after taking an hour to do 1 pass it didn't get any errors after running all the tests.

Now what i've done was reset myself to default, no XMP and just set 4.8ghz. 1 minute into Prime95 and i got an error. Dialed it down to 4.7Ghz and no errors at least not that i know of i only let it run a few minutes just to see if i'd immediately catch an error. Same was the case at 4.7ghz when i had XMP on. CPU really doesn't like 4.8Ghz. At 1.3v 4.8ghz with XMP it took Prime almost an hour to get an error, i reckon 1.31v would maybe get it error free, but the problem i'm beginning to think is solely with the IMC, its just really poor. 32GB is also stressing it more so and i'd probably get away with a better OC if i was using a 16GB kit. It's really unfortunate because otherwise i think its a pretty good chip, just the IMC is pretty poor and needs a lot of voltage to run a high cpu clock with a high memory clock.

EDIT: Took a stick out, currently sitting at 1.288v at 4.8ghz running prime95 blend test (default bios settings just core clock set). Temps are 50C, lowest i've seen under load, definitely has something to do with the fact that im not running dual channel anymore. 10 minutes of Prime95 and 0 errors. I think i can make the conclusion that the IMC is getting too stressed with 32GB vs 16GB, Not sure how many others are using 32GB, i think most are probably on 16GB, but i'll be buying a 16GB kit for sure. Only have the 32GB kit cause i bought it off a friend for a good price, didn't realize it'd cause issues when it came to OCing the CPU.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Here in the EU we can send back the product for full refund without giving any reason in the first 14 days of purchase. I don't know where you're from but if you can get your money back and you're not satisfied, don't think about it. Get a new one from somewhere else and hope to get lucky. Or if you still have some money left, first get a new one, compare the two and decide which one is better. Rinse & repeat until you find the best one.
> 
> ---
> 
> In case I have to get a new motherboard, do you think any of these would offer any advantage in overclocking over my Z270-*K*?
> 
> 
> PRIME Z270-K (DIGI+ VRM: 7 Phase digital power design)
> TUF Z270 MARK 2 (4 +2 Digital Phase Power Design)
> PRIME Z270-A (DIGI+ VRM: 8 Phase digital power design)
> ASUS ROG STRIX Z270H (DIGI+ VRM, no mention about phases)
> ASUS ROG STRIX Z270F (DIGI+ VRM, no mention about phases)
> 
> I'm guessing those phase levels are the ones that I can adjust in UEFI as well. Considering that so far I've found level 4-5 to be more than enough, level 5 giving rougly the same voltage under load that I've set. Level 6 is already giving Vboost so 6 different levels should be enough and not really a deciding factor?
> 
> The looks are not so important as my current case doesn't have a side window. What's important is durability (maybe stronger socket pins
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) and stability for OC @ 4.8-5 GHz.
> 
> Am I missing something in the specs sheets or the more expensive boards are only better looking and offer some extra unneded features for OC or they are actually better for OC as well?


I don't think you will need to replace the whole board, I don't know about your country but here in Australia and many other countries I suspect you can get the CPU socket replaced at a cost of about $100, much cheaper option. Usually the board is tested after a socket replacement so no potential issue there, it just means being without your P.C for a while.


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> At 4.8ghz with XMP using x2 16GB sticks 3200Mhz CL14 im getting SA and IO voltage of 1.35 and 1.3 which is adding a decent amount to the temps as i've just learned after loading BIOS default and not enabling XMP, 5-7C difference with XMP off. When i was stressing 4.8ghz 1.3v with XMP i was hitting 79C. Don't want to push it over 80C is all, had i not delidded it'd be well over 80C.
> 
> I'm using a 212 evo for a cooler, thinking of getting NH-D15 that should drop me 10C under load. Mobo is a MSI Z270 Gaming M3, RAM is G.Skill 32GB 16GBx2 3200Mhz CL14 Ripjaws V.
> 
> I have 0 issues running the chip at 1.25v 4.8ghz and doing something like the x264 test, doesn't BSOD, but when i tried Prime95 i immediately got errors. Ran memtest86 and got 5 errors a few minutes in. Dropped OC to 4.5ghz and ran memtest again and after taking an hour to do 1 pass it didn't get any errors after running all the tests.
> 
> Now what i've done was reset myself to default, no XMP and just set 4.8ghz. 1 minute into Prime95 and i got an error. Dialed it down to 4.7Ghz and no errors at least not that i know of i only let it run a few minutes just to see if i'd immediately catch an error. Same was the case at 4.7ghz when i had XMP on. CPU really doesn't like 4.8Ghz. At 1.3v 4.8ghz with XMP it took Prime almost an hour to get an error, i reckon 1.31v would maybe get it error free, but the problem i'm beginning to think is solely with the IMC, its just really poor. 32GB is also stressing it more so and i'd probably get away with a better OC if i was using a 16GB kit. It's really unfortunate because otherwise i think its a pretty good chip, just the IMC is pretty poor and needs a lot of voltage to run a high cpu clock with a high memory clock.


Your temps rise using XMP because MSI boards change PLL OC Voltage from 1.2V to 1.3V. Set it manually to 1.2v at bios.
SA and IO feels a bit high too. Leave your CPU at stock, set ram to the right frequency and latency, then set SA to 1.25V and IO to 1.2V. Test with HCL Memtest till 500%. If no errors, you can use those voltages.

Deliding the CPU and getting a better cooler like the Nh-d15 will greatly drop the temps, which will improve stability and maybe you can go over that 4.8ghz.


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> Your temps rise using XMP because MSI boards change PLL OC Voltage from 1.2V to 1.3V. Set it manually to 1.2v at bios.
> SA and IO feels a bit high too. Leave your CPU at stock, set ram to the right frequency and latency, then set SA to 1.25V and IO to 1.2V. Test with HCL Memtest till 500%. If no errors, you can use those voltages.
> 
> Deliding the CPU and getting a better cooler like the Nh-d15 will greatly drop the temps, which will improve stability and maybe you can go over that 4.8ghz.


I'm already delidded, i edited my original post, check the edit for my results with 1 stick installed for 16gb mem. I tried playing with the SA and IO voltages manually already, made no difference once i hit 4.8ghz, it just wanted more vcore to avoid errors. Running 1 stick of 16GB no problem at 4.8ghz. Will push for 5ghz provided i can stay under 80C and will see what happens with just the 1 stick installed.


----------



## Malinkadink

5ghz 1.35v no problems now with just 16gb. TDP is only reaching 70W under full load because im running the 1 stick which explains why temps are 56C. Once i get a 16gb kit and get back on dual channel i should see temps go over 70C, probably even 80C, but i'll be ordering the Noctua cooler to help alleviate that. I also set the SA and IO voltages manually. Not sure why XMP goes crazy and puts them both over 1.3v. I have them at 1.2 and 1.15 and im not getting any errors in Prime or any other stability issues. Once im on the 16GB kit i'll play around with the core voltage and see just how low it can go at 5ghz, for now i'll leave it at 1.35v since it just works.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I don't think you will need to replace the whole board, I don't know about your country but here in Australia and many other countries I suspect you can get the CPU socket replaced at a cost of about $100, much cheaper option. Usually the board is tested after a socket replacement so no potential issue there, it just means being without your P.C for a while.


My board costs around $148. The repair costs would be 2/3 of the price or even more with shipping costs. Anyhow, would these boards offer anything more in terms of overclocking the the Asus Prime Z270-K or just other unnecessary extras like rgb lighting, better soundcard?

PRIME Z270-K (DIGI+ VRM: 7 Phase digital power design)
TUF Z270 MARK 2 (4 +2 Digital Phase Power Design)
PRIME Z270-A (DIGI+ VRM: 8 Phase digital power design)
ROG STRIX Z270H (DIGI+ VRM, no mention about phases)
ROG STRIX Z270F (DIGI+ VRM, no mention about phases)

When testing if the board and CPU if it posts, can I skip the thermal compound or even mounting the cooler or even those couple of seconds would result in too much heat?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> My board costs around $148. The repair costs would be 2/3 of the price or even more with shipping costs. Anyhow, would these boards offer anything more in terms of overclocking the the Asus Prime Z270-K or just other unnecessary extras like rgb lighting, better soundcard?
> 
> PRIME Z270-K (DIGI+ VRM: 7 Phase digital power design)
> TUF Z270 MARK 2 (4 +2 Digital Phase Power Design)
> PRIME Z270-A (DIGI+ VRM: 8 Phase digital power design)
> ROG STRIX Z270H (DIGI+ VRM, no mention about phases)
> ROG STRIX Z270F (DIGI+ VRM, no mention about phases)
> 
> When testing if the board and CPU if it posts, can I skip the thermal compound or even mounting the cooler or even those couple of seconds would result in too much heat?


To be sure I would mount an Intel box cooler to simply test if the boards posts, I don't think heat would be an issue but better safe than sorry. Most boards seem to overlook pretty much the same the main difference being the extras and features you mentioned as well as the fact that some boards handle higher speed memory better than others. Ultimately it comes down to your budget and what it important in terms of features for you. When I mentioned replacing the socket on your board that was $100AU which is about $75US so half the cost of your existing board.


----------



## dirtyred

I don't have a stock cooler but I'll mount the Arctic Freezer i32 without or just a tiny dot of thermal compound for a quick check.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I don't have a stock cooler but I'll mount the Arctic Freezer i32 without or just a tiny dot of thermal compound for a quick check.


With thermal paste less is usually better.


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> With thermal paste less is usually better.


Wrong, better a bit too much than too little.


----------



## briank

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Wrong, better a bit too much than too little.


Can you back that up with a real world example? I've found its almost difficult to put too little.


----------



## Vipu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *briank*
> 
> Can you back that up with a real world example? I've found its almost difficult to put too little.


Not really the best and deepest test maybe but: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2MEAnZ3swQ

Edit: I might be very wrong I know and I should have not said "wrong".
Im not any master overclocker myself but I havent seen any REAL test with different methods like that so thats why.

Dont hit me!


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Wrong, better a bit too much than too little.


Correct me if Im wrong but thermal paste is only there to fill the microscopic pitts that exist in the Intel heat spreader which is why some members lap their CPU heat spreader to remove those pitts and make the surface more thermally efficient by making it very smooth. My personal experience is that too much thermal paste has the opposite effect to what you are trying to achieve which is optimal heat transfer away from the die, a small amount about the size of a grain of rice vertically along the die works for me. Im not interested in getting into an argument about this each to their own.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Wrong, better a bit too much than too little.


couldn't disagree more

we're trying to fill out (getting rid off) the air trapped between 2 surfaces in the smaller imperfections

these days coolers have very even, sometimes even polished surfaces and not deep ridges

kaby lakes IHS is also very even and perfect (there's like no convex/concave
at all)
gonna link this again
http://www.overclock.net/t/1491876/ways-to-better-cooling-airflow-cooler-fan-data





the manual for my liquid metal (Phobya) also says the more perfect the 2 surface the less should be used
as thin as having the copper shimmer through even


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> My board costs around $148. The repair costs would be 2/3 of the price or even more with shipping costs. Anyhow, would these boards offer anything more in terms of overclocking the the Asus Prime Z270-K or just other unnecessary extras like rgb lighting, better soundcard?
> 
> PRIME Z270-K (DIGI+ VRM: 7 Phase digital power design)
> TUF Z270 MARK 2 (4 +2 Digital Phase Power Design)
> PRIME Z270-A (DIGI+ VRM: 8 Phase digital power design)
> ROG STRIX Z270H (DIGI+ VRM, no mention about phases)
> ROG STRIX Z270F (DIGI+ VRM, no mention about phases)
> 
> When testing if the board and CPU if it posts, can I skip the thermal compound or even mounting the cooler or even those couple of seconds would result in too much heat?


many folks would not call a better sound system unnecessary. If you can afford it (and actually need to after fixing the socket yourself) get the ROG series board of your choice. If you are looking at the strix... look twice at the Apex.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I don't have a stock cooler but I'll mount the Arctic Freezer i32 without or just a tiny dot of thermal compound for a quick check.


DO NOT start the cpu with no cooler. KBL will likely over temp during POST
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Wrong, better a bit too much than too little.


nope.. wrong, better just right than either. but too much is worse than too little. The tim it there to fill micro imperfections in the contact surfaces, not to lubricate the surface.


----------



## dirtyred

Woohoo! Spent an hour bending pins with a tiny 1.4 mm screwdriver, a needle and a 50 mm camera lens reversed and used as a macro lens. My eyes hurt, would like to scratch them out. But at least managed to power on the PC and get a BIOS error to because of CPU fan is not attached and boot device is not selected (did a BIOS reset). Never been so happy because of an error!

Thank you everybody for the technical and moral support! Didn't needed the rakia before but I'll have one now as I'm still shaking. Will do some stability test and see how it goes.

Thermal compound quantity seems to give 1-2 degrees difference so it doesn't really matter how little or how much in my book (but what do I know). Well, I definetly applied too much as it got even on the socket's edge. But probably my temps were 2 degrees higher than in the best case scenario, which is close nothing. I've read so many topics and watched so many videos about this but none of them gave an exact answer as how much is the perfect amount. It also depends on the cooler's contact area so it's a really hard to tell the amount needed. In my case I've found out that the best is to apply a thin strip on each of the four heatpipes to get the best spread.


----------



## ducegt

Woohoo! I hope it's okay.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Not really the best and deepest test maybe but: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2MEAnZ3swQ
> 
> Edit: I might be very wrong I know and I should have not said "wrong".
> Im not any master overclocker myself but I havent seen any REAL test with different methods like that so thats why.
> 
> Dont hit me!


When in doubt....mumble


----------



## Jpmboy

I probably swap out cpus a dozen times (or more) a month on 2 or more MBs. A small pea size glob of tim in the center of the IHS (gelid ex, TGK, NT-H1) and radial tightening always give a nice clean application. The guy in that video is using waaay too much TIM.


----------



## dirtyred

Reporting that my 7700K passed a 15 min 4 GB ram RealBench stress test. Overclocked to 4.6 GHz with 1.22 Vcore. Max temperatures per core: 82/85/80/85 °C but TIM wasn't applied properly with only the tiniest amount and neither was the cooler mounted perfectly (screws not tightened perfectly equal), only just for a quick test.

Btw, how do I know what's the perfect amount of pressure (as how much tightening needed)? I first tighen all 4 corners with no down pressure (just the weight of the screwdriver) until it jumps out of the screw's head. Then I tighten the four screws half a turn in every corner until my screwdriver rotates out or the screw's X (Philips) groove (don't know the definition in english) while applying small-medium amount of down pressure by holding the screwdriver with only 2 fingers.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Reporting that my 7700K passed a 15 min 4 GB ram RealBench stress test. Overclocked to 4.6 GHz with 1.22 Vcore. Max temperatures per core: 82/85/80/85 °C but TIM wasn't applied properly with only the tiniest amount and neither was the cooler mounted perfectly (screws not tightened perfectly equal), only just for a quick test.
> 
> Btw, how do I know what's the perfect amount of pressure (as how much tightening needed)? I first tighen all 4 corners with no down pressure (just the weight of the screwdriver) until it jumps out of the screw's head. Then I tighten the four screws half a turn in every corner until my screwdriver rotates out or the screw's X (Philips) groove (don't know the definition in english) while applying small-medium amount of down pressure by holding the screwdriver with only 2 fingers.


Good Job! good news... regarding the block mount, these are fairly delicate devices (no lug wrench needed







). Main thnig is to tighten down in a pattern that spreads the tim out evenly. There should not be any "run-out" past the top of the IHS. If there is, too much tim was used.


----------



## SweWiking

Any one got an idea whats the highest "okay" volt to run your ddr4 mem at ? I got some corsair 3200mhz ddr4 mem, it will however run at 3600mhz at 1.4v. Altho I have no clue if 1.4v is considered okay for 24/7 use ?


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> Any one got an idea whats the highest "okay" volt to run your ddr4 mem at ? I got some corsair 3200mhz ddr4 mem, it will however run at 3600mhz at 1.4v. Altho I have no clue if 1.4v is considered okay for 24/7 use ?


1.5V is the max for ddr4. Stay below 1.45V and you should be okay. Also, try to check your RAM temp somehow, like touching the heatspreader or with a laser thermometer, i think the max temp for rams is 80ºC.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> 1.5V is the max for ddr4. Stay below 1.45V and you should be okay. Also, try to check your RAM temp somehow, like touching the heatspreader or with a laser thermometer, i think the max temp for rams is 80ºC.


HWmonitor will shows the RAM temperature.


----------



## Zacw

What are peoples temperatures around the 1.35 volt mark ?

I have a full custom waterloop, with 600 mm worth of rad with EK Vardar fans and 5GHZ while stable at 1.35 v I overheated at 100 degrees on Asus Real bench. I am super confused because my last build all I had was a 240mm radiator for a single cpu (4670k) and at 1.35 v it never went on 60 degree. I have no idea why this much rad can't seem to keep my CPU cool? I know people are saying it's a hot processor but i'm feeling like I must have put too much thermal paste on? but even so I feel like my temps are about 30 degrees too high for my loop setup.


----------



## dirtyred

In the Prime95 specifics these are the settings:



With 4 threads the total CPU usage is around 54% while with 8 is maxes out all 8 logical cores.

Is there any reason to use only 4 threads instead of 8?


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zacw*
> 
> What are peoples temperatures around the 1.35 volt mark ?
> 
> I have a full custom waterloop, with 600 mm worth of rad with EK Vardar fans and 5GHZ while stable at 1.35 v I overheated at 100 degrees on Asus Real bench. I am super confused because my last build all I had was a 240mm radiator for a single cpu (4670k) and at 1.35 v it never went on 60 degree. I have no idea why this much rad can't seem to keep my CPU cool? I know people are saying it's a hot processor but i'm feeling like I must have put too much thermal paste on? but even so I feel like my temps are about 30 degrees too high for my loop setup.


Delid your cpu.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zacw*
> 
> What are peoples temperatures around the 1.35 volt mark ?
> 
> I have a full custom waterloop, with 600 mm worth of rad with EK Vardar fans and 5GHZ while stable at 1.35 v I overheated at 100 degrees on Asus Real bench. I am super confused because my last build all I had was a 240mm radiator for a single cpu (4670k) and at 1.35 v it never went on 60 degree. I have no idea why this much rad can't seem to keep my CPU cool? I know people are saying it's a hot processor but i'm feeling like I must have put too much thermal paste on? but even so I feel like my temps are about 30 degrees too high for my loop setup.


I dont beleve its the overuse of the compaund....

Its the cpu you've got.

Im also on water 280+120 mm rad. I have tested at least 4 7700k cpu's . And yes 2 of them (first one and other one) were giving me 100c with no delliding. The other ones were in a range of 80c . The one that i kept was on even lower temps while stress.
Assuming you have a custom loop you know how to mount things right... i would say grab another cpu from any store close to you , put it in and see the temps... if its same then you maybe got unlucky again or there is something wrong with what you do ( mb some huge air bubles in rads idkn) . Aaandd, You can always return it









Btw , what motherboard you use?
Any water sensor in your loop?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> Delid your cpu.


Even if he dellids it , he can expect like 20c drop. So he would get 80c in real bench? On 600mm loop. Na... i would not go for it


----------



## Zacw

Yeah, well at the moment one of my fans on my front mounted rad can't reach any Mobo headers but I have an order arriving today with extenders for it. I wonder if that alone could be contributing to much higher temps? And yeah I didn't think I mucked up the thermal paste, it would be such a pain to take the CPU off to check but I might have to. I was trying to avoid delidding this CPU as I am trying to sell the build. I'm okay with hot temps but it seems my entire loop once it gets to 90 degrees it just keeps heating up to the point that I can't cool it if that makes sense? I'm hoping getting my last fan working will help a bit. I just want 80 degrees so a 10 degree drop would be good.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zacw*
> 
> Yeah, well at the moment one of my fans on my front mounted rad can't reach any Mobo headers but I have an order arriving today with extenders for it. I wonder if that alone could be contributing to much higher temps? And yeah I didn't think I mucked up the thermal paste, it would be such a pain to take the CPU off to check but I might have to. I was trying to avoid delidding this CPU as I am trying to sell the build. I'm okay with hot temps but it seems my entire loop once it gets to 90 degrees it just keeps heating up to the point that I can't cool it if that makes sense? I'm hoping getting my last fan working will help a bit. I just want 80 degrees so a 10 degree drop would be good.


Ive got 4 fans cooling my rads if i disable one , you think my temps will get like 20c higher?








Its not the fan and not the amount of compaund used.

What motherboard do you use?
Any water sensor in the loop?


----------



## Caos

Hello, I was testing 4.9 with vcore 1.3, one hour of BF1 gives me this results .. the chip is delid.

What do you think?


----------



## Zacw

Okay, I think I am going to go and delid the processor today. I am fine with actual delidding part I am concerned regarding the re glueing or lack there of. Do most people re glue it?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zacw*
> 
> Okay, I think I am going to go and delid the processor today. I am fine with actual delidding part I am concerned regarding the re glueing or lack there of. Do most people re glue it?


4 small amounts on each corner is all I did. Done so, so thatsome of the glue is on the IHS's side and none is directly under it


----------



## Spiriva

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zacw*
> 
> Okay, I think I am going to go and delid the processor today. I am fine with actual delidding part I am concerned regarding the re glueing or lack there of. Do most people re glue it?


I delided both a 6700k and a 7700k and didnt use any glue on either of them. Id just put the cpu back in the socket, put the lid back on and let the preassure from the socket lock hold the lid in place. Its absolute fine.


----------



## Zacw

Well the deed is done, and on a test bench it booted so I haven't killed it. I have to say scariest thing in my life when I heard the giant crack of the lid coming off. Anyway Once i get the system all back together and run a leak test I guess we will find out how beneficial it was for my chip in particular. I'm hoping it was worth it


----------



## becks

@Jpmboy

Do you mind telling me what addon / gadget you are using here...



Its not hwinfo... or anything known to me..
Looks like the old Everest gadget...

Pretty please


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Caos*
> 
> Hello, I was testing 4.9 with vcore 1.3, one hour of BF1 gives me this results .. the chip is delid.
> 
> What do you think?


Hello

which cooler you have there ? Im asking as my 7700k isn't delided and at 5Ghz @1.28v my temp around 66c... my cooler is Corsair H105..


----------



## Caos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> Hello
> 
> which cooler you have there ? Im asking as my 7700k isn't delided and at 5Ghz @1.28v my temp around 66c... my cooler is Corsair H105..


Hello, I have a swiftech h220x2 prestige, you have very good temperatures without delid, mine without delid reached 80ºC


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> @Jpmboy
> 
> Do you mind telling me what addon / gadget you are using here...
> 
> 
> 
> Its not hwinfo... or anything known to me..
> Looks like the old Everest gadget...
> 
> Pretty please


AID64 OSD.


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Caos*
> 
> Hello, I have a swiftech h220x2 prestige, you have very good temperatures without delid, mine without delid reached 80ºC


Your cooler is better than mine, which thermal paste under the IHS ?

Here is my Setup



The Fans at 1000Rpm under load... cpu at 5Ghz 1.28v & 1.15v on the SA and IO.. DDR4 at 3333mhz CL16 @1.40v.. cache still stock ( for now ).. the board is MSI Gaming Pro Carbon..





@Jpmboy

What you think ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> Your cooler is better than mine, which thermal paste under the IHS ?
> 
> Here is my Setup
> 
> 
> 
> The Fans at 1000Rpm under load... cpu at 5Ghz 1.28v & 1.15v on the SA and IO.. DDR4 at 3333mhz CL16 @1.40v.. cache still stock ( for now ).. the board is MSI Gaming Pro Carbon..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @Jpmboy
> 
> What you think ?


Looks good to me. Any realbench or x264 runs? I'd set 1.425V vdimm and CR1.


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Looks good to me. Any realbench or x264 runs? I'd set 1.425V vdimm and CR1.


For sure RB loop for 1h ( Video encoding ) at same voltage.. i will test RB again after pushing the cache today.. also will try the CR1











I'm thinking about new memory kit..

Gskill Tz 3200C14 or 3600 C16 ? those from Amazon and the price is +30$ than NewEgg price..

no way to order from NewEgg here


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> For sure RB loop for 1h ( Video encoding ) at same voltage.. i will test RB again after pushing the cache today.. also will try the CR1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm thinking about new memory kit..
> 
> Gskill Tz 3200C14 or 3600 C16 ? those from Amazon and the price is +30$ than NewEgg price..
> 
> no way to order from NewEgg here


if you can find the 3600c15 kit, grab it. Otherwise the 3600c16 kit is a good one and can clock higher. (the 3600c15 kit is probably the best bin currently offered... unless you go with the 4266c19 kit







)


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you can find the 3600c15 kit, grab it. Otherwise the 3600c16 kit is a good one and can clock higher. (the 3600c15 kit is probably the best bin currently offered... unless you go with the 4266c19 kit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Got it

this one ?

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232306&cm_re=gskill_trident_z_3600mhz-_-20-232-306-_-Product


----------



## dirtyred

Could somebody explain it to me how could I monitor thermal power? I thought it should be less then the CPU package power, which is around 83 W even overclocked and under load using Prime95 4 threads, FFT 8k in-place.


----------



## FedericoUY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> Got it
> 
> this one ?
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232306&cm_re=gskill_trident_z_3600mhz-_-20-232-306-_-Product


That's the kit. Be sure that you will be able to RMA it in case of failure. There have been several of this kits (inluding my first one), that came with a stick DOA... Just to let you know. Otherwise if you get a good one, is awesome.

EDIT: Read the newegg reviews and you'll see what I'm talking about...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> Got it
> 
> this one ?
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232306&cm_re=gskill_trident_z_3600mhz-_-20-232-306-_-Product


yes. I've had two, both were outstanding. (benching 4000c12, and 24/7 3866c16)


----------



## FedericoUY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes. I've had two, both were outstanding. (benching 4000c12, and 24/7 3866c16)


Votages you used on those 2 speeds? vram, io and sa?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedericoUY*
> 
> Votages you used on those 2 speeds? vram, io and sa?


4000c12 @ 1.9V, 1.3, 1.3875V; [email protected], 1.2, 1.3V, resp. (1.45V if you don't tightenup secondaries and RTL / IOL).


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes. I've had two, both were outstanding. (benching 4000c12, and 24/7 3866c16)


OMG that's insane


----------



## Duality92

If I'm to run up to 1.5v on my DRAM for my 7700K, what other voltages do I need to increase? This would be on a Gigabyte board.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> OMG that's insane




.... DO NOT run 1.9V on your ram sticks.


----------



## rt123

Yes, run 2.1V instead.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Yes, run 2.1V instead.


contributing to delinquency.









get your TXFp yet?


----------



## rt123

Its fun breaking rules.









TXFp will be here on Tuesday, tracking shows that it left SAINT PAUL, MN at 6:43AM today. Opted for free shipping since spent too much on HW recently, need to pace myself. Have ~15 CPUs at home right now







. Mostly i7s, few i3s & a couple Ryzen. Need to sell stuff I don't need.

But, I will keep an eye out for results from you next morning guys & try not to feel jealous.


----------



## FedericoUY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 
> 
> .... DO NOT run 1.9V on your ram sticks.


Only b-dies can handle those voltages right?
Really nice results on that pic, was there chilled water chilling your cpu right? 64° is insanely low for regular water...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> AID64 OSD.


Essential piece of software for anyone into overclocking


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> AID64 OSD.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Essential piece of software for anyone into overclocking


Yes and Yes... that is why I was looking so desperately into it...

I was pretty close saying it resembles the old Everest on screen gadget thingy as Everest is now Aida64

+rep for the hint.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Yes and Yes... that is why I was looking so desperately into it...
> 
> I was pretty close saying it resembles the old Everest on screen gadget thingy as Everest is now Aida64
> 
> +rep for the hint.


No problem I use the Aida 64 sidebar gadget on Windows 10 which is highly customisable see below enjoy :thumb


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Have ~15 CPUs at home right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Mostly i7s, few i3s & a couple Ryzen. Need to sell stuff I don't need.
> 
> But, I will keep an eye out for results from you next morning guys & try not to feel jealous.


I'm already jealous. 15?! Where dafuq are you working?! I always wondered how some overclockers can afford expensive hardware and just play with them. If something fails, they get a new one... And I'm just sitting here and being happy that finally after 10 years I've got a desktop again. Before that I had an AMD 64 3000+ and before that two AMD Athlons. Burned one, promised myself never OC again as my parents did not want to finance that bull*****. Did not even let me open the case so I had to be sneaky.


----------



## Caos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Caos*
> 
> Hello, I was testing 4.9 with vcore 1.3, one hour of BF1 gives me this results .. the chip is delid.
> 
> What do you think?


@ Jpmboy

What do you think?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Its fun breaking rules.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TXFp will be here on Tuesday, tracking shows that it left SAINT PAUL, MN at 6:43AM today. Opted for free shipping since spent too much on HW recently, need to pace myself. Have ~15 CPUs at home right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Mostly i7s, few i3s & a couple Ryzen. Need to sell stuff I don't need.
> 
> But, I will keep an eye out for results from you next morning guys & try not to feel jealous.


it's here and installed. new driver loading...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedericoUY*
> 
> Only b-dies can handle those voltages right?
> Really nice results on that pic, was there chilled water chilling your cpu right? 64° is insanely low for regular water...


not necessarily. other ICs can too. rt123 would know which. 8MFR etc).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Essential piece of software for anyone into overclocking


I use it on every rig.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I'm already jealous. 15?! Where dafuq are you working?! I always wondered how some overclockers can afford expensive hardware and just play with them. If something fails, they get a new one... And I'm just sitting here and being happy that finally after 10 years I've got a desktop again. Before that I had an AMD 64 3000+ and before that two AMD Athlons. Burned one, promised myself never OC again as my parents did not want to finance that bull*****. Did not even let me open the case so I had to be sneaky.


He's just at 15 right now... crazy.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I'm already jealous. 15?! Where dafuq are you working?! I always wondered how some overclockers can afford expensive hardware and just play with them. If something fails, they get a new one... And I'm just sitting here and being happy that finally after 10 years I've got a desktop again. Before that I had an AMD 64 3000+ and before that two AMD Athlons. Burned one, promised myself never OC again as my parents did not want to finance that bull*****. Did not even let me open the case so I had to be sneaky.


Umnn, trust me, I make decent money, but I am not rich. Its just that I am obsessed with overclocking, so I spend ALL of my money on it. Money that other people would spend on clothes, dinners, drinking, etc. And I don't intend to keep all these CPUs, I've just gathered this many because I've been slacking on selling (getting on it soon). Ideally I would only have 2 of each ones that I am currently interested in.

The good overclockers rarely, I mean rarely kill stuff. Accidents do happen, but if you have taken proper care of hardware, you can get it RMAed. And yes there are some rich people with DEEP pockets in the game. Just gotta learn to be content & slowly try to get there. My parent have only bought me one Pentium D desktop, everything else, I paid for by working myself.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedericoUY*
> 
> Only b-dies can handle those voltages right?
> Really nice results on that pic, was there chilled water chilling your cpu right? 64° is insanely low for regular water...


All most all B-die can take 2.1V, but not all will do 4000C12-12-12. Also you don't want to feed more than 1.55V for 24/7 use. Those high volts are only for benching for a few hours at a time. If you ran them 24/7 at those volts, they'd probably degrade. Not to mention those settings are not really stable.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's here and installed. new driver loading...


OMG.










Results NOW.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> He's just at 15 right now... crazy.












I don't keep old stuff. Can't afford to, maybe someday. Only got Z270 & X370 right now.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Umnn, trust me, I make decent money, but I am not rich. Its just that I am obsessed with overclocking, so I spend ALL of my money on it. Money that other people would spend on clothes, dinners, drinking, etc. And I don't intend to keep all these CPUs, I've just gathered this many because I've been slacking on selling (getting on it soon). Ideally I would only have 2 of each ones that I am currently interested in.
> 
> The good overclockers rarely, I mean rarely kill stuff. Accidents do happen, but if you have taken proper care of hardware, you can get it RMAed. And yes there are some rich people with DEEP pockets in the game. Just gotta learn to be content & slowly try to get there. My parent have only bought me one Pentium D desktop, everything else, I paid for by working myself.
> All most all B-die can take 2.1V, but not all will do 4000C12-12-12. Also you don't want to feed more than 1.55V for 24/7 use. Those high volts are only for benching for a few hours at a time. If you ran them 24/7 at those volts, they'd probably degrade. Not to mention those settings are not really stable.
> OMG.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Results NOW.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't keep old stuff. Can't afford to, maybe someday. Only got Z270 & X370 right now.


yesssir

http://www.overclock.net/t/1627390/2017-nvidia-titan-xp-owners-thread/100_20#post_25993752


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Umnn, trust me, I make decent money, but I am not rich. Its just that I am obsessed with overclocking, so I spend ALL of my money on it. Money that other people would spend on clothes, dinners, drinking, etc. And I don't intend to keep all these CPUs, I've just gathered this many because I've been slacking on selling (getting on it soon). Ideally I would only have 2 of each ones that I am currently interested in.
> 
> The good overclockers rarely, I mean rarely kill stuff. Accidents do happen, but if you have taken proper care of hardware, you can get it RMAed. And yes there are some rich people with DEEP pockets in the game. Just gotta learn to be content & slowly try to get there. My parent have only bought me one Pentium D desktop, everything else, I paid for by working myself.


My rig costed 3 months of my salary ($1300) so it's not that I don't have deep pockets. I don't have pockets at all.









I guess I wasn't a good overclocker back then but it was pretty much trial and error. Had no internet and my only source of information was from magazines and when occasionally got near the internet for half an hour. So I played around with the jumpers on the motherboard and see if it even posts. Once it didn't. Athlon got fried. Promises myself that no more OC. Few months later another Athlon fried. Promised myself never-ever again. And now here I am with a 7700K.









Btw, I reset my settings to default to check some temperatures and voltages.

*Prime95 (26.6) in-place large FFTs on 8 threads after 10 minutes:*
Vcore: 1.152 - 1.168 V (average 1.156 V)
Core VID: 1.194 V
Clock: 4400 MHz
Package power: 79 W
IA Cores power: 66.5 W
Core Max: 73 °C (Arctic Freezer i32 and 2 intake fans on 100%, room ambient around 22 °C)

*With Intel XTU:*
Vcore: 1.168 - 1.184 V (average 1.170 V)
Core VID: 1.198 V
Core Max: 53-72 °C (average 62 °C)

How would you rate this chip? Would like to know what to expect with a much better cooler (Phanteks, Noctua, Thermalright).


----------



## rt123

I'm sorry, that sucks.









I wasn't overclocking at all till Haswell (Z87) & by that time I had plenty of guides I could lookup on the internet & also this awesome forum. But I've had my blunders.

As for rating the chip, I can't do with much with that info. My testing criteria is different.

I test with 5Ghz core, 4.6 Uncore, RAM auto (2133), LLC5, C-states & speedstep off. Then set a manual Vcore in BIOS (start at 1.3V) & find the lowest Vcore for 2 runs of Cinebench R15.

Avg chips need 1.28-1.32V.
Good ones need 1.24-1.28V.
Golden 1.23V or less, lower is better ofcourse.
Bad ones need >1.32V.

Test with Corsair H100i, non delidded chip, ambient temp ~22C. If the chip is good, then I push for 5.1 & 5.2 R15 if possible.

I don't do 24/7 stress testing unless I'm selling a chip. I don't game & a laptop is good enough for my other needs. Desktop only for OC. For the ones that I have tested, I use realbench 1 hour 16GB RAM, same settings as above just RAM at XMP, good ones do 5G stable, 5.1 is great, 5.2 is ultra rare. You'll probably hit a temp limit around 1.35-1.38V even with delidded chips.


----------



## Vipu

What should I set LCC and c-states at on 7700k?
I dont really know anything about those so...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> What should I set LCC and c-states at on 7700k?
> I dont really know anything about those so...


you need to fill out rig builder so folks know what MB and gear you are asking about. Without knowing that, don't take any advice.


----------



## dirtyred

LLC depends on your Vcore settings. Set LLC on a level that will gives the same amount (or really close) of Vcore under full CPU load that you've set in the BIOS. On Asus good starting point would be LLC 3-5. Level 6 and especially 7 will overshoot the Vcore quite a bit. Leave C-States on default, no need to change them.


----------



## Zacw

Hey guys, I know I should probably start a forum post somewhere else regarding this topic. However I figured a few of you guys who have delidded have likely used a liquid metal. My question is simple, I have Thermal grissly conductonaut however in all the guides I keep seeing everybody spreads the metal right to the edge of the CPU. Wouldn't this cause a spill over when you apply pressure? and being more conductive then regular thermal paste this could be lethal if it came into contact with something bad? It just looks sketchy with people spreading to the edges? or does it not spill over when you apply pressure?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> LLC depends on your Vcore settings. Set LLC on a level that will gives the same amount (or really close) of Vcore under full CPU load that you've set in the BIOS. On Asus good starting point would be LLC 3-5. Level 6 and especially 7 will overshoot the Vcore quite a bit. Leave C-States on default, no need to change them.


fully defeating vdroop with LLC is not necessarily the best conditions for a 24/7 cpu OC. Droop is there for a specific reason - which you will not detect/notice with any OS-based. Vdroop is a friend to your cpu.


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> What should I set LCC and c-states at on 7700k?
> I dont really know anything about those so...


Enhanced Cstate (C1E) is CPU controlled clock speed
The other C states are more aggressive and turn off cores, cut voltage etc. Saves a few more watts but can increase (dpc) latency and takes longer to get back from idle to full working state.
Speedstep is Windows controlled clock speeds through power plan.

With C1E and speedstep both enabled, C1E overrides speedstep.

So you want either one or the other.

I personally solely use speedstep and turn off anything else. This way you can have maximum control over your CPU








With this you can try and reduce offset voltage so your cpu also runs lower voltages on all non-turbo multipliers. I run at -75mv so idle voltage is around 0.576v


----------



## FedericoUY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> I personally solely use speedstep and turn off anything else. This way you can have maximum control over your CPU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With this you can try and reduce offset voltage so your cpu also runs lower voltages on all non-turbo multipliers. I run at -75mv so idle voltage is around 0.576v


Than won't affect your OC capability right?


----------



## seven7thirty30

New build 24/7 overclock:

*Username*: seven7thirty30
*CPU Model*: i7-7700K
*Base Clock*: 100
*Core Multiplier*: 50
*Core Frequency*: 5.0
*Cache Frequency*: 4.6
*Vcore in UEFI*: 1.4
*Vcore*: 1.44
*FCLK*: 1000
*Cooling Solution*: Delidded, Custom Loop
*Stability Test*: Realbench 2.43 8-hour

*Batch Number*: Malaysia L641G184
*Ram Speed*: 3600 (16-16-16-36)
*Ram Voltage*: 1.35
*VCCIO*: 1.225
*VCCSA*: 1.25
*Motherboard*: Z270 Asus Maximus IX Extreme
*LLC Setting*: 8
*Misc Comments*: No AVX offset


----------



## dirtyred

7700K with stock default Asus settings (or overclocked) does not crash under Prime95 or XTU after 10-15 minutes while using RealBench 2.44 or 2.54 Luxmark crashes after 2 minutes. But that shouldn't be CPU related as LuxMark uses GPU (OpenCL) rendering. Raising the Vcore to 1.25 V (yes, for 4.5 GHz) doesn't help at all. Meanwhile running FurMark for 15 minutes full screen with MSAA x8 doesn't crash, seems rocks solid even with my GTX 1060 OC'd to 2025 MHz GPU clock and 9400 MHz memory clock. Reaching max TDP of 116% otherwise I'd be pushing it even further.


----------



## FedericoUY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *seven7thirty30*
> 
> New build 24/7 overclock:
> 
> *Username*: seven7thirty30
> *CPU Model*: i7-7700K
> *Base Clock*: 100
> *Core Multiplier*: 50
> *Core Frequency*: 5.0
> *Cache Frequency*: 4.6
> *Vcore in UEFI*: 1.4
> *Vcore*: 1.44
> *FCLK*: 1000
> *Cooling Solution*: Delidded, Custom Loop
> *Stability Test*: Realbench 2.43 8-hour
> 
> *Batch Number*: Malaysia L641G184
> *Ram Speed*: 3600 (16-16-16-36)
> *Ram Voltage*: 1.35
> *VCCIO*: 1.225
> *VCCSA*: 1.25
> *Motherboard*: Z270 Asus Maximus IX Extreme
> *LLC Setting*: 8
> *Misc Comments*: No AVX offset


That cpu is reaching 1.52, and avg'ing on 1.48v.. That seems too high!


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Duality92*
> 
> If I'm to run up to 1.5v on my DRAM for my 7700K, what other voltages do I need to increase? This would be on a Gigabyte board.


I don't think this has been answered yet

gonna say none right now

if you need more stability for the RAM (as in the memory controller) you can dabble with VCCIO, however as this setting is about signal strength you could apply to much (or too little)
trying to find a golden middle path

Quote:


> CPU VCCIO and CPU System Agent voltages are found in the Extreme Tweaker page (scroll down to the bottom of the page to find them). These two voltages are sensitive to changes because they are related to signaling. Applying too much voltage can cause instability


hint:
read Kaby Lake OC guide in Jpmboy's sig
while it is for Asus, its still worth a read even with having a different manufacturer


----------



## seven7thirty30

Yeah, temps peaked at 80C. I lowered the VCore to 1.38 and it's stable. MOBO sensors show VCore Max: 1.48 Average 1.42. I'll try to get it stable at lower settings.


----------



## dirtyred

Yep. LLC on 8 seems to be way too high level. Would drop it to 5-6 to see if it's still stable or drop the voltage a bit. Would not call it a 24/7 build unless you want to set your house on fire. Maybe set an AVX offset as it's not used in games only in rendering and a few other softwares but there aren't many. AVX instructions are faster anyways so even at lower clock speed it gets the job done faster.


----------



## stryfetew

I have a strange situation going on that maybe you guys can give insight on. Started on this new build 7700K + EVGA Z270 Classified K, Corsair Dominator Platinum Special Edition memory (3200mhz 32gb).

I started the OC slow at 45, voltage on adaptive no offset works fine bump to 46 same thing no problems. When I get to 4.7 (with 25mV offset) or higher the stress test pass without problem. BUT, the system does randomly restart for no apparent reason. I'm using the stock XMP profile on the memory, the voltages all look fine. i guess the question is, is this something related to the hardware itself or do I need to increase the voltage more to stabilize the build? I'm now running at 1.307v max on realbench doing a 4 hour test and it hasn't rebooted thus far. It's strange that the only time I've seen it reboot is when it's not doing anything, stress test run all day without issue.


----------



## dirtyred

1.3 V is way too high for 4.7 GHz (unless you have a potato chip). Would drop it to 1.25 - 1.27 V. Don't use XMP until you get a fully stable system. XMP interferes with the memory controller on the CPU and could cause instability. First stabilize your system with default 2133 MHz ram at 1.2 V and default timings (or even 1 step higher) then overclock your memory step by step until you reach 3200 MHz. See where it crashes. When it does crash or fails to POST raise the voltage from 1.2 to 1.25 or 1.3 V. At 3200 MHz you might need 1.35 V. Also tighter memory timings require more voltage to be stable.

The other source of problem could be that while it's stable under load because it has enough voltage, when the load decreases so does the voltage and somewhere between idle and full load the voltage is not enough. Check your idle voltage settings as well and go for 0.8 - 1 V.

That's all I can think of. Surely the more experienced members will correct me or give you better advices







.


----------



## stryfetew

Yeah I think that's where I'm messing up. Sorry, it's been many many years since I've done overclocking. I started with turning the XMP profile to 1 and then started the overclock. When I get home this afternoon I'll turn the XMP off and put the voltage offset back.


----------



## stryfetew

Maybe I'm also reading the voltages wrong too. the EVGA CPU-Z software is showing 1.288 to 1.307. DIMM voltage is showing 1.375 to 1.360. So many voltages to look at I don't know if I'm looking at the right thing or not.


----------



## stryfetew

HWiNFO64 on the Vcore is report 1.262 with 1.270 as max.


----------



## dirtyred

HWiNFO should report it correctly. Vcore will and should jump up and down a bit depending on CPU load. That's called Vdroop and it's normal. Reset your BIOS to defaults then SET AC and DC load line calibration to 0.01 and set LLC level on maybe 4-5. 6 and up will probably result in too much voltage compensation. After this adjust only the multiplier and Vcore on adaptive voltage until your temps are fine and your system is stable. Alternatively you could just set to fixed voltage and once you find the perfect value switch to adaptive mode to save some power. But it's all written down in the first post of this topic and it's pretty detailed even for a noob like me.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedericoUY*
> 
> Than won't affect your OC capability right?


no it won't, and avoiding phase shedding and core parking will increase performance. Basically, if you are using adaptive or offset, disable all c-states (freq and voltage will drop to idle levels). With manual override, the higher c-states will idle and then "sleep" cores but the voltage to any "awake" cores will be at the manual override. That's why it is called "override".


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *seven7thirty30*
> 
> New build 24/7 overclock:
> 
> *Username*: seven7thirty30
> *CPU Model*: i7-7700K
> *Base Clock*: 100
> *Core Multiplier*: 50
> *Core Frequency*: 5.0
> *Cache Frequency*: 4.6
> *Vcore in UEFI*: 1.4
> *Vcore*: 1.44
> *FCLK*: 1000
> *Cooling Solution*: Delidded, Custom Loop
> *Stability Test*: Realbench 2.43 8-hour
> 
> *Batch Number*: Malaysia L641G184
> *Ram Speed*: 3600 (16-16-16-36)
> *Ram Voltage*: 1.35
> *VCCIO*: 1.225
> *VCCSA*: 1.25
> *Motherboard*: Z270 Asus Maximus IX Extreme
> *LLC Setting*: 8
> *Misc Comments*: No AVX offset


Was that the stock default Vcore?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> no it won't, and avoiding phase shedding and core parking will increase performance. Basically, if you are using adaptive or offset, disable all c-states (freq and voltage will drop to idle levels). With manual override, the higher c-states will idle and then "sleep" cores but the voltage to any "awake" cores will be at the manual override. That's why it is call "override".


Why would he disable C-states on adaptive? The reason to use adaptive if to reduce power consumption. So does C-states enabled.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Was that the stock default Vcore?


Don't think that 1.4 V default Vcore would have passed QC. But hey, it's Intel who's making Kaby Lake with crappy TIM so who knows...


----------



## stryfetew

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> HWiNFO should report it correctly. Vcore will and should jump up and down a bit depending on CPU load. That's called Vdroop and it's normal. Reset your BIOS to defaults then SET AC and DC load line calibration to 0.01 and set LLC level on maybe 4-5. 6 and up will probably result in too much voltage compensation. After this adjust only the multiplier and Vcore on adaptive voltage until your temps are fine and your system is stable. Alternatively you could just set to fixed voltage and once you find the perfect value switch to adaptive mode to save some power. But it's all written down in the first post of this topic and it's pretty detailed even for a noob like me.


Yeah I've read over it a bit but not all of it in detail. The Vcore HWiNFO is reporting then is on par with what you mentioned in your first post to me. As for LLC I'll look into that haven't seen much info on the EVGA boards.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Why would he disable C-states on adaptive? The reason to use adaptive if to reduce power consumption. So does C-states enabled.
> Don't think that 1.4 V default Vcore would have passed QC. But hey, it's Intel who's making Kaby Lake with crappy TIM so who knows...


What is Kaby Lake specification VID limit?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stryfetew*
> 
> Yeah I've read over it a bit but not all of it in detail. The Vcore HWiNFO is reporting then is on par with what you mentioned in your first post to me. As for LLC I'll look into that haven't seen much info on the EVGA boards.


LLC is to compensate Vdroop. High levels result in Vboost. You have to find the sweet spot. Higher is not always better.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is Kaby Lake specification VID limit?


Don't know but considering that on average is around 1.2 V and lower on default, while some use 1.4 V to achieve 5 GHz overclock, stock clock speed and 1.4 V seems really high.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Why would he disable C-states on adaptive? The reason to use adaptive if to reduce power consumption. So does C-states enabled.
> Don't think that 1.4 V default Vcore would have passed QC. But hey, it's Intel who's making Kaby Lake with crappy TIM so who knows...


spin up from idle with adaptive + c-states is very noticeable, serioudly if cores get parked. Besides, it's redundant since the voltage is already at the base vid value with no load.. what power are you saving at that point?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> LLC is to compensate Vdroop. High levels result in Vboost. You have to find the sweet spot. Higher is not always better.
> Don't know but considering that on average is around 1.2 V and lower on default, while some use 1.4 V to achieve 5 GHz overclock, stock clock speed and 1.4 V seems really high.


What is the VID with maximum Turbo boost at 4.5GHz running prime95 using default voltage?


----------



## Inelastic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> fully defeating vdroop with LLC is not necessarily the best conditions for a 24/7 cpu OC. Droop is there for a specific reason - which you will not detect/notice with any OS-based. Vdroop is a friend to your cpu.


I found that I can lower my temps by keeping a lower LLC. My cpu runs at 4.8GHz with Vcore set at 1.21V in the bios. Under load, it runs at 1.65V with LLC 3. If I raise the LLC up to 5 so the Vcore is at 1.21V under load, then the core temps raise up by ~4C. If I try to lower the Vcore in the bios below 1.21V, the cpu becomes unstable.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is the VID with maximum Turbo boost at 4.5GHz running prime95 using default voltage?


Loaded optimized defaults in UEFI, VID is 1.194 V while Vcore is around 1.152-1.184 V but mostly around 1.168 V. Seems like it doesn't matter if using 4 or 8 threads, neither FFT size or if it's in-place in Prime95. For some reason turbo boost doesn't reach 4.5 GHz under Prime95 v26.6 or Hyper Pi. It does however in 3DMark or XTU.



Btw, I just found out after 5 hours of stress testing, rebooting, adjusting settings in UEFI and repeating the whole process over and over why is RealBench (LuxMark) crashing around the 2 minute mark. It had nothing to do with my settings. It had to do with HWiNFO and Gigabyte Xtreme Gaming Engine running. Closed HWiNFO and disabled monitoring in GXGE while keeping my GPU overclocked to 2025/9400 MHz and 15 minute stress test passed without crashing. Seems like some folks on ASUS ROG forums experienced the similar crashes.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Loaded optimized defaults in UEFI, VID is 1.194 V while Vcore is around 1.152-1.184 V but mostly around 1.168 V. Seems like it doesn't matter if using 4 or 8 threads, neither FFT size or if it's in-place in Prime95. For some reason turbo boost doesn't reach 4.5 GHz under Prime95 v26.6 or Hyper Pi. It does however in 3DMark or XTU.


Thanks for doing that test.







My VID is much higher on my i5 VID=1.283v Vcore=1.260v Max, running Prime 95 at 4.2GHz optimized default settings except multiplier.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Inelastic*
> 
> I found that I can lower my temps by keeping a lower LLC. My cpu runs at 4.8GHz with Vcore set at 1.21V in the bios. Under load, it runs at 1.65V with LLC 3. If I raise the LLC up to 5 so the Vcore is at 1.21V under load, then the core temps raise up by ~4C. If I try to lower the Vcore in the bios below 1.21V, the cpu becomes unstable.


yes, with your ASUS board, a lower number LLC is less compensation = more droop (asrock is opposite). for all but really extreme overclocking, allowing a _healthy_ amount of vdroop is beneficial for the cpu.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Thanks for doing that test.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My VID is much higher on my i5 VID=1.283v Vcore=1.260v Max, running Prime 95 at 4.2GHz optimized default settings except multiplier.


You're welcome! Keep in mind that I've let Prime95 v26.6 run only about 5-10 minutes, and checked with other settings only for about 1 minute but VID was the same. No idea if it would have changed later on, probably not. Also v26.6 is an old version, with newer ones that use AVX instructions my temps reach 90-95 degrees pretty much instantly so I don't use those. Maybe when I'll get myself a beefier cooler (hopefully soon, maybe next week) I'll do some more tests.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> You're welcome! Keep in mind that I've let Prime95 v26.6 run only about 5-10 minutes, and checked with other settings only for about 1 minute but VID was the same. No idea if it would have changed later on, probably not. Also v26.6 is an old version, with newer ones that use AVX instructions my temps reach 90-95 degrees pretty much instantly so I don't use those. Maybe when I'll get myself a beefier cooler (hopefully soon, maybe next week) I'll do some more tests.


It is very interesting that you have such a low VID. I just did a test at 4.2GHz, with Prime95 v28.10 AVX off command (CpuSupportsAVX=0) and maximum VID = 1.238v. With AVX command that I added removed from local.txt running Prime95 v28.10, it was maximum VID=1.283v. I did each test for 5 minutes. If you get a new cooler and do more tests PM me.


----------



## stryfetew

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> LLC is to compensate Vdroop. High levels result in Vboost. You have to find the sweet spot. Higher is not always better.
> Don't know but considering that on average is around 1.2 V and lower on default, while some use 1.4 V to achieve 5 GHz overclock, stock clock speed and 1.4 V seems really high.


Apparently the EVGA boards don't have LLC on them or any of the other settings for that matter that you recommended. Just voltage changes, multiplier, C-States, etc.


----------



## Zacw

Okay, luckily after my delid the CPU still works I just booted into Windows and my temps were looking fantastic exactly at water temperature. So I fired up ROG realbench and the temps literally shot through the roof higher than before the delid. I was curious does liquid metal take awhile to settle? or have I potentially not put enough on? I really tried to put as little as possible on as I didn't want to risk it spilling over, could this possibly be the issue?


----------



## 77792

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zacw*
> 
> Okay, luckily after my delid the CPU still works I just booted into Windows and my temps were looking fantastic exactly at water temperature. So I fired up ROG realbench and the temps literally shot through the roof higher than before the delid. I was curious does liquid metal take awhile to settle? or have I potentially not put enough on? I really tried to put as little as possible on as I didn't want to risk it spilling over, could this possibly be the issue?


You need to spread the liquid metal in the die and in the IHS. A small drop in each one, then spread nicely. There are very good youtube videos showing how to do it the right way.


----------



## Zacw

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vommok*
> 
> You need to spread the liquid metal in the die and in the IHS. A small drop in each one, then spread nicely. There are very good youtube videos showing how to do it the right way.


Yeah I watched a couple videos but in my past experience I accidentally put to much on which went everywhere and was a mess to cleanup.

Anyway I just took the loop apart and applied a bit more liquid metal.

Running Rog real bench for an hour @ 5ghz OC @ 1.35 Volts max temp is now 61 previous temp = over 100 in about 2 minutes.

Thats over a 40 degree drop in temperatures! that's absolutely insane!


----------



## audiotest

That must be a new world record. I don't recall reading anyone experiencing more than 25C temp drop on Kabylake.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> It is very interesting that you have such a low VID. I just did a test at 4.2GHz, with Prime95 v28.10 AVX off command (CpuSupportsAVX=0) and maximum VID = 1.238v. With AVX command that I added removed from local.txt running Prime95 v28.10, it was maximum VID=1.283v. I did each test for 5 minutes. If you get a new cooler and do more tests PM me.


Did the test again just because I was curious. For default clock speeds my current cooler is enough. Did reset HWiNFO value when Prime95 was running for about 2 minutes and let it run a couple minutes to get a better average.

Prime95 v28.1 with AVX support enabled and emptied local.txt ran at 4.1 GHz and VID 1.130 V using Blend on 8 threads:



Same but with CpuSupportsAVX=0 added to local.txt:



The content of local.tx (only CpuSupportsAVX=0 was added/removed):
Quote:


> CpuSupportsAVX=0
> OldCpuSpeed=4200
> NewCpuSpeedCount=0
> NewCpuSpeed=0
> RollingAverage=1000
> RollingAverageIsFromV27=1
> ComputerGUID=744911083ed2442f3ed593315fb3839d


Just as previously, it seems that the number of threads and FPU size (8k, 128k, 448k, 1024k, 1344k) or has absolutely no influence on VID.


----------



## stryfetew

I am totally floored by this, even at the voltage that I set it STILL restarts on it's own. The only other thing I can think of is the xmp profile is pushing the memory voltage too high?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Did the test again just because I was curious. For default clock speeds my current cooler is enough. Did reset HWiNFO value when Prime95 was running for about 2 minutes and let it run a couple minutes to get a better average.
> 
> Prime95 v28.1 with AVX support enabled and emptied local.txt ran at 4.1 GHz and VID 1.130 V using Blend on 8 threads:
> 
> 
> 
> Same but with CpuSupportsAVX=0 added to local.txt:
> 
> 
> 
> The content of local.tx (only CpuSupportsAVX=0 was added/removed):
> Just as previously, it seems that the number of threads and FPU size (8k, 128k, 448k, 1024k, 1344k) or has absolutely no influence on VID.


4.1 GHz and VID 1.130 V using Blend on 8 threads. Well that is a little bump with AVX. If you get a new cooler it would be interesting to see what Stock VID is running at 4.5GHz.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stryfetew*
> 
> I am totally floored by this, even at the voltage that I set it STILL restarts on it's own. The only other thing I can think of is the xmp profile is pushing the memory voltage too high?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Don't use XMP until you get a fully stable system. XMP interferes with the memory controller on the CPU and could cause instability. First stabilize your system with default 2133 MHz ram at 1.2 V and default timings (or even 1 step higher) then overclock your memory step by step until you reach 3200 MHz. See where it crashes. When it does crash or fails to POST raise the voltage from 1.2 to 1.25 or 1.3 V. At 3200 MHz you might need 1.35 V. Also tighter memory timings require more voltage to be stable.


As I said earlier. DISABLE XMP! Why bother with it? Usually it's not the highest memory OC you can get anyways. Just OC your CPU first with RAM on 2133 @ 1.2 V and default timings. If you OC your CPU and memory at the same time and you crash, how do you know which caused it?


----------



## SweWiking

I tried some memory overclock today and yesterday. They are 3200mhz corsair memory. I turned on XMP and tried them at 3200mhz (original) 3333mhz, 34xxmhz, 3600mhz, 3733mhz.

But no matter what speed i try, there is no difference at all in gaming preformance. I tried 3dmark, timespy, valley bench, gta5 benchmark and i get pretty much exactly the same score no matter what the ddr4 is running at. Is there something els i need to change butr the mhz of the memory to get some preformance gain from it ?


----------



## Dude970

You will need to tighten the timings to get an increase


----------



## stryfetew

I did turn the XMP off and it did restart again.


----------



## SweWiking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dude970*
> 
> You will need to tighten the timings to get an increase




This is how i run now at 3600mhz, should i turn it back down to 3200mhz or 3333mhz and if so what should i change the timings too ?


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> 
> 
> This is how i run now at 3600mhz, should i turn it back down to 3200mhz or 3333mhz and if so what should i change the timings too ?


What is the Version Number on the sticker that is on the ram modules ? The version number will tell what IC's you have and then based on that, we can then assist you as to what timings you can run.


----------



## stryfetew

I think I see part of the problem now. The actual VID of the chip itself never went above 1.230 so I don't believe the offset was working it was 100% set to auto. Per the guide I set it to 48 with 1.350 on adaptive voltage with XMP turned off. Now HWMonitor shows 1.255v at the VID with the OC at 48. I'm running a stress test now in realbench to see if it's stable, IF it is stable with the overclock I'll give it 24-48 hours to verify it dont restart itself again.


----------



## SweWiking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> What is the Version Number on the sticker that is on the ram modules ? The version number will tell what IC's you have and then based on that, we can then assist you as to what timings you can run.




Took a picture of the memory









CMU16GX4M2C320016R
ddr4 16GB(2 x8GB), 16-18-18-36, 1.35V, ver 5.39, 170303954776234


----------



## Dude970

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> 
> 
> This is how i run now at 3600mhz, should i turn it back down to 3200mhz or 3333mhz and if so what should i change the timings too ?


I would switch to 1T first, then maybe try lowering from 16 to 15


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stryfetew*
> 
> I did turn the XMP off and it did restart again.


Turning XMP off after you enabled it will leave the settings like they were set by XMP. Load the BIOS default settings first then start playing with the multiplier / Vcore.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stryfetew*
> 
> I think I see part of the problem now. The actual VID of the chip itself never went above 1.230 so I don't believe the offset was working it was 100% set to auto. Per the guide I set it to 48 with 1.350 on adaptive voltage with XMP turned off. Now HWMonitor shows 1.255v at the VID with the OC at 48. I'm running a stress test now in realbench to see if it's stable, IF it is stable with the overclock I'll give it 24-48 hours to verify it dont restart itself again.


As you said, it's only a *guide*. You can't copy every setting and expect it to work. Every CPU is different. Some need less then 1.3 V for stable 5 GHz, others need 1.45 V or can't even reach 5 GHz. You have to find it out the hard and long way. The guide give just some starting safe values. *Forget the VID*, it's not an important metric, it's just what the CPU is requesting. Vcore is the one that you're setting with adaptive voltage and that is needed to be monitored to not be too much off from your setting in BIOS. I don't think 1.35 V is necessary for 48. Maybe on potato chips but I can get away with 1.25 V.

*@SweWiking*

Memory timings are frequency and voltage dependent. Too have tigher timings without changing the frequency you need to increase the voltage. If you don't or can't increase the voltage, you have to lower the frequency. Here's some graphs and tables to give you a rough idea: http://hw-db.com/memory/2768/g-skill-f4-3200c16d-8gvk-review/2. Benchmark your memory with HyperPi 8M at least (fast), preferably 32M (slow). If you're really into memory OC, read this: http://hwbot.org/newsflash/3058_advanced_skylake_overclocking_tune_ddr4_memory_rtlio_on_maximus_viii_with_alexaros_guide


----------



## stryfetew

Disabling XMP and loading automatic puts the memory back at the stock timings and voltages. As for the VCORE nothing seems to be consistent. Like for instance right now VID is 1.255v and VCORE is .994v on one 1.208v on another and CPU VCORE is .552v. Which none of these match anything close to what I set the bios to or what the vid is requesting.. Based on that statement none of these values are right.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> I tried some memory overclock today and yesterday. They are 3200mhz corsair memory. I turned on XMP and tried them at 3200mhz (original) 3333mhz, 34xxmhz, 3600mhz, 3733mhz.
> 
> But no matter what speed i try, there is no difference at all in gaming preformance. I tried 3dmark, timespy, valley bench, gta5 benchmark and i get pretty much exactly the same score no matter what the ddr4 is running at. Is there something els i need to change butr the mhz of the memory to get some preformance gain from it ?


well
practically no

like dude suggested you could try to tighten timings further, but that works against the higher speed (and might not show any difference either, except if they're set unreasonably high)

it's hard to find anything in the real world showing a difference beyond 3000

CPU-Z has a score, that should be higher with higher speed

real world usage, mmm
off the top of my head I only know Fallout 4 to be more sensitive to higher memeroy speeds

what you could do is make sure that command rate is set to 1 and not 2
that could increase performace a tad if it isn't set at 1 already

http://www.overclock.net/t/1586767/digital-foundry-memory-overclocking-and-how-it-affects-fps-in-8-different-games


----------



## dirtyred

VID has pretty much nothing to do with the Vcore you set in BIOS. Use HFiNFO not HWMonitor as those values seem to be inaccurate (I'm sure there's an explanation for that, maybe your MB is not supported). Vcore and CPU Vcore should be the same value. Also it's important to measure Vcore under full CPU load. When idle the Vcore should drop to around 700-800 mV (0.7-0.8 V).

*@peter2k* you're right, in games memory speed is not that relevant. But try some memory intensive apps like 3d rendering. You'll get measurable real life gains as few seconds every minute or few minutes every hour between every full memory ratio. Between 2133 and 3200 MHz there could be 3-6 seconds every minute, which is huge (5-10%). Translate that to an 8 hour 3d rendering and it becomes really important.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stryfetew*
> 
> Disabling XMP and loading automatic puts the memory back at the stock timings and voltages. As for the VCORE nothing seems to be consistent. Like for instance right now VID is 1.255v and VCORE is .994v on one 1.208v on another and CPU VCORE is .552v. Which none of these match anything close to what I set the bios to or what the vid is requesting.. Based on that statement none of these values are right.


sigh

err
as I'm on the go at the moment

you wouldn't have set you're voltage to something *not* manual (means set to adaptive or offset) and you're power plan is set to balanced or energy saver? (I think that low voltage is for when the CPU is at 800Mhz, as it's idle)

to stop confusion
maybe set it to manual for a desired voltage
set power plan to max performace

set you're memory to default
OC you're CPU as desired
and when you know which voltage is needed you could switch to offset or adaptive and try reaching that voltage

then move onto memeroy OC

you can leave the memory at default
the timings and other settings for my memeroy were noted on the packaging it came in

you could set voltage, speed and timings(the main ones) manually

and start working from there (or leave it if it's fine as is)


----------



## stryfetew

I set the voltage to adaptive and instead of allowing it to be auto I set it to 1.350 with no offset. HWiNFO also shows the lower voltage as well. It's worth noting I haven't failed any stress test, this whole problem occurs when little to no load is on the CPU. Power plan was on balanced jsut changed it to High Performance.

EDIT: Since I did make those voltages changes Real Bench has been running for 98m with no issue.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> VID has pretty much nothing to do with the Vcore you set in BIOS. Use HFiNFO not HWMonitor as those values seem to be inaccurate (I'm sure there's an explanation for that, maybe your MB is not supported). Vcore and CPU Vcore should be the same value. Also it's important to measure Vcore under full CPU load. When idle the Vcore should drop to around 700-800 mV (0.7-0.8 V).
> 
> *@peter2k* you're right, in games memory speed is not that relevant. But try some memory intensive apps like 3d rendering. You'll get measurable real life gains as few seconds every minute or few minutes every hour between every full memory ratio. Between 2133 and 3200 MHz there could be 3-6 seconds every minute, which is huge (5-10%). Translate that to an 8 hour 3d rendering and it becomes really important.


I'm not sure if I edited it in
but I mentioned *beyond* 3000

also note he didn't mention any software

only 3dmark and games

I mean WinRar would show a difference too

I'm sure professional software would show something

but then you should be using a 6800k or better or a Ryzen if saving time equals more money (as in productivity)


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stryfetew*
> 
> I set the voltage to adaptive and instead of allowing it to be auto I set it to 1.350 with no offset. HWiNFO also shows the lower voltage as well. It's worth noting I haven't failed any stress test, this whole problem occurs when little to no load is on the CPU. Power plan was on balanced jsut changed it to High Performance.
> 
> EDIT: Since I did make those voltages changes Real Bench has been running for 98m with no issue.


there could be issues with certain voltage settings and switching between low and high power states
maybe

I'm just thinking loudly here

but maybe when the system is idle it has a low setting in voltage, which is normal
but a background task could make the CPU spike to a higher freqency (think browser, antivirus, explorer, sensor software anything really)

and at those spikes there's not enough voltage making the system unstable

but under high load (stresstest) it's max voltage is applied evenly, making the system stable as long as the voltage doesn't change to lower states

well either moving to manual or getting better control over how and how much is applied would yield better results

means leaving less things at auto

I'm kinda old school OC

I start with manual and see where things go that way
and when I have time try to dabble with the other settings

shrugs


----------



## fevion

Temperature aside, what is the max Vcore for not shorten the CPU life using it 12h / day for 7 days / week? The canonic 1.4?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fevion*
> 
> Temperature aside, what is the max Vcore for not shorten the CPU life using it 12h / day for 7 days / week? The canonic 1.4?


if we just knew that









gonna say yes on 1.4 (I think that's also what der8auer recommends)
though if you love hammering you're CPU with prime even less

but frankly if you're in it for fun and just try to find the highest clock you'll notice the sweet spot

I need to bump voltage from 1.375 to 1.45 to get from 5.2 to 5.3
definitely beyond the sweet spot









but if you're "only" in it for the magical 5Ghz then you might have luck with not even getting near 1.4


----------



## stryfetew

I think you're right.. Ever since I set the voltage to a manual value over auto everything thus far has been fine but, then again it's only been a couple hours since I've made that adjustment. And yeah, I DO leave my browser window open and Teamspeak as well so I think you're right with the minimal spike in usage which causes the voltage to not be there when needed thus causing system to restart. As far as the software not displaying the correct information a quick restart corrected that problem.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> there could be issues with certain voltage settings and switching between low and high power states
> maybe
> 
> I'm just thinking loudly here
> 
> but maybe when the system is idle it has a low setting in voltage, which is normal
> but a background task could make the CPU spike to a higher freqency (think browser, antivirus, explorer, sensor software anything really)
> 
> and at those spikes there's not enough voltage making the system unstable
> 
> but under high load (stresstest) it's max voltage is applied evenly, making the system stable as long as the voltage doesn't change to lower states
> 
> well either moving to manual or getting better control over how and how much is applied would yield better results
> 
> means leaving less things at auto
> 
> I'm kinda old school OC
> 
> I start with manual and see where things go that way
> and when I have time try to dabble with the other settings
> 
> shrugs


----------



## SweWiking

Thanks for all the answers to my ddr4 questions, so far i got it at:



Set the voltage to 1.400v


----------



## seven7thirty30

Looks like the best that I can do with this chip is 5GHz @ 1.4v with LLC set to 4. Temps are consistently below 80C during RealBench 8 hour. Idle is 32C. Going to stay here. RIG is never left on unless I'm using it which is 4-6 hours a day. Since I paid $299 retail, I'm content to wait out for the fallout between Intel and AMD later this year.


----------



## Dude970

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> Thanks for all the answers to my ddr4 questions, so far i got it at:
> 
> 
> 
> Set the voltage to 1.400v










well done


----------



## Vipu

Are latest Aida and IBT:t fine to test 7700k with?
I remember there was some program that had bad version that wasnt good for testing something.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Are latest Aida and IBT:t fine to test 7700k with?
> I remember there was some program that had bad version that wasnt good for testing something.


short answer
yes

long answer
look at first post under stress testing


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vipu*
> 
> Are latest Aida and IBT:t fine to test 7700k with?
> I remember there was some program that had bad version that wasnt good for testing something.


They are fine to test with but neither is really a good indicator of stability. Use Real bench or something like Occt.


----------



## fevion

I know that this isn't the correct thread to ask about it, but may I ask what are the best Z270 motherboards for high end Overclock and features? If it is too OT here, I was asking about it in this *post*.

Thank you and sorry for the request.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fevion*
> 
> I know that this isn't the correct thread to ask about it, but may I ask what are the best Z270 motherboards for high end Overclock and features? If it is too OT here, I was asking about it in this *post*.
> 
> Thank you and sorry for the request.


Personally I think you can't go wrong with the Asus ROG range in particular the Formula or Extreme both high end and both loaded with features. If you simply want a board that is great for overlooking the Apex might be the board for you. Some of the Gigabyte boards are quite high end too but personally I have had no end of issues with their UEFI's in the past hence why I wouldn't buy one. Hope that helps


----------



## Spiriva

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fevion*
> 
> I know that this isn't the correct thread to ask about it, but may I ask what are the best Z270 motherboards for high end Overclock and features? If it is too OT here, I was asking about it in this *post*.
> 
> Thank you and sorry for the request.


I got the Asus Maximus IX Hero and i gotta say so far i love the board. Got my cpu running at 5.2ghz 24/7.



It will boot on 5.3ghz but @ 1.48v, it will bluescreen before i can get cpu z running








*Delided cpu.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Spiriva*
> 
> I got the Asus Maximus IX Hero and i gotta say so far i love the board. Got my cpu running at 5.2ghz 24/7.
> 
> 
> 
> It will boot on 5.3ghz but @ 1.48v, it will bluescreen before i can get cpu z running
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Delided cpu.


To be perfectly honest historically ROG boards have always been up there as a premium board. That said I have built several computers with Asrock boards for friends and they have been good too though I can't vouch for their current range.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fevion*
> 
> I know that this isn't the correct thread to ask about it, but may I ask what are the best Z270 motherboards *for high end Overclock and features*? If it is too OT here, I was asking about it in this *post*.
> 
> Thank you and sorry for the request.


Asus Apex


----------



## peter2k

the Apex is a good board

but stripped of a few features compared to other Asus boards in the same price range

other Asus Z270 boards get promoted for good audio solutions, on-board wifi
built in mono block

what makes the Apex stand out is it can reach 4266 speed on RAM (if RAM and IMC play along) *at the expense of 2 RAM slots*
while all other z270 from Asus "only" reach 4133 speeds and have the same OC settings
it would be a challenge to find a RAM kit at 4266 rated speeds were the uptick in price couldn't upgrade you from a gtx1080 to a *ti*

if I would be doing a custom loop and don't have a CPU block already it would be the Asus Maximus IX Extreme
really liking the in and out temp sensors and flow control on the mono block

or a formula again if you're into the clean look the armor provides

if you're going for price then any z270 from Asus with a ROG on the packaging will do

but in honesty it would be hard to find a bad Z270 these days

the Z is already the premium desktop line


----------



## stryfetew

I wish EVGA would step up and add more features to their boards. It's VERY limited as to what you can change when overclocking. No LLC configuration, no idle voltage changes just basic stuff.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> the Apex is a good board
> 
> but stripped of a few features compared to other Asus boards in the same price range
> 
> other Asus Z270 boards get promoted for good audio solutions, on-board wifi
> built in mono block
> 
> what makes the Apex stand out is it can reach 4266 speed on RAM (if RAM and IMC play along) *at the expense of 2 RAM slots*
> while all other z270 from Asus "only" reach 4133 speeds and have the same OC settings
> it would be a challenge to find a RAM kit at 4266 rated speeds were the uptick in price couldn't upgrade you from a gtx1080 to a *ti*
> 
> if I would be doing a custom loop and don't have a CPU block already it would be the Asus Maximus IX Extreme
> really liking the in and out temp sensors and flow control on the mono block
> 
> or a formula again if you're into the clean look the armor provides
> 
> if you're going for price then any z270 from Asus with a ROG on the packaging will do
> 
> but in honesty it would be hard to find a bad Z270 these days
> 
> the Z is already the premium desktop line


Agree with you regarding the Z270 Extreme it's an incredible board from a water cooling perspective especially the level of fan control within the UEFI given its set up for radiator fans which means more control over ramp up and down delays etc. On board sound is somewhat overated though in my opinion as a sound card does give much better results. I hope someday motherboard manufacturers realise putting on board sound circuitry in the lower left hand corner of a board is the worst place to put it given that in a majority of cases it's right near the PSU, not ideal. The Apex is an excellent board from all reports for its target audience which is overclockers and benchers more so than gamers. If I could fit M9E in my chassis that's the board I would purchase given its targeted at someone like me a water cooler, it's very different to anything else in the market right now, not cheap but oh so nice.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Agree with you regarding the Z270 Extreme it's an incredible board from a water cooling perspective especially the level of fan control within the UEFI given its set up for radiator fans which means more control over ramp up and down delays etc. On board sound is somewhat overated though in my opinion as a sound card does give much better results. I hope someday motherboard manufacturers realise putting on board sound circuitry in the lower left hand corner of a board is the worst place to put it given that in a majority of cases it's right near the PSU, not ideal. The Apex is an excellent board from all reports for its target audience which is overclockers and benchers more so than gamers. If I could fit M9E in my chassis that's the board I would purchase given its targeted at someone like me a water cooler, it's very different to anything else in the market right now, not cheap but oh so nice.


I hear you

but most people would not try to chase a speed on RAM of 5000 if it means only using 1 module

all ROG boards offer plenty of options to play around with and overlock the same
there's not a ROG board that you will achieve higher CPU clocks than another

hell my formula VIII doesnt overclock better or has more features (that don't come from the chipset itself) than my "old" sabertooth z77 just because it is more pricy, just looks better to my eyes

it just depends too much on the CPU to begin with

nothing worse than dropping 600 bucks on a board but getting a dud as a CPU









I'd say pick Asus Z270
they're all good

just go for the one that ticks all boxes (like wifi and what not) or looks best to you


----------



## fevion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> if I would be doing a custom loop and don't have a CPU block already it would be the Asus Maximus IX Extreme
> really liking the in and out temp sensors and flow control on the mono block
> 
> or a formula again if you're into the clean look the armor provides
> 
> if you're going for price then any z270 from Asus with a ROG on the packaging will do
> 
> but in honesty it would be hard to find a bad Z270 these days
> 
> the Z is already the premium desktop line


Woooooo the extreme is just "woooooooow"









the only problem is the cost :S ok the double water block for the cpu and the mobo transistors, but if you add a 90$ waterblock on the asus IX formula it will be 150$ cheaper than asus IX extreme and I think they share the same things.

I'm so confused now ahahaha a lot of motherboards have very nice things ecc, but everyone have something "bad", who the price, who a feature, ecc. For example, looking for a good case that can have enough space for a custom loop with 2 rads I found the *Cooler Master MasterCase Maker 5t* that is a very beautifull case and it have 4 3.0 usb ports in the front panel BUT the problem is that 50% of the motherboards have only ONE usb 3.0 front connector that can active only 2 ports lol, and the other 50% have 2 connector that will be perfect. For now the only two mobo that have 2 connectors are the gigabyte and the asrock, but between the 2 only the gigabyte z270 gaming 8 have the mobo cooler preinstalled, BUT that mobo cost a lot ahahah. Choose hardware is an hard life xD

I'm just frustrating myself trying to find the best piece of hardware without spend too much -_-


----------



## hotrod717

Finally got around to testing 1st 7700k (G023) after delid. Initial "impression"

53/50 @ 1.44v isn't stellar, but for msrp, is a gem. In reality F977 wasn't all that much better on water. Getting used to new mobo (From M8I to M9A), but should be on LN2 with it in nest week or two.


----------



## Marctraider

I figured out the huge temps on my 4.9ghz overclock, its due to VCCSA and Agent having to run near 1.25/1.30 to keep my 3600 CL15 memory stable :O

I dont think its worth going 5ghz and drastically having to reduce my memory speed though, especially in cpu bound games.

Just curious, has anyone tried underclocking their ICH? I havent found intel specs but i think it runs around 1v by default.


----------



## MaKeN

Impressive!!!


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> I figured out the huge temps on my 4.9ghz overclock, its due to VCCSA and Agent having to run near 1.25/1.30 to keep my 3600 CL15 memory stable :O
> 
> I dont think its worth going 5ghz and drastically having to reduce my memory speed though, especially in cpu bound games.
> 
> Just curious, has anyone tried underclocking their ICH? I havent found intel specs but i think it runs around 1v by default.


Do you think it's worth the high temperatures just to have a stable 3600 CL15 memory? Would you lose many FPS by going for 3200 CL16 with the advantage of lowering your voltages and getting lower temps and as a result lower noise from the cooling?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> Finally got around to testing 1st 7700k (G023) after delid. Initial "impression"
> 
> 53/50 @ 1.44v isn't stellar, but for msrp, is a gem. In reality F977 wasn't all that much better on water. Getting used to new mobo (From M8I to M9A), but should be on LN2 with it in nest week or two.


you try the 3866c12 preset yet? should be straight forward. That board really hums right along. and it can do some crazy stuff:










Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> I figured out the huge temps on my 4.9ghz overclock, its due to VCCSA and Agent having to run near 1.25/1.30 to keep my 3600 CL15 memory stable :O
> 
> I dont think its worth going 5ghz and drastically having to reduce my memory speed though, especially in cpu bound games.
> 
> Just curious, has anyone tried underclocking their ICH? I havent found intel specs but i think it runs around 1v by default.


the auto settings for 3600c15 will push vccio and vsa. you can lower these by alot. should be no more than 1.2 vccio and 1.25vsa. I have that kit running 3866c15 (1.45V) with vsa at 1.175 and vccio at 1.15V. AUTO and VOLT are 2 four letter words.









@peter2k - the question was overclocking and secondly features. Not sure what you believe is missing from the Apex... but sure, compared to the M9 Extreme, EVERY board is lacking.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> @peter2k - the question was overclocking and secondly features. Not sure what you believe is missing from the Apex... but sure, compared to the M9 Extreme, EVERY board is lacking.


All I need is a CPU socket. RAM slots are nice features, PCI is optional. Overclocking jumpers are for the enthusiasts. I still miss the AGP port.


----------



## stryfetew

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> All I need is a CPU socket. RAM slots are nice features, PCI is optional. Overclocking jumpers are for the enthusiasts. I still miss the AGP port.


Reminds me of the old AMD chips I used to overclock. Ahh the good old days.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> @peter2k - the question was overclocking and secondly features. Not sure what you believe is missing from the Apex... but sure, compared to the M9 Extreme, EVERY board is lacking.


well the M9 extreme is obviously the one with the most features, for the prices it better, yet I'm missing the armour shroud for a cleaner look on that board

the extreme outlier aside

all ROG boards are within the same price range, 300 bucks
some a bit more, some a bit less

as for the Apex
I think the 2 RAM slots are putting me off
it only offers 2 banks for a reason, and high density RAM sticks should also be troublesome to get to high speeds as well

remember we're talking about what the Apex can do compared to all the other Asus ROG offerings
4266 RAM speed vs 4133

you just take the ones that tick all the boxes

the Hero if you want to save a few bucks
the Apex if youre a bencher I guess
the formula if you like the look and want built in MU-MIMO wifi

the Rampage if you want to go 2011-v3 (which costs more again, but you get quad channel if that is worth to ones workload)

they all overclock the same, have the same bios settings, all get advertised to reach 4133 speeds

actually the Hero already ticks all the boxes if you don't want built into wifi

the Apex sure makes the impression of being build for people who will put a pot on it and pour some LN2 down its throat
it has two 8 pin power connectors


----------



## dirtyred

Does this fit into Intel's Vcore specifications or it's a bit suspicious?

Settings that might be the cause, especially the offset:


----------



## SweWiking

This is the ddr4 at 3333mhz original timeings at 1.360v



This is the ddr4 at 3333mhz with tighter timings at 1.405v



From what I understand there should be no problem running the ddr4 at 1.405v 24/7, right ?


----------



## kleitos44

*Do you guys think I need to delid, these temperatures on insane on a watercooling loop?

It is so much work for that extra 200mhz. Thoughts? BTW this isn't super stable at 5.3ghz, but it is bootable.*


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> This is the ddr4 at 3333mhz original timeings at 1.360v
> 
> 
> 
> This is the ddr4 at 3333mhz with tighter timings at 1.405v
> 
> 
> 
> From what I understand there should be no problem running the ddr4 at 1.405v 24/7, right ?


it's fine for 24/7

if you would have to bump voltage even a bit more for stability you could even do that

though be sure there's some kind of air flow







(I'm sure there is)


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kleitos44*
> 
> *Do you guys think I need to delid, these temperatures on insane on a watercooling loop?
> 
> It is so much work for that extra 200mhz. Thoughts? BTW this isn't super stable at 5.3ghz, but it is bootable.*


in honesty I have no experience with the stresstool you're using there *on the CPU*

you're not even reaching 80 degrees there
I've seen people saying they reach 100 degrees at 5Ghz without delid in the delid thread

that being said
using one of the "approved" stress tests might yield a lot higher temps

kaby lake OC is all voltage, temps and luck of the draw

less temps enables more voltage, gives more stability/clocks

you have to know if going from 5 Ghz or so is worth the effort
not us








it's already the magical number









if it's stable at 5.2 and doesn't go over 80 you could leave it as is
if you really don't want to go through the trouble or know someone you could do it for you/ship the CPU to


----------



## SweWiking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> it's fine for 24/7
> 
> if you would have to bump voltage even a bit more for stability you could even do that
> 
> though be sure there's some kind of air flow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (I'm sure there is)


Is it up to 1.450v for 24/7 that is the max recomended volt ?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> Is it up to 1.450v for 24/7 that is the max recomended volt ?


let's say yes

G.Skill sells some ddr4 kits that come with 1.4v and a lifetime warranty

there's like this consensus that 1.45 is like a greyish zone and under 1.5 should still be ok
there's like those 2 opinions

those high rated RAM kits don't use special chips
they just bin them and then "OC" them










at those voltage settings the RAM might become too hot and gives you instability that way (I think the Samsung b dies are sensitive to high temps for instance)

I have no idea if you have a temp readout from you're actual RAM
but dropping from 1.4 to 1.35 reduced temps for me from "too hot to touch" to "it's fine"

just saying

be sure to test those settings
RAM instability and errors are hard to track down and show themselves in funky ways you might think comes from somewhere else


----------



## SweWiking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> let's say yes
> 
> G.Skill sells some ddr4 kits that come with 1.4v and a lifetime warranty
> 
> there's like this consensus that 1.45 is like a greyish zone and under 1.5 should still be ok
> there's like those 2 opinions
> 
> those high rated RAM kits don't use special chips
> they just bin them and then "OC" them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> at those voltage settings the RAM might become too hot and gives you instability that way (I think the Samsung b dies are sensitive to high temps for instance)
> 
> I have no idea if you have a temp readout from you're actual RAM
> but dropping from 1.4 to 1.35 reduced temps for me from "too hot to touch" to "it's fine"
> 
> just saying
> 
> be sure to test those settings
> RAM instability and errors are hard to track down and show themselves in funky ways you might think comes from somewhere else


First i wanna say thank you for answering all my ddr4 questions









I tried a few benchmarks and it was fine, but after like 10sec of gta5 the computer froze, i upped the ddr4 voltage to 1.420v from 1.405v and gta5 runs fine w/o freezeing.

I have from my old g skill ddr3 mem a fan hooked up over the ddr4 mem so they got some cooling going on over them

 (not my ram but it looks like this)

I have no way that i know of to control the temp of my ram tho. However they are not "hot to touch" at all.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> let's say yes
> 
> G.Skill sells some ddr4 kits that come with 1.4v and a lifetime warranty
> 
> there's like this consensus that 1.45 is like a greyish zone and under 1.5 should still be ok
> there's like those 2 opinions
> 
> those high rated RAM kits don't use special chips
> they just bin them and then "OC" them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> at those voltage settings the RAM might become too hot and gives you instability that way (I think the Samsung b dies are sensitive to high temps for instance)
> 
> I have no idea if you have a temp readout from you're actual RAM
> *but dropping from 1.4 to 1.35 reduced temps for me from "too hot to touch" to "it's fine"*
> 
> just saying
> 
> be sure to test those settings
> RAM instability and errors are hard to track down and show themselves in funky ways you might think comes from somewhere else


If you DDR4 RAM is running too hot to touch at only 1.4V, then your case must have _really really really_ poor ventilation.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you try the 3866c12 preset yet? should be straight forward. That board really hums right along. and it can do some crazy stuff:


Fredyama profile or ......















Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> Finally got around to testing 1st 7700k (G023) after delid. Initial "impression"
> 
> 53/50 @ 1.44v isn't stellar, but for msrp, is a gem. In reality F977 wasn't all that much better on water. Getting used to new mobo (From M8I to M9A), but should be on LN2 with it in nest week or two.


I've seen a few G023s in stores but always hesitant to buy them. Very curious about how it scales. Your 977 didn't do much well, I'm assuming?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kleitos44*
> 
> *Do you guys think I need to delid, these temperatures on insane on a watercooling loop?
> 
> It is so much work for that extra 200mhz. Thoughts? BTW this isn't super stable at 5.3ghz, but it is bootable.*


if that chip wil do cinebench R15 at that clock and voltage, guys will pay >$1000 for it in a flash.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> If you DDR4 RAM is running too hot to touch at only 1.4V, then your case must have _really really really_ poor ventilation.


well there really isn't any airflow

thermaltake P5, and aside from the PSU there are only fans on the radiator and graphics card

also considering my RAM is rated for 2133 but running at 3200 I think it's fine

also running too hot when stresstesting the OC on the RAM
not under normal conditions in any way
when I say too hot to touch I mean like 70 degrees I guess
not "Damn I burned myself" hot
but a little less voltage and it's more like 50ish


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if that chip wil do cinebench R15 at that clock and voltage, guys will pay >$1000 for it in a flash.


yeah right?








that's what I was thinking

good clocks and so low temps for a non delidded chip

seems like a winner to me

wonder what it could do after a delid


----------



## Teiji

Hello, I've just started overclocking my 7700K, and it seems stable. Passed x264 custom 10 loops (~70min) and Realbench 8 hours with 48 ratio at 1.26 BIOS vcore (1.280 in Windows 10) and max temp is like 81.

Now, I've moved on to RAM overclocking. I just set my "CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3000 (PC4 24000)" to XMP in my Asus Strix Z270E. Which program should I use to best test RAM OC? The Raja's Asus guide recommended HCI Memtest, while this OP guide recommended Memtest86. Honestly, I prefer to use Memtest86 since it can be run on the USB and doesn't need Windows to interfere, while HCI Memtest seems a bit more complicated with running multiple instances and setting the amount of ram, etc. What do you guys think?


----------



## FedericoUY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Teiji*
> 
> Hello, I've just started overclocking my 7700K, and it seems stable. Passed x264 custom 10 loops (~70min) and Realbench 8 hours with 48 ratio at 1.26 BIOS vcore (1.280 in Windows 10) and max temp is like 81.
> 
> Now, I've moved on to RAM overclocking. I just set my "CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3000 (PC4 24000)" to XMP in my Asus Strix Z270E. Which program should I use to best test RAM OC? The Raja's Asus guide recommended HCI Memtest, while this OP guide recommended Memtest86. Honestly, I prefer to use Memtest86 since it can be run on the USB and doesn't need Windows to interfere, while HCI Memtest seems a bit more complicated with running multiple instances and setting the amount of ram, etc. What do you guys think?


HCI memtest, 1 instance for every logical core. I'd use like 80% of the ram, lets say, if you have 16gb, open 8 instances with 1536mb on each... At least 100% on each, recommended is 300%...


----------



## Teiji

But if you test only 80% of RAM, what if the other 20% of RAM that you didn't test get error and you don't know?


----------



## FedericoUY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Teiji*
> 
> But if you test only 80% of RAM, what if the other 20% of RAM that you didn't test get error and you don't know?


The other 20% will be still be using by the os, processes, etc. Don't worry, it is not a static quantity, it just stress that amount of ram. If you do not like HCI memtest (wich is considered by many as the best for ram stability), you can use intel's xtu ram tests, p95, etc...


----------



## Halofan24

i5 7600k 1.35v on air 5.2 stable aida 64 6+ hrs.. Did I win the lottery?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Halofan24*
> 
> i5 7600k 1.35v on air 5.2 stable aida 64 6+ hrs.. Did I win the lottery?


Maybe yes maybe no, AIDA 64 stress test is not very hard to pass to be honest, try RealBench or OCCT as per the opening post


----------



## Halofan24

How long would you run realbench for


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Halofan24*
> 
> How long would you run realbench for


At least an hour with maximum memory would be a good starting point, pass that at that voltage then it would be fair to say lottery winner as 1.35V is very low for 5.2Ghz


----------



## Halofan24

Thanks ill try tonight. Whats a safe temp on these I try to keep it <80C


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Halofan24*
> 
> Thanks ill try tonight. Whats a safe temp on these I try to keep it <80C


Personally I try to keep below 80 degrees C but others might say higher opinions vary same as stability very subjective


----------



## Marctraider

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you try the 3866c12 preset yet? should be straight forward. That board really hums right along. and it can do some crazy stuff:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the auto settings for 3600c15 will push vccio and vsa. you can lower these by alot. should be no more than 1.2 vccio and 1.25vsa. I have that kit running 3866c15 (1.45V) with vsa at 1.175 and vccio at 1.15V. AUTO and VOLT are 2 four letter words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @peter2k - the question was overclocking and secondly features. Not sure what you believe is missing from the Apex... but sure, compared to the M9 Extreme, EVERY board is lacking.


The auto setting as in memory timings? Because I already set them manually to 15/15/36

I have never been able to boot my memory higher than 3600 under any settings, not even manual timings specified by XMP profile.

I suspect my 7600k isnt the best out there as I require close to 1.4v to even get 5GHz stable. :-(

Edit: For the first time i managed to boot with XMP 3866 profile, got into windows and did some aida64 benchmarks, then rebooted, and no post.
Trying again for 10 times no post... I wonder why my board has such issues posting on 3866+.

Perhaps i should mess with bootup voltages.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Halofan24*
> 
> Thanks ill try tonight. Whats a safe temp on these I try to keep it <80C


under 80 would be ok, a bit on the toasty side, but ok
it would be less in games anyway
and with a delid it would come down to more reasonable temps obviously

to get a good guess an hour is fine

for entry here in the list you would need 8 hours with maximum RAM

it's good to let it run overnight that way

I had voltages set thinking it's stable only to have it halt at around 4 hours, repeatedly
had to bump up voltage in small steps until it passed 8 hours
so there is a reason why it's 8 hours









also remember there is a benchmark and a stress testing button

you want the stresstesting one


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Halofan24*
> 
> i5 7600k 1.35v on air 5.2 stable aida 64 6+ hrs.. Did I win the lottery?


Its anyway a very good one









Try 5.3


----------



## jameyscott

Finally got some time to play around with my 7700k and am able to boot at 1.325 at 5.2 and at the very least check CPUz and got 5.0 with XMP at 1.32v LLC5 on my M9H.

This week I should get to delid it and then put it and my pro duo under water this Friday. Awww yis!

Maybe then I'll take a look at your little guide @Darkwizzie.


----------



## Halofan24

Should have put in original post.. im new.. real bench 1 hr 5.2 @ 1.35 stable as a mofo.. next post 8hr


----------



## stryfetew

Username: stryfetew
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4600
Vcore in UEFI: 1.325
Vcore: 1.328
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Full custom loop.
Stability Test: 4 hours x264 stability 4 hours rog realbench

Batch Number: Unsure.
Ram Speed: (3200 14 16 16 16)
VCCIO: 1.246
VCCSA: 1.270
Ram Voltage: 1.375
Motherboard: EVGA Z270 Classified K
LLC Setting: NA

CPU-Z
http://valid.x86.fr/g2gt78

Vcore is off with CPU-Z but EVGA E-LEET tool shows the 1.328 voltage.


----------



## stryfetew

@dirtyred @peter2k

I finally managed to get it stable, thus far at least. After changing from balanced to high performance and trying a static voltage in the offset I was able to as you can see get a 5ghz stable and no reboots in the past 49 hours.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Halofan24*
> 
> 
> 
> Should have put in original post.. im new.. real bench 1 hr 5.2 @ 1.35 stable as a mofo.. next post 8hr


Awesome CPU..









Can you try XTU bench??


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Halofan24*
> 
> 
> 
> Should have put in original post.. im new.. real bench 1 hr 5.2 @ 1.35 stable as a mofo.. next post 8hr


That looks really good


----------



## SweWiking

I played around with the settings in bios some, and got a gain in mem speed by loosening my ram timings, and then oc the mem from 3333 > 3466mhz


@1.420v - 14-16-16-30-1 - Stable

Vs.


@1.400v - 15-17-17-34 -1 - Stable

*fixed type-o, 3466mhz


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> mem from 3333 > 4466mhz











you mean 3466

I mean 4466 would be quite something









if you're looking for a what's better, higher bandwidth vs lower timings

you would have to bench yourself really (how to bench it using real world testing is quite another matter, but I guess you could use sisoft sandra to try out which gives higher scores for you, lower timings or higher rated speed, which would indicate what is better for you I think, but its not exactly a real world comparison)

for me I'd take the higher speed over lower timings and lower voltage


----------



## becks

Hi there guys,

Gonna post later today some pictures when I get back home but for the moment I need some advice...

I am running a delided i7-7700k and resealed with RTV with grizzly conductonaut under IHS and Gelid on IHS and NH-D14 as cooler + 1 NF-F12 industrialPPC-3000 for the RAM/VRM.
I am at 5.1 core 5.1 cache - 1.385V 2x16Gb Trident Z @ 3733 16-16-16-35 Cr1 / Mode 2 with 1.392v, 1.2125 SA 1.1625 VCCIO, MRC Boot and Fast Boot Disable, AVX 1, Everything else on Auto on a M8I.

Everything is stable (Cinebench, Aida64, RealBench, Memtest etc etc ) but for the life of it I can't make the Adaptive/ Offset work...
I keep OS in balanced mode, Core freq jumps up and down between 4.1 and 5.1 but volts don't move at all.
Whenever I try Adaptive or Offset the opposite happens no matter what...
It boots into windows...and I can open aida / cpuz and It shows 1.320 - 1/350....and as soon as I put some load on it it drops to 1.250 and BSOD's... Tryed LLC 3 up to 7 Load Ia dc to Auto or 0.01 etc..nothing works.
On top of everything I updated bios last night to latest release (3401 I think ) and Aida can not read Temps on CPU anymore and some other bugs (it is not a beta release)
Maybe @[email protected] or @Jpmboy can shed a bit of light...I know the later had a M8I.









NB. Sorry if I butchered some of those terms (MRC Boot or MR boot can't remember ) I am at work at the moment and don't have the bios in front of me.
I want first to try and get everything working how I want it to be (Volts going up and down as frequency ) and than I will try and tighten the Ram timings or shoot for lower volts.
Whatever you are about to suggest, do not suggest more volts anywhere as This is my limit till I get under water at the end of the month.

Temps are 80-83-77-75 under 1h RealBench ( might need to redo the delid)
CB score is 1115, Aida mem bench is 51 - 57 - 50 - 43ns
Running on cardboard open test bench


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Hi there guys,
> 
> Gonna post later today some pictures when I get back home but for the moment I need some advice...
> 
> I am running a delided i7-7700k and resealed with RTV with grizzly conductonaut under IHS and Gelid on IHS and NH-D14 as cooler + 1 NF-F12 industrialPPC-3000 for the RAM/VRM.
> I am at 5.1 core 5.1 cache - 1.385V 2x16Gb Trident Z @ 3733 16-16-16-35 Cr1 / Mode 2 with 1.392v, 1.2125 SA 1.1625 VCCIO, MRC Boot and Fast Boot Disable, AVX 1, Everything else on Auto on a M8I.
> 
> Everything is stable (Cinebench, Aida64, RealBench, Memtest etc etc ) but for the life of it I can't make the Adaptive/ Offset work...
> I keep OS in balanced mode, Core freq jumps up and down between 4.1 and 5.1 but volts don't move at all.
> Whenever I try Adaptive or Offset the opposite happens no matter what...
> It boots into windows...and I can open aida / cpuz and It shows 1.320 - 1/350....and as soon as I put some load on it it drops to 1.250 and BSOD's... Tryed LLC 3 up to 7 Load Ia dc to Auto or 0.01 etc..nothing works.
> On top of everything I updated bios last night to latest release (3401 I think ) and Aida can not read Temps on CPU anymore and some other bugs (it is not a beta release)
> Maybe @[email protected] or @Jpmboy can shed a bit of light...I know the later had a M8I.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NB. Sorry if I butchered some of those terms (MRC Boot or MR boot can't remember ) I am at work at the moment and don't have the bios in front of me.
> I want first to try and get everything working how I want it to be (Volts going up and down as frequency ) and than I will try and tighten the Ram timings or shoot for lower volts.
> Whatever you are about to suggest, do not suggest more volts anywhere as This is my limit till I get under water at the end of the month.
> 
> Temps are 80-83-77-75 under 1h RealBench ( might need to redo the delid)
> CB score is 1115, Aida mem bench is 51 - 57 - 50 - 43ns
> Running on cardboard open test bench


post bios screen shots please (as a zip file). best to have a look at your bios settings.


----------



## SweWiking

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you mean 3466
> 
> I mean 4466 would be quite something
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if you're looking for a what's better, higher bandwidth vs lower timings
> 
> you would have to bench yourself really (how to bench it using real world testing is quite another matter, but I guess you could use sisoft sandra to try out which gives higher scores for you, lower timings or higher rated speed, which would indicate what is better for you I think, but its not exactly a real world comparison)
> 
> for me I'd take the higher speed over lower timings and lower voltage


Hehe yep was a misstype, 3466mhz is the correct speed








I will give sandra a go and check the scores there too, thnx for the tip!


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> Hehe yep was a misstype, 3466mhz is the correct speed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will give sandra a go and check the scores there too, thnx for the tip!


With regards to speed vs timings, you would get better performance with tighter timings and lower speed, than with higher speed and loose timings.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> With regards to speed vs timings, you would get better performance with tighter timings and lower speed, than with higher speed and loose timings.


Not necessarily true.

In different scenarios (read, write or copy) different RAM settings will be faster. There is no golden rule. And you won't really notice much difference between 1-2 difference in timings or 1 step in speed ratio. If you want to test your ram speed, you can do it with Hyper Pi (it's a bit tweaked Super Pi, otherwise the same). And if you really want to get into memory overclocking, you have to dig really deep into RTL/IOL timings and you need to have a good understanding of how memory works. It's really time consuming and I don't see much gain out of it. It's only for the hardcore competitors.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> With regards to speed vs timings, you would get better performance with tighter timings and lower speed, than with higher speed and loose timings.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Not necessarily true.
> 
> In different scenarios (read, write or copy) different RAM settings will be faster. There is no golden rule. And you won't really notice much difference between 1-2 difference in timings or 1 step in speed ratio. If you want to test your ram speed, you can do it with Hyper Pi (it's a bit tweaked Super Pi, otherwise the same). And if you really want to get into memory overclocking, you have to dig really deep into RTL/IOL timings and you need to have a good understanding of how memory works. It's really time consuming and I don't see much gain out of it. It's only for the hardcore competitors.


Well in order to overclock memory properly, you do have to have a good understanding of all the timings including, primary, secondary, tertiary, RTL/IOLS, as well other settings such as IO Latency Offset or RFR Delay for example , in order to achieve the best performance from your memory.

Making changes to only the primary timings, will not result in the best performance if the other timings are not adjusted accordingly, as it can result in a decrease in performance instead.

Therefore if all the timings are properly tightened and adjusted at a certain speed, then it will outperform a higher speed with looser timings.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Well in order to overclock memory properly, you do have to have a good understanding of all the timings including, primary, secondary, tertiary, RTL/IOLS, as well other settings such as IO Latency Offset or RFR Delay for example , in order to achieve the best performance from your memory.
> 
> Making changes to only the primary timings, will not result in the best performance if the other timings are not adjusted accordingly, as it can result in a decrease in performance instead.
> 
> Therefore if all the timings are properly tightened and adjusted at a certain speed, then it will outperform a higher speed with looser timings.


Exactly. But 1 step of frequency ratio or timings usually don't result in much speed gain. It's measurable with benchmarks but in real world I don't think anyone would notice the difference. Maybe in really long workloads for example 1 hour of 3D rendering you might notice a 2-3 minute gain. That's about 3-5% improvement. Combine that with CPU overclock and you can gain 7-10% or more. But for gaming however that doesn't really translates as many are GPU bottlenecked most of the times and you'd gain maybe only a couple of FPS's.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


Here they are....

M8I.zip 3674k .zip file


And here is a screen of the system



Even more strange, now with the new bios, manual voltage acts as adaptive...whatever I set into bios (and I went down to 1.325...) it boots in windows and sees that voltage but as soon as I put load on it it jumps up to 1.408)
Also you can see in the screen that Aida readings are all over the place, not really accurate after this last bios update..

You think using Adaptive is it safe to up the CPU to 1.43 -145 ? Assuming the temps are under 80...and I can boot / bench the mem up to 4133 ...is it safe to boost the voltage on it to 1.45 for daily use ? (I think I heard it a million times before but just double checking )


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marctraider*
> 
> The auto setting as in memory timings? Because I already set them manually to 15/15/36
> 
> I have never been able to boot my memory higher than 3600 under any settings, not even manual timings specified by XMP profile.
> 
> I suspect my 7600k isnt the best out there as I require close to 1.4v to even get 5GHz stable. :-(
> 
> Edit: For the first time i managed to boot with XMP 3866 profile, got into windows and did some aida64 benchmarks, then rebooted, and no post.
> Trying again for 10 times no post... I wonder why my board has such issues posting on 3866+.
> 
> Perhaps i should mess with bootup voltages.


I'm referring to the auto settings for vccio and vsa when you increase ram freq to 3600, or use XMP. control these manually. fFor 3866 it's likely not the board.... set VSa (VCCSA) to 1.35V for 3866, vccio to 1.2V.
Ram can be tricky on any platform... it takes a bit of time to get things right. Be sure to correctly test any ram PC you intend to use as a 24/7. Unlike a bad cpu oc, which just crashes, bad ram can completely corrupt an OS install. Make a system image before getting too far into this.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> With regards to speed vs timings, *you would get better performance with tighter timings and lower speed, than with higher speed and loose timings*.


this is a tough question and really depends on what measure one uses. Sometimes a lower freq with very tight timings can be unexpectedly efficient. But overall, you are correct.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Here they are....
> 
> M8I.zip 3674k .zip file
> 
> 
> And here is a screen of the system
> 
> 
> 
> Even more strange, now with the new bios, manual voltage acts as adaptive...whatever I set into bios (and I went down to 1.325...) it boots in windows and sees that voltage but as soon as I put load on it it jumps up to 1.408)
> Also you can see in the screen that Aida readings are all over the place, not really accurate after this last bios update..
> 
> You think using Adaptive is it safe to up the CPU to 1.43 -145 ? Assuming the temps are under 80...and I can boot / bench the mem up to 4133 ...is it safe to boost the voltage on it to 1.45 for daily use ? (I think I heard it a million times before but just double checking )


1.45V daily is at the edge.. and we really do not have a lot of history with KBL yet. I run my 2 core KBL at 1.45V adaptive, but would be a bit reluctant to run my 7700K at the same unless I had temps below 70c (and watch the package temp). Temp tolerance is a personal thing.









thanks for the screenshots... will look at them shortly.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


Thank for doing so, just played a bit with llc...

Cpu set to 1,325 manual in bios....llc 2 to 7 all give same result..1.328 in OS idle and 1.360 under load ( followed by a crash







) these chip really need 1.385 for 5.1 core / 5 uncore @ 3733


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Thank for doing so, just played a bit with llc...
> 
> Cpu set to 1,325 manual in bios....llc 2 to 7 all give same result..1.328 in OS idle and 1.360 under load ( followed by a crash
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) these chip really need 1.385 for 5.1 core / 5 uncore @ 3733


okay - going back to your original post
you want to get dynamic voltage and clocks... here;s how to do it and a few other tweaks:

bclk : dram ratio -> Auto
CPu/Cache current limit -> 255.5
Set voltgae mode to Adaptive
Put the 1.39V from your screenies in the "Additional Turbo Voltage" field
PCH core -> 1.05 to 1.08V
Speedstep -> Enabled
VRM Spreadspectrum -> disabled
CPU LLC -> 5 or 6
CPU Current -> 130%
CPU Power Phase -> optimized or extreme (power phase shedding)
Dram Current -> 120%
Speedstep and Speedshift -> Enabled
MRC Fast Boot -> Auto (once trained only a cold boot retrains the ram)

Main thing to get the voltage and frequency to work together is use Adaptive (or offset) and Enable Speedstep.
and for starters lower the ccahe multiplier to like 48 until you know the core is working right.


----------



## areczek1987

There is any chance that intel take a cpu with problem on booting on xmp settnigs? On gskill 3600cl16 need to clear cmos after night and turn on the xmp to work with even no oc of the cpu. It is also a potato with 1.312 stock vid...


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


Slowly playing with the settings you provided...some strange things happened that I want explanation, if possible...in Plain English









When OS boots up and aida loads it flickers for couple of seconds or till I minimise it ( have left it for like 15 sec than I had enough...I don't know if it will stop doing so if left alone for more time) ? symptom of something ?! or usual ?
Also.. before, on manual Fix voltage...my CPU would not take any less than 1.385 Bios (1.392OS) to run RB 2.43, Aida Stress test at 5.1 / 5 uncore ) now it boots at 1.136... spikes for a second to 1.392 but under load its a constant 1.360 and no BSOD so far ?! I am really confused... Adaptive basically lets you run higher voltage in Bios and actually uses less in OS ?!

Edit:

It seems no matter what I do on Adaptive voltage under load it goes to 1.360 - 1376 which results in BSOD. Will play with it some more.


----------



## becks

Double post sorry


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Slowly playing with the settings you provided...some strange things happened that I want explanation, if possible...in Plain English
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When OS boots up and aida loads it flickers for couple of seconds or till I minimise it ( have left it for like 15 sec than I had enough...I don't know if it will stop doing so if left alone for more time) ? symptom of something ?! or usual ?
> Also.. before, on manual Fix voltage...my CPU would not take any less than 1.385 Bios (1.392OS) to run RB 2.43, Aida Stress test at 5.1 / 5 uncore ) now it boots at 1.136... spikes for a second to 1.392 but under load its a constant 1.360 and no BSOD so far ?! I am really confused... Adaptive basically lets you run higher voltage in Bios and actually uses less in OS ?!
> 
> Edit:
> 
> It seems no matter what I do on Adaptive voltage under load it goes to 1.360 - 1376 which results in BSOD. Will play with it some more.


... yes I know, you described that in the post I quoted.
AID64 sounds like a driver issue if some type. you did load the chipset and ME driver.. and have a clean install of windows and not moved from another rig? (Win management interface, and machine interface need updating fir kaby)
If it needed 1.385V on manual, it will use the same on adaptive. first KNOW what voltage works with manual override, then just set adaptive to that same voltage, CPU SVID on Auto should work, if not Enable it for Adaptive. change nothing else. if the voltage still is not loading correctly, set IA AC and IA DC loadline to 0.01. This adjusts the adaptive voltage load line.
Any difference in bios set voltage and during load in windows is LLC (or IA loadlines)


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


So...to be able to finally pass RB 2.43 I had to raise the Additional Turbo Voltage in bios to 1.425 which resulted in :

Spikes 1.424 (Os)...Idle 1.136 (Os) ....Load 1.392 (Os) and passed the 15 min test in RB with 32gb Ram used....but jumping from 1.385 bios to 1.425 added a whole bunch of heat to the CPU and the Package was hovering around 91-93. Will have to play with it some more tomorrow as it is pretty late now.



NB. its a fresh install of Win 10 Pro x64.



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *areczek1987*
> 
> There is any chance that intel take a cpu with problem on booting on xmp settnigs? On gskill 3600cl16 need to clear cmos after night and turn on the xmp to work with even no oc of the cpu. It is also a potato with 1.312 stock vid...


The CPU does not have a problem if it works fine with stocks speeds, I would say the memory has a problem.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> So...to be able to finally pass RB 2.43 I had to raise the Additional Turbo Voltage in bios to 1.425 which resulted in :
> 
> Spikes 1.424 (Os)...Idle 1.136 (Os) ....Load 1.392 (Os) and passed the 15 min test in RB with 32gb Ram used....but jumping from 1.385 bios to 1.425 added a whole bunch of heat to the CPU and the Package was hovering around 91-93. Will have to play with it some more tomorrow as it is pretty late now.
> 
> 
> 
> NB. its a fresh install of Win 10 Pro x64.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


those real bench temps are too hot for my liking... what cpu cooler? (fill out rigbuilder and add it to your sig block )
and is it down clocking and down volting as originally asked????
fix one thing at a time.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> So...to be able to finally pass RB 2.43 I had to raise the Additional Turbo Voltage in bios to 1.425 which resulted in :
> 
> Spikes 1.424 (Os)...Idle 1.136 (Os) ....Load 1.392 (Os) and passed the 15 min test in RB with 32gb Ram used....but jumping from 1.385 bios to 1.425 added a whole bunch of heat to the CPU and the Package was hovering around 91-93. Will have to play with it some more tomorrow as it is pretty late now.
> 
> 
> 
> NB. its a fresh install of Win 10 Pro x64.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


You're using adaptive voltage. It's perfectly normal and expected to have lower Vcore voltage when idle. From my experience AVX workloads cause bigger Vdroop or not supplying enough voltage then I set an AVX offset. I solved it by lowering the adaptive voltage by roughly the amount of Vdroop and adding that difference to the offset.

If you have temperature issues, apply an AVX offset 2-4. If you don't use softwares that have AVX code (there aren't many) then you're better off with an offset.


----------



## dmo580

Ok, I swapped out my Gigabyte Gaming K7 for an ASUS Maximus IX. Same CPU, but I've noticed that with the ASUS board, setting the same Vcore seems to get me even better stability. For instance I would fail Prime 95 in 2 minute son my Gigabyte board at 1.28 Vcore, but on the ASUS board, I've been stable 15 minutes now. Obviously more data is needed, but it's still interesting to observe.

I think once you factor in Vdroop, the ASUS board is actually even delivering less Vcore. I always log down what my Vcore @ Load so I have a good understanding of what a stable voltage is at load. So whereas the Gigabyte board supplied 1.284V and failed in 2 minutes, the ASUS board is only supplying 1.264V and is still going strong. Additionally because of this slight Vdroop on the ASUS board, I'm actually getting lower temps.

Maybe my old board was defective or something.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


Trying to do 1 thing at the time, but one thing gave 10 more things to deal with







)

Firstly, adaptive Works!...volts jump up and down with core freq...Cpu goes to 5.1...volts go up...Cpu goes to 4.1 volts go down..
The problem is that I had to add 1.425v in bios to have 1.392 in Os under load because whenever I apply load, volts go up...but not high enough... and using any less in bios eg 1.385 or 1.395...result in having 1.360 in Os under load and a BSOD.

I think my OS got corrupted all of the sudden as well so I am going back to point 0..
Gonna clear and reinstall Bios, put everything on default and start playing just with core voltage and see where that leads me.

Cooler is Noctua Nh-D14 + 1 Noctua 3000 ippp cooler for v-ram / dram...gonna re-seat this today as well as the cooler is touching the GPU which sits at a funny angle now...I either hit the GPU or if I turn it around I hit the ram...everything is tight







)

I think my strategy was wrong in the first place going: Stable manual volts --> Stable RAM ---> Cache ---> Adaptive ---> Lower Vols...so as said I am going back to point 0..will report later.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> You're using adaptive voltage. It's perfectly normal and expected to have lower Vcore voltage when idle. From my experience AVX workloads cause bigger Vdroop or not supplying enough voltage then I set an AVX offset. I solved it by lowering the adaptive voltage by roughly the amount of Vdroop and adding that difference to the offset.
> 
> If you have temperature issues, apply an AVX offset 2-4. If you don't use softwares that have AVX code (there aren't many) then you're better off with an offset.


You got me wrong, I have lower volts under Load!

I had to jump from 1.385 manual fixed volts (BIOS) stable ...to 1.425 adaptive (BIOS) stable

That 0.160 added voltage gave me a whole bunch of extra heat to take care of under load and I am hitting 91-93 Celsius after 10-15 min of RB. Before it was 75-80 Celsius (Cpu package) after 3-4h of RB.

Adaptive works great, except whatever value I set for the it llc 3 up to llc 7 or volts (Turbo) 1.360 to 1.395..when I get in OS under LOAD it drops to 1.360 - 1.376 for some reason which is not sufficient for my CPU and I BSOD.

Only way to make it supply necessary volts under load is to put turbo under Adaptive to 1.425 ....that gives me 1.392 under load...


----------



## becks

Oky...Update...I am a fool!

I was playing with the wrong LLC...I have more than 1 option in bios...
Corrupted OS....2 wasted days of my life....high blood pressure....and my sugar level went high....just because of some stupid terminology.

I still have PLENTY to learn...I am on the right track at least thanks to you.
Will post back later when I get home.

NB. Apex was much more easy... think because I was scared of that big bad MB and paid extra attention when changing stuff around


----------



## deathgun

Im really unexperienced with overclocking, By now Im only increasing the multiplier, keeping the BLCK locked at 100 and changing the voltages. I started trying with 1.2v (45 x 100) and for some reason the hwinfo64 shows the 1.160v when the cpus are under full load (x264 or prime95). Can anyone to help me finding out why?I tried some other values yesterday and the hwinfo64 showed it accordingly with what I set in the BIOS (I dont even remember those values, it was just a random test).

Another interesting fact is that whenever I left everything at auto in BIOS (clocks, voltages), the voltage the processor uses under full load is around 1.26v @4200mhz. Interesting factor 2 is that the pc is completely stable with this [email protected] (that the hwinfo says its 1.16v). Temps under full load are around 60-66º in Cores #0,#2 and #3. Core #1 is stable at 65-66º. Im using Corsair's H45.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Trying to do 1 thing at the time, but one thing gave 10 more things to deal with
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> Firstly, adaptive Works!...volts jump up and down with core freq...Cpu goes to 5.1...volts go up...Cpu goes to 4.1 volts go down..
> The problem is that I had to add 1.425v in bios to have 1.392 in Os under load because whenever I apply load, volts go up...but not high enough... and using any less in bios eg 1.385 or 1.395...result in having 1.360 in Os under load and a BSOD.
> 
> I think my OS got corrupted all of the sudden as well so I am going back to point 0..
> Gonna clear and reinstall Bios, put everything on default and start playing just with core voltage and see where that leads me.
> 
> Cooler is Noctua Nh-D14 + 1 Noctua 3000 ippp cooler for v-ram / dram...gonna re-seat this today as well as the cooler is touching the GPU which sits at a funny angle now...I either hit the GPU or if I turn it around I hit the ram...everything is tight
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> I think my strategy was wrong in the first place going: Stable manual volts --> Stable RAM ---> Cache ---> Adaptive ---> Lower Vols...so as said I am going back to point 0..will report later.


last thing... at idle the clock should drop to 8x100, if you are only seeing it drop to 42x100 verify that you are using the Balanced Power plan in Windows, and that in advanced power settings min proc state = 0%.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Oky...Update...I am a fool!
> 
> I was playing with the wrong LLC...I have more than 1 option in bios...
> Corrupted OS....2 wasted days of my life....high blood pressure....and my sugar level went high....just because of some stupid terminology.
> 
> I still have PLENTY to learn...I am on the right track at least thanks to you.
> Will post back later when I get home.
> 
> NB. Apex was much more easy... think because I was scared of that big bad MB and paid extra attention when changing stuff around


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


Have you seen my latest update ? quoted here.. It was me being silly all along


----------



## D13mass

Guys, who uses 7700K without change thermal interface to liquid metal ? Is it real ?









What is the stable OC and temps for cpu "out of the box" ? As I understood correctly many guys changed thermal interface for OC.


----------



## dmo580

Here are my stats in Prime 95 before and after delidding my 7700k.



I did make a motherboard change in the process, but the cooling is still the same. So keep in mind this isn't the best apples to apples test.


----------



## Inelastic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Guys, who uses 7700K without change thermal interface to liquid metal ? Is it real ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is the stable OC and temps for cpu "out of the box" ? As I understood correctly many guys changed thermal interface for OC.


I haven't changed mine. I run at 4.8GHz at 1.21V Vcore set in the bios (1.165V under load) on a custom loop and get in the low 60s in RealBench. At 5GHz, I was at 1.35V set in the bios and 1.312V under load running at mid 80s in RealBench.


----------



## D13mass

thank you guys!
One more question: which will be prefer ? Seller proposed choose


----------



## MaKeN

I own f777 one , very cold chip annd kinda good for oc , running it at 5130 ghz with no problems , about rest idkn.


----------



## becks

Mine is L642G264 doing 5.1 easy... anything over that becomes a problem


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Inelastic*
> 
> I haven't changed mine. I run at 4.8GHz at 1.21V Vcore set in the bios (1.165V under load) on a custom loop and get in the low 60s in RealBench. At 5GHz, I was at 1.35V set in the bios and 1.312V under load running at mid 80s in RealBench.


What the hell. I'm so envious. Then again the custom loop may be the factor here, but over 1.32v with stock TIM my CPU would hit 100C even with my D14 running full blast.

I suppose if I re-de-lid and apply less RTV or just use 4 dots of superglue as Rockit suggests, I could probably get another 3-5C out of the drop. In my years of OCing I've never gotten a lucky chip. Oh well.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Have you seen my latest update ? quoted here.. It was me being silly all along


lol... good to know you got it sorted out.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> What the hell. I'm so envious. Then again the custom loop may be the factor here, but over 1.32v with stock TIM my CPU would hit 100C even with my D14 running full blast.
> 
> I suppose if I re-de-lid and apply less RTV or just use 4 dots of superglue as Rockit suggests, I could probably get another 3-5C out of the drop. In my years of OCing I've never gotten a lucky chip. Oh well.


I would not use superglue....


----------



## JackCY

Re-lid? Why, just run it naked, what's the point of delidding otherwise if you just change the TIM, sure helps but worth the trouble, nah.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Re-lid? Why, just run it naked, what's the point of delidding otherwise if you just change the TIM, sure helps but worth the trouble, nah.


Running naked has its own risks too with the thin PCB. The theory is both the TIM and gap that Intel introduced is causing the massive temperature spike. That is why just by delidding, applying new TIM and reducing that gap between the die and IHS can see anywhere from 10-25C drops.

I have no idea how I did as it was my first time, but after reading a bit more, it seems that taking it back off just to observe the imprint the die made would be a good inspection. Also, in reviewing my own work with the RTV it's clear I used too much even though I used a needle and syringe. I probably should've just brushed small amounts of RTV on there--enough so I don't need to worry about IHS movement.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I would not use superglue....


I wouldn't glue the IHS down with 4 lines of super glue as that would be pretty much perament, but is 4 dots in the corners on the outside that bad? (Photo below from Rockit Cool)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> I wouldn't glue the IHS down with 4 lines of super glue as that would be pretty much perament, but is 4 dots in the corners on the outside that bad? (Photo below from Rockit Cool)


bad if you plan to remove the IHS later.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> bad if you plan to remove the IHS later.


Super glue is actually pretty weak against lateral forces. So if you put the dot on the right side where your delidder provides a shearing force on it, it should pop off pretty easily. I'm not saying you're wrong, but Rockit Cool does specifically mention that they have found this method works well even for taking off the IHS again.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> I wouldn't glue the IHS down with 4 lines of super glue as that would be pretty much perament, but is 4 dots in the corners on the outside that bad? (Photo below from Rockit Cool)


Do the same but with rtv silicone... wait till it dries and it will hold ihs in place as the sglue


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Re-lid? Why, just run it naked, what's the point of delidding otherwise if you just change the TIM, sure helps but worth the trouble, nah.


I think the amount of people running Kaby lake and skylake without a IHS could be counted on 1 hand, maybe 2
you can order a delid from some shops
they will glue it back together as well
and still see a temp drop of ~20 degrees

how do you mount any cooler and account for the missing IHS?
they don't make contact

for ivy bridge EK offered a custom mounting option for running without a IHS (that shouldn't fit either any more as the substrate and IHS since then have all a different thickness

I have found only one review of running without a IHS compared to a relid

3 degrees difference
and a whole lot of trouble of mounting and making it work

problem with the original TIM is not just that it is not as good

the space between DIE and IHS is too big

usually you want TIM to fill out the smallest imperfections between 2 surfaces

but since Intel stopped using solder the 2 surfaces don't actually meet and heat is transferred only through the TIM

conventional thinking would suggest running bare would be best temp wise

but liquid metal has so great heat transfer capabilities that it's like when Intel used solder

people were also delidding soldered chips back in the day and saw a reduction in temps in the low single digits (3-5 degrees)

just putting liquid metal as a replacement TIM under the IHS is quite good enough
especially considering that thanks to delidding tools these days less handy people can do it too (means higher chance for chipped DIE's like in the days before IHS on CPUs)

edit:
added a link to the review, bare DIE vs delid-relid

https://m.hardocp.com/article/2017/02/07/7600k_naked_die_cooling_temperature_followup/


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Super glue is actually pretty weak against lateral forces. So if you put the dot on the right side where your delidder provides a shearing force on it, it should pop off pretty easily. I'm not saying you're wrong, but Rockit Cool does specifically mention that they have found this method works well even for taking off the IHS again.


The super glue bonds with the pcb and when you try shearing it off as you put it, it will take parts of the pcb with it and destroy your chip.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I think the amount of people running Kaby lake and skylake without a IHS could be counted on 1 hand, maybe 2
> you can order a delid from some shops
> they will glue it back together as well
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> and still see a temp drop of ~20 degrees
> 
> how do you mount any cooler and account for the missing IHS?
> they don't make contact
> 
> for ivy bridge EK offered a custom mounting option for running without a IHS (that shouldn't fit either any more as the substrate and IHS since then have all a different thickness
> 
> I have found only one review of running without a IHS compared to a relid
> 
> 3 degrees difference
> and a whole lot of trouble of mounting and making it work
> 
> problem with the original TIM is not just that it is not as good
> 
> the space between DIE and IHS is too big
> 
> usually you want TIM to fill out the smallest imperfections between 2 surfaces
> 
> but since Intel stopped using solder the 2 surfaces don't actually meet and heat is transferred only through the TIM
> 
> conventional thinking would suggest running bare would be best temp wise
> 
> but liquid metal has so great heat transfer capabilities that it's like when Intel used solder
> 
> people were also delidding soldered chips back in the day and saw a reduction in temps in the low single digits (3-5 degrees)
> 
> just putting liquid metal as a replacement TIM under the IHS is quite good enough
> especially considering that thanks to delidding tools these days less handy people can do it too (means higher chance for chipped DIE's like in the days before IHS on CPUs
> 
> 
> )
> 
> edit:
> added a link to the review, bare DIE vs delid-relid
> 
> https://m.hardocp.com/article/2017/02/07/7600k_naked_die_cooling_temperature_followup/


the question is whether jackcy is running bare-to-die. If not, it's just bloviating.


----------



## Spiriva

After deliding my cpu, i just put the cpu back in the socket and placed the IHS on top of it, and locked it in place. There is no gain as far as i know to use any type of glue/silicon to put the IHS back on. The socket "lock" is enuff to keep it in place.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Spiriva*
> 
> After deliding my cpu, i just put the cpu back in the socket and placed the IHS on top of it, and locked it in place. There is no gain as far as i know to use any type of glue/silicon to put the IHS back on. The socket "lock" is enuff to keep it in place.


until you take the chip out and the ihs slides around changing the thin layer that formed...and you need to do the whole process over again.. I did 4 super glue dots as rockit suggested. Acetone can be used to help remove super gluen. Another method would be using a razor between the glue and side of the IHS. No glue is under my ihs. I don't anticipate ever needing to redo the delid from the feedback SL has shared.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> until you take the chip out and the ihs slides around changing the thin layer that formed...and you need to do the whole process over again.. I did 4 super glue dots as rockit suggested. Acetone can be used to help remove super gluen. Another method would be using a razor between the glue and side of the IHS. No glue is under my ihs. I don't anticipate ever needing to redo the delid from the feedback SL has shared.


For me, i find it easier to clean LM under the IHS then cleaning non LM compaund on top of it ...( and you have to because you take out your cpu).
Downside that :you'll have to clean under and on top of IHS and takes a bit longer time, but , considering the time that you will need to re-dellid it again after you put glue there, i think it takes longer ... well idkn i guess it depends, some use those delliding tools wich makes it faster , i use razor method and thinking that with sglue razor method would take long time to undo the sglue there and clean it.
I guess there are diff types of sglue out there... i bought one from homedepot to glue my child's Lego pieces so they wont fall appart when he throws that lego toys arround , And after seeing how this sglue literally melts that plastic pieces together.... makes me think of using it on cpu or not








But, yeah, its just my opinion...

On that picture he showed , its a such a perfect aplication of sglue , considering that the glue is not dense at all , its almost as water, i guess its verry hard to apply it with no spills arround


----------



## Inelastic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> On that picture he showed , its a such a perfect aplication of sglue , considering that the glue is not dense at all , its almost as water, i guess its verry hard to apply it with no spills arround


There's a gel type of super glue that's not watery/runny.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Inelastic*
> 
> There's a gel type of super glue that's not watery/runny.


good info! I didnt know/use that type of sglue...

And that explains why it would look that perfect









But anyway, idkn if it is like real sglue, but its a glue right? Its not a silicone ... as i know , the difference between silicone and glue, is that they got really big diff in flexibility/softness and temp resistance ...
Idkn why intell used silicon type of adhesive there instead of sglue or welding , but i gues from all,the easier way to remove /dellid is the silicon one...
Personally i would prefer ( if i would be up to do it) the one that would be removed fast and easy....


----------



## Spiriva

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> until you take the chip out and the ihs slides around changing the thin layer that formed...and you need to do the whole process over again.. I did 4 super glue dots as rockit suggested. Acetone can be used to help remove super gluen. Another method would be using a razor between the glue and side of the IHS. No glue is under my ihs. I don't anticipate ever needing to redo the delid from the feedback SL has shared.


Im pretty sure there is no reason to remove the cpu from the motherboad ever. Well if the cpu dies then i have to replace it, but then it doesnt matter, And its very unlikely i would upgrade from Asus ix hero to any other motherboard, as my cpu does 5.2ghz on this board.

For me im way more happy with not using superglue on my cpu.


----------



## becks

@Jpmboy

Reporting in... Turbo V in bios 1.376 with adaptive + llc 6 = Stable RB 2.43 with v under load 1.392 ( 109w Cpu and 112w Cpu package)....temps 76-76-73-73.
It seems I have a really mediocre chip....I hit Trump wall at 5.1, tried even 1.440 in bios for 5.2 and BSOD at 15-20 mins into RB (temps in the 80 ssh)
Cache is at 48, everything else on default/auto.
Is there anything I could bump to help with 5.2, 5.3 ?
Maybe if I apply more V to PCH ? idk...
Still working on lowering volts...will try to lower to 1.375....1.374 and see what happens.
Freq and Volts are going up and down correctly now ( 800 - 5.100.....0.600 - 1.392)
Found it interesting that if I go with 1.387 + llc 5 in bios I get same result as 1.376 + llc 6 but a bit more W on the Cpu/Cpu package and more heat...

Next on my list are, lower volts, than cache....if I can get away with 5.1 core / 5.1 uncore will suffice.


----------



## Grimz Reeper

hey all! can anybody shed why i can't reach 5Ghz on my CPU now that I've changed boards? i was using a Maximus IX Code that i recently sold for reasons, and now am using Maximus IX Hero. Voltages were 1.32v idle on the Code, and now this 1.4124 @ 5Ghz idle with the hero....way too high and locks up and isn't stable.

Can anyone shed some light? or a method on how to reach that magical 5Ghz on this board is possible?

Cheers!


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Grimz Reeper*
> 
> hey all! can anybody shed why i can't reach 5Ghz on my CPU now that I've changed boards? i was using a Maximus IX Code that i recently sold for reasons, and now am using Maximus IX Hero. Voltages were 1.32v idle on the Code, and now this 1.4124 @ 5Ghz idle with the hero....way too high and locks up and isn't stable.
> 
> Can anyone shed some light? or a method on how to reach that magical 5Ghz on this board is possible?
> 
> Cheers!


Did you had your overclock dialed in manually in bios before or was it everything on Auto ?
If everything was on auto, did you tried using AiSuite ? or KeyBot (Keynote...can't remember the exact name)..


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> @Jpmboy
> 
> Reporting in... Turbo V in bios 1.376 with adaptive + llc 6 = Stable RB 2.43 with v under load 1.392 ( 109w Cpu and 112w Cpu package)....temps 76-76-73-73.
> It seems I have a really mediocre chip....I hit Trump wall at 5.1, tried even 1.440 in bios for 5.2 and BSOD at 15-20 mins into RB (temps in the 80 ssh)
> Cache is at 48, everything else on default/auto.
> Is there anything I could bump to help with 5.2, 5.3 ?
> Maybe if I apply more V to PCH ? idk...
> Still working on lowering volts...will try to lower to 1.375....1.374 and see what happens.
> Freq and Volts are going up and down correctly now ( 800 - 5.100.....0.600 - 1.392)
> Found it interesting that if I go with 1.387 + llc 5 in bios I get same result as 1.376 + llc 6 but a bit more W on the Cpu/Cpu package and more heat...
> 
> Next on my list are, lower volts, than cache....if I can get away with 5.1 core / 5.1 uncore will suffice.


AVX is generating quite alot more heat so I would start with an offset of 2-4. If you're not using softwares daily with AVX instructions then there's no use of it anyways. For gaming you will see absolutely no benefit for it (yet).

Try manual fixed voltage. RealBench is doing fluxuating load to simulate real life usage and causes frequency and voltage fluxuation which could cause instability at certain frequencies where the voltage is not enough. Voltages are not linear to frequencies. If it's stable with manual, then go back to adaptive but add a really small offset, like 0.02-0.05 V and lower the turbo voltage by the same amount giving you the desired total Vcore. This last step resulted in stabilizing my 4.8 GHz with AVX offset. At 4.8 GHz it was stable but once AVX was detected it dropped to 4.5 GHz but didn't get enough voltage and crashed.

On my board and probably on others LLC level 5 gives the closes Vcore to the set value under load. Setting IA AC / DC load line to 0.01 should help with more stable voltages.

If unstable but you can't increase voltage more because of heat, try lowering RAM speed and voltage (try 1.2 V between 2133-2800 MHz with default timings or even a bit looser). That should decrease temperatures by 3-10 degrees. Instability can be caused by too much heat as well because of electromigration.

You can lower cache frequency to 47-46 and see if it's more stable. Cache speed doesn't result in much gain anyways. See guide in first post or you can benchmark it for yourself.


----------



## Grimz Reeper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Did you had your overclock dialed in manually in bios before or was it everything on Auto ?
> If everything was on auto, did you tried using AiSuite ? or KeyBot (Keynote...can't remember the exact name)..


I just set the oc profile to the asus 5ghz oc profile. Im a bit daft with this new chip so can anyone shed liggt on how to do it manually? Forcing voltage?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Grimz Reeper*
> 
> I just set the oc profile to the asus 5ghz oc profile. Im a bit daft with this new chip so can anyone shed liggt on how to do it manually? Forcing voltage?


Read the guide in the first post. Or this.


----------



## Grimz Reeper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Read the guide in the first post. Or this.


No worries, will do!


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*


RB 2.43 that I have does not use AVX or if it does.....the avx is not working wright.
When I use Aida stress test.. or other stress tests that use AVX... it is detected right by my CPU and it drops its Freq to 5.0 and stays stable..
In RB i don't see any of those drops in Freq and assume it is not using AVX.

A AC / DC load line works the same for me either on Auto or 0.01.

My problem is that I cannot go past 5.1 .... not even when I provide the CPU 1.440v manual in Bios. Its Cinebench Stable....Aida Stable...CPU-z stable but not RB stable.. and For my "stable" I want at least 1h of RB with 100% ram.
And also, adaptive helped me run lower volts in bios than on manual..
On manual I had to run 1.385 in bios...which reads 1.392 in Os and in RB temps of 79-80
On adaptive I have 1.376 In bios...+ llc 6 ...which reads 1.392 in Os but temps in RB are lower...and the Wattage on CPU and CPU package is lower...and the fact that OS reads v in bins of 0.16 (if I remember right) it seems using adaptive and llc6 makes me get real/actual lower volts ( being on the low side of the bin)...haven't used my multi yet so its just guesses.


----------



## Spiriva

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Grimz Reeper*
> 
> hey all! can anybody shed why i can't reach 5Ghz on my CPU now that I've changed boards? i was using a Maximus IX Code that i recently sold for reasons, and now am using Maximus IX Hero. Voltages were 1.32v idle on the Code, and now this 1.4124 @ 5Ghz idle with the hero....way too high and locks up and isn't stable.
> 
> Can anyone shed some light? or a method on how to reach that magical 5Ghz on this board is possible?
> 
> Cheers!







Try following these steps, you got the same settings on your MB.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> RB 2.43 that I have does not use AVX or if it does.....the avx is not working wright.
> When I use Aida stress test.. or other stress tests that use AVX... it is detected right by my CPU and it drops its Freq to 5.0 and stays stable..
> In RB i don't see any of those drops in Freq and assume it is not using AVX.
> 
> A AC / DC load line works the same for me either on Auto or 0.01.
> 
> My problem is that I cannot go past 5.1 .... not even when I provide the CPU 1.440v manual in Bios. Its Cinebench Stable....Aida Stable...CPU-z stable but not RB stable.. and For my "stable" I want at least 1h of RB with 100% ram.
> And also, adaptive helped me run lower volts in bios than on manual..
> On manual I had to run 1.385 in bios...which reads 1.392 in Os and in RB temps of 79-80
> On adaptive I have 1.376 In bios...+ llc 6 ...which reads 1.392 in Os but temps in RB are lower...and the Wattage on CPU and CPU package is lower...and the fact that OS reads v in bins of 0.16 (if I remember right) it seems using adaptive and llc6 makes me get real/actual lower volts ( being on the low side of the bin)...haven't used my multi yet so its just guesses.


LLC 6 almost for sure will give more voltage then set. Also voltage is always oscillating, not a straight line and never trust voltage meters. Voltage can spike only for split seconds or miliseconds and you (software) won't notice. You need an oscilloscope for that to detect. So the voltages you set are never exactly what you set or what you measure by software. It's always an average measurement. Just like 220 V from the wall socket that's only 220 by average.

Forget Cinebench, it's not an accurate representation for stability. Just like booting into Windows isn't. Aida is not bad but it's not generating enough load and it's constant load. That's why it's relatively easy to pass.

RealBench stress test uses a combination of softwares like 7-Zip, Blender (Luxmark rendering), x264. Those all use AVX code. You might not see frequency drops because either your monitoring tool is not refreshing fast enough or because not all cores are doing AVX computations at the same time. The only issue with RealBench is that it's not a realistic scenario (Asus claims that it's the most realistic). Who's doing 3D rendering while encoding x264 and compressing files?! I don't. And don't think many others either.

There's also a newer RB version out: http://dlcdnmkt.asus.com/rog/RealBench_v2.54.zip?_ga=1.76815831.399520072.1491942636.

In my opinion the best way to test stability is to actually use the PC. Test with the softwares that you use for work or gaming. I use 3D Max with Corona Render. I open up a demanding scene (13 GB in RAM) and do a 1-2 hour render test. GTA V is also good for testing games as it stresses both the GPU and CPU and you can edit the launcher config to make it loop. If I test those tests then it's good enough for me. I'm not doing nuclear research to need 101% stability. Even nuclear reactors fail sometimes.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*


Agree on that, but as I said *I think* the v are actually lower due to Wattage used and lower temp, at same freq with same test on the same PC







but yet again it might be just margin of error..

Still testing, the trouble is that I work so much ...I only have like 2-3 h / day to put my hands on it...that's like 2 RB runs and 3 bsod's and that's it
Will report later how its doing but still need any advice that might help me go 5.2...5.3 without going over the top with volts...maybe i'm missing something in bios...


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Agree on that, but as I said *I think* the v are actually lower due to Wattage used and lower temp, at same freq with same test on the same PC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but yet again it might be just margin of error..
> 
> Still testing, the trouble is that I work so much ...I only have like 2-3 h / day to put my hands on it...that's like 2 RB runs and 3 bsod's and that's it
> Will report later how its doing but still need any advice that might help me go 5.2...5.3 without going over the top with volts...maybe i'm missing something in bios...


Maybe your chip can't handle 5.2. Does it worth the effort to squeeze out even the last MHz? I'd settle with 5 GHz if it's stable and you're not preparing to win any OC competition.


----------



## FedericoUY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I'd settle with 5 GHz if it's stable and you're not preparing to win any OC competition.


Hahaha maybe he is








LOL


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Maybe your chip can't handle 5.2. Does it worth the effort to squeeze out even the last MHz? I'd settle with 5 GHz if it's stable and you're not preparing to win any OC competition.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedericoUY*
> 
> Hahaha maybe he is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL


Ohhhhh.... I'd like to do that but I doubt I will be able anytime soon...have a ring on my finger and that wraps it up pretty much. Even this new build as it is has stretched the limit a bit to much...

I think @dirtyred understands me very well when it comes to finance









Edit! That won't stop me to push every last drop of performance out of this Chip!!! I have 1 year shop warranty!!!! (don't ask how haha)


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Ohhhhh.... I'd like to do that but I doubt I will be able anytime soon...have a ring on my finger and that wraps it up pretty much. Even this new build as it is has stretched the limit a bit to much...
> 
> I think @dirtyred understands me very well when it comes to finance


Yes I do but I doubt you used a crappy laptop for the past 10 years as I did.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Yes I do but I doubt you used a crappy laptop for the past 10 years as I did.


Even worse....a crappy laptop + a dyeing 11 years old PC


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Even worse....a crappy laptop + a dyeing 11 years old PC


How about a crappy corporate laptop from *2015 sporting 1366x768 resolution?*


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> AVX is generating quite alot more heat so I would start with an offset of 2-4. If you're not using softwares daily with AVX instructions then there's no use of it anyways. For gaming you will see absolutely no benefit for it (yet).
> 
> Try manual fixed voltage. RealBench is doing fluxuating load to simulate real life usage and causes frequency and voltage fluxuation which could cause instability at certain frequencies where the voltage is not enough. Voltages are not linear to frequencies. If it's stable with manual, then go back to adaptive but add a really small offset, like 0.02-0.05 V and lower the turbo voltage by the same amount giving you the desired total Vcore. This last step resulted in stabilizing my 4.8 GHz with AVX offset. At 4.8 GHz it was stable but once AVX was detected it dropped to 4.5 GHz but didn't get enough voltage and crashed.
> 
> On my board and probably on others LLC level 5 gives the closes Vcore to the set value under load. Setting IA AC / DC load line to 0.01 should help with more stable voltages.
> 
> If unstable but you can't increase voltage more because of heat, try lowering RAM speed and voltage (try 1.2 V between 2133-2800 MHz with default timings or even a bit looser). That should decrease temperatures by 3-10 degrees. Instability can be caused by too much heat as well because of electromigration.
> 
> You can lower cache frequency to 47-46 and see if it's more stable. Cache speed doesn't result in much gain anyways. See guide in first post or you can benchmark it for yourself.


Personally I just keep cache at 42. It doesn't hurt. IF you're trying to dial in your CPU overclock, keep everything low for now.

With that said, if one drops AVX by 2 - 4 how does that affect Prime 95 benching? Does Prime 95 then look more in line with other benchmarks? I'm curious because if you drop AVX sufficiently, could it be possible that other benchmarks now generate more heat than Prime 95?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Agree on that, but as I said *I think* the v are actually lower due to Wattage used and lower temp, at same freq with same test on the same PC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but yet again it might be just margin of error..
> 
> Still testing, the trouble is that I work so much ...I only have like 2-3 h / day to put my hands on it...that's like 2 RB runs and 3 bsod's and that's it
> Will report later how its doing but still need any advice that might help me go 5.2...5.3 without going over the top with volts...maybe i'm missing something in bios...


I think you should always measure load voltage versus frequency rather than measuring what you set as different motherboards behave differently in terms of LLC and what not. Ultimately the most accurate would be using a DMM or oscilloscope to measure the vcore each time your CPU is tested for stability. I personally don't do that so just measuring load vcore vs frequency vs temperature is good enough for me.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> How about a crappy corporate laptop from *2015 sporting 1366x768 resolution?*


How about Asus Eee pc...the first generation


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> How about Asus Eee pc...the first generation


Heh you definitely win. Anything 10 years old is certainly slow especially in the days prior to SSDs.


----------



## moorhen2

One of my first PC's was a 286.lol


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> One of my first PC's was a 286.lol


Same here, coax networking through Dos 4, orange screen, 300-baud Modem and basic BBSing.
Ah those were the days...

Funny thing is I have only got into Overclocking in the last 18 or so months, guess it was the last frontier...


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Personally I just keep cache at 42. It doesn't hurt. IF you're trying to dial in your CPU overclock, keep everything low for now.
> 
> With that said, if one drops AVX by 2 - 4 how does that affect Prime 95 benching? Does Prime 95 then look more in line with other benchmarks? I'm curious because if you drop AVX sufficiently, could it be possible that other benchmarks now generate more heat than Prime 95?
> I think you should always measure load voltage versus frequency rather than measuring what you set as different motherboards behave differently in terms of LLC and what not. Ultimately the most accurate would be using a DMM or oscilloscope to measure the vcore each time your CPU is tested for stability. I personally don't do that so just measuring load vcore vs frequency vs temperature is good enough for me.


Well, you can test Prime95 with and without AVX. Add *CpuSupportsAVX=0* into local.txt and see what temperatures it results. I suspect an offset of around 2-3 would generate the same amount of heat.

I did benchmark Prime95 v28.1 with and without AVX extension. The CPU was running on 4.4 GHz with no AVX offset, RAM @ 3000 MHz with 16-16-16-28-2T timings. The results are pretty much expected but there is a surprise: AVX with hyper-threading is slower then without while still around 1.6-1.9x faster then SSE4 depending on the FFT size, the average being 166,6%. That translates at 5000 MHz to an offset of 20! While it's only one benchmark and at a single frequency, I expect similar results in other benchmarks as well.

So, that being know you can and probably should use AVX offset when overclocking to keep your temperatures low enough. An offset of around 2-4 should result in roughly the same temperatures.



At every FFT size left columns are without HT, right colums are with HT. Data can be checked here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EE4ox-jePQ_S9zYqE9dTZiaMh78jc_Gi2GrwGG6AiSw/edit?usp=sharing


----------



## becks

Another update...

What If i tell you that....without re-deliding..and without reapplying paste...and same setup....Only difference I raised cache back to 5.1 (so 5.1 Core / 5.1 Cache...Ram default 2133) I was able to lower volts to *1.364*+llc 6 and pass Intel XTU / RB / Cine / Aida at 1.376 under load and gained 10-15 degrees...running a max of 68 Celsius (All fans at 60-65%)

Before I would sit at 1.392 under load with 86 Celsius under load (even more at times - with fans screaming at full power) and would BSOD at any lower volts.

And all this Just by Tweaking volts and trying to understand what does what.

I still stand by what I said! Firstly I still have to learn A LOT ! and secondly I will squeeze every single drop of performance out of this chip!


----------



## becks

Passed 30 min Rb 2.54
Passed 30 min Prime95 v2810 with AVX
Passed 30 min XTU
And new Personal record on CB

All with 1.342 in bios + llc6, tweaking is magic..

Will edit later and add screens.
Still can't do 5.2....and its neither a v or temp wall...I'm sure I am missing something..


Spoiler: Pics!


----------



## MaKeN

Interesting resoults, i wonder i can do the same , what votls you have tweak for that big drop in vcore?
That happened after lowering ram speed and increasing cache to 5.1? ( dam my chip would need many voltage increase with every step of increasing cache, max is 47 for me)


----------



## dmo580

So I've been benching at 1.34v @ 4900 a few times. 45 minutes on Small FFTs and 50 minutes on blend. Then I ran overnight and it failed at 7 hours. I guess it's up to 1.35V then. I suspect that should be fine for full stability.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Interesting resoults, i wonder i can do the same , what votls you have tweak for that big drop in vcore?
> That happened after lowering ram speed and increasing cache to 5.1? ( dam my chip would need many voltage increase with every step of increasing cache, max is 47 for me)


Core ratio 51
BCLK Freq 100
AVX Offset 2
CPU SVID Enable
Cache current limit max 255.50
Min Cache Auto
Max Cache 51
Adaptive
1.342
Offset Volt Auto
PCH Core 1.0125
PLL Termination V 0.990
CPU Standby 1.00 (These 3 are really sensitive for me....to litle or to much is very bad and I get Prime errors after 10-25 mins )
CPU Load-Line Calibration - lvl 6
CPU Current Capability 130%
DRAM Current Capability 120%
DRAM Power Phase Control Extreme
CPU Power Phase Control Extreme
IA AC Load Line - 0.01
IA DC Load Line - 0.01
SpeedStep - Enable
Turbo Mode Enable
FCLK Freq 1GHz
Speed Shift Enable

Still testing with Cpu/Cache and once I'm done I will put everything back on default and start playing with DRAM and see where that gets me ...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> So I've been benching at 1.34v @ 4900 a few times. 45 minutes on Small FFTs and 50 minutes on blend. Then I ran overnight and it failed at 7 hours. I guess it's up to 1.35V then. I suspect that should be fine for full stability.


Depends what you call "stable" for me 30 mins of everything is stable enough... Its not a self driving car with no room for error, its a PC.
I mainly game, and render a video or 2 once in a while or Photoshop some pictures... or stream some game play...


----------



## skingun

Username: skingun
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 49
Core Frequency: 4900
Cache Frequency: 4500
Vcore in UEFI: 1.34
Vcore: 1.344
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Full custom loop.
Stability Test: 8 hours Realbench

Batch Number: Unsure.
Ram Speed: (3000 15 17 17 35 1T)
VCCIO: 1.160
VCCSA: 1.144
Ram Voltage: 1.344
Motherboard: ASUS Apex Z270
LLC Setting: 5

Notes. 1.28v for 4.8Ghz. 1.44v for 5Ghz. (Potato)


----------



## patman-dk

Username: patman-dk
CPU Model: 7600k
Base Clock: 3800
Core Multiplier: 49
Core Frequency: 4900
AVX Offset: 2
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore in UEFI: 1.24
Vcore: 1.24
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Full custom loop.
Stability Test: 8 hours Realbench

Batch Number: L649H322
Ram Speed: (3100) 15 17 17 35 1T)
VCCIO: 1.05
VCCSA: 1.05
Ram Voltage: 1.35
Motherboard: ASUS Z270-P
LLC Setting: 5

http://imgur.com/a/InHnX

No delid but i like the low vcore for 4900.

I struggeling to get 5ghz stable tho, any suggestions?

I tried 1.3 vcore, maybe I need to raise VCCIO and VCCSA?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *patman-dk*
> 
> Username: patman-dk
> 
> I struggeling to get 5ghz stable tho, any suggestions?
> 
> I tried 1.3 vcore, maybe I need to raise VCCIO and VCCSA?


Kaby Lake OC is all temps, voltage (vcore) and luck (once you get past 5.2Ghz there are secondary voltages that might need adjustments, usually less than the board puts in if left on auto)

so the delid is the only thing you can additionally do

well I guess you could try out phase change cooling, but a delid would not only be easier to do and cheaper, but that solution would benefit from a delid as well (though would have to use a different TIM than liquid metal







, err Grizzly cryonaut)

VCCIO and VCCSA has to do with RAM overclocking, trying to stabilize
and more is not better

those are about signal strength, and more might make it get worse again
having to try out through testing which setting is best

also as they feed voltage to the memory controller which sits inside the CPU they would also affect temps

from Asus OC guide (JPmboy's signature: Kaby Lake OC Guide )
Quote:


> CPU VCCIO and CPU System Agent voltages are found in the Extreme Tweaker page (scroll down to the bottom of the page to find them). These two voltages are sensitive to changes because they are related to signaling.
> Applying too much voltage can cause instability.
> Note the auto value being used by the motherboard (displayed to the left of the entry box) and apply gradual changes either above or below that value.
> 
> DDR4 frequency range Required CPU VCCIO Voltage range Required CPU System Agent Voltage range
> DDR4-2133 ~ DDR4-2800 1.05V ~ 1.15V 1.05V ~ 1.15V
> DDR4-2800 ~ DDR4-3600 1.10V~1.25V 1.10V~1.30V
> DDR4-3600 ~ DDR4-4266 1.15V~1.30V 1.20V~1.35V
> 
> The values shown in the table above are a guideline only.
> Some CPUs may require more voltage and others less.
> The amount of voltage required depends on the capabilities of the CPU's memory controller and the memory kit used.


----------



## D13mass

Finally I bought 7700k, for 4800Mhz I need setup 1.32V and max temps during gaming 75 °C and think it`s not bad result, but for 4900Mhz I tried to give 1.40V and it was unstable


----------



## patman-dk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Finally I bought 7700k, for 4800Mhz I need setup 1.32V and max temps during gaming 75 °C and think it`s not bad result, but for 4900Mhz I tried to give 1.40V and it was unstable


Do u use LLC for vdroop control?


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *patman-dk*
> 
> Do u use LLC for vdroop control?


No, my MSI motherboard doesn`t have these settings, so I use 'Override' mode for setup voltage and put manually 1.32V and I turned off Compensation settings because it increases voltage in idle mode.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Finally I bought 7700k, for 4800Mhz I need setup 1.32V and max temps during gaming 75 °C and think it`s not bad result, but for 4900Mhz I tried to give 1.40V and it was unstable


Set pll oc voltage to 1.100 you will get a drop in temps and you will be able to get higher clocks.

I run 1.100 on it and it's perfectly fine. With my cooling setup , i get 38-42 c temps in gaming , 60c on stress testing, water temps about 32-35c.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> No, my MSI motherboard doesn`t have these settings, so I use 'Override' mode for setup voltage and put manually 1.32V and I turned off Compensation settings because it increases voltage in idle mode.


I use adaptive, never tried override on that board( how will it defer?) what kind of compensation setting you are talking about? You mean llc settings?
Thx


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I use adaptive, never tried override on that board( how will it defer?) what kind of compensation setting you are talking about? You mean llc settings?
> Thx


No, I mean this one (it`s old my screenshot) "CPU Core Volyage COmpensation"


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Set pll oc voltage to 1.100 you will get a drop in temps and you will be able to get higher clocks.
> 
> I run 1.100 on it and it's perfectly fine. With my cooling setup , i get 38-42 c temps in gaming , 60c on stress testing, water temps about 32-35c.


Could you explain what does it mean ? I don`t see these settings on my MB .

Sorry, my fault, I found, it`s record#6 from my screen, so setup it to 1.100 and don`t touch another settings except core voltage ?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Could you explain what does it mean ? I don`t see these settings on my MB .
> 
> Sorry, my fault, I found, it`s record#6 from my screen, so setup it to 1.100 and don`t touch another settings except core voltage ?


Take a look in the screen shot you posted. I can see Cpu Pll voltage set to auto. Make it be 1.100( on z270 boards it would simply decreasy in an insane amount the temps)

How you turn off the compensation? Set it on auto ?

On msi z170 you have a setting for llc ... but its limited , it would just do one option llc mode 1 or something as i remember from previous msi z170 board.


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Take a look in the screen shot you posted. I can see Cpu Pll voltage set to auto. Make it be 1.100( on z270 boards it would simply decreasy in an insane amount the temps)
> 
> How you turn off the compensation? Set it on auto ?
> 
> On msi z170 you have a setting for llc ... but its limited , it would just do one option llc mode 1 or something as i remember from previous msi z170 board.


I don`t have LLC settings.

Right now what I have setup


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> I don`t have LLC settings.
> 
> Right now what I have setup


Did temps drop after changing pll voltage?

As i just searched in google the z170 m5 wont have llc option, only m3 nad m7 would have it. Try to update to latest bios and see if they apear.... other than that idkn...


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Did temps drop after changing pll voltage?
> 
> As i just searched in google the z170 m5 wont have llc option, only m3 nad m7 would have it. Try to update to latest bios and see if they apear.... other than that idkn...


I have latest bios version.







Temps yes, little bit smaller.


----------



## patman-dk

what is stock pll oc voltage? i think I have auto on my asus mb


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> I have latest bios version.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Temps yes, little bit smaller.


Hello

Check Digitall Power menu.. its the Cpu Loadline Calibration Control.... this from my Msi Z270 Gaming Pro Carbon one



I never change that from Auto.. as i set 1.290v in the bios and under load the voltage is 1.296v.. that's nice and enough for Rock Solid 5Ghz


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> I have latest bios version.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Temps yes, little bit smaller.


You don't need LLC it if using Adaptive.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Check Digitall Power menu.. its the Cpu Loadline Calibration Control.... this from my Msi Z270 Gaming Pro Carbon one
> 
> 
> 
> I never change that from Auto.. as i set 1.290v in the bios and under load the voltage is 1.296v.. that's nice and enough for Rock Solid 5Ghz


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> I have latest bios version.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Temps yes, little bit smaller.[/quote
> 
> Well if only little bit then your board is a bit different then z270 msi boards are... i see a 10-15c difference on my board. I own z270 g m7 .
> 
> Yep it differs from m7 .... the z170 m5 wont have "digital power " there as i wread on the web.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You don't need LLC it if using Adaptive.


It depends on your board. Like I said when I was on my Gigabyte board I noticed different behavior on Auto/Standard/High/Turbo. Similarly on my ASUS board I find different LLC behavior too. I think most people have established here if you have an ASUS board, LLC5 is perfect.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> It depends on your board. Like I said when I was on my Gigabyte board I noticed different behavior on Auto/Standard/High/Turbo. Similarly on my ASUS board I find different LLC behavior too. I think most people have established here if you have an ASUS board, LLC5 is perfect.


I was talking about Adaptive/Dynamic DVID. So the Vcore according to VID will go up and down according to CPU load.

Example Auto LLC, DVID/Adaptive full load prime95 1.332v, RealBench 1.284v, IDLE ~0.600v. No Vdroop.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I was talking about Adaptive/Dynamic DVID. So the Vcore according to VID will go up and down according to CPU load.
> 
> Example Auto LLC, DVID/Adaptive full load prime95 1.332v, RealBench 1.284v, IDLE ~0.600v. No Vdroop.


Measuring Vdroop is a lot harder if you allow VID modes. You need to put your CPU at load so the frequency maxes out but not as much load as benchmarking. I typically visit some crappy Flash based website like CNN's video streaming. As it loads it will peg your CPU at a higher usage rate and you can measure the Vcore then. It's a light loading at max speed, and you can compare that Vcore with Vcore under Prime 95. i've found a significant difference. The other easy way is to just turn off C-States and EIST and your vcore won't drop in idle.

This is what I documented on my Z270 Gaming K7.



Notice auto and standard result in a Vdroop of ~0.048V, but in High and Turbo the Load VCore shoots up PAST what I've set. That's dangerous. I've already reported this to Gigabyte and got zero response.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Measuring Vdroop is a lot harder if you allow VID modes. You need to put your CPU at load so the frequency maxes out but not as much load as benchmarking. I typically visit some crappy Flash based website like CNN's video streaming. As it loads it will peg your CPU at a higher usage rate and you can measure the Vcore then. It's a light loading at max speed, and you can compare that Vcore with Vcore under Prime 95. i've found a significant difference. The other easy way is to just turn off C-States and EIST and your vcore won't drop in idle.
> 
> This is what I documented on my Z270 Gaming K7.
> 
> 
> 
> Notice auto and standard result in a Vdroop of ~0.048V, but in High and Turbo the Load VCore shoots up PAST what I've set. That's dangerous. I've already reported this to Gigabyte and got zero response.


When using DVID with light loads on Auto LLC is not causing Vdroop that lowers the vcore it is the VID. Example I turnd off all power saving fetures, Auto LLC, DVID/Adaptive full load prime95 1.332v, RealBench 1.284v, IDLE ~1.296v. No Vdroop


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Check Digitall Power menu.. its the Cpu Loadline Calibration Control.... this from my Msi Z270 Gaming Pro Carbon one
> 
> 
> 
> I never change that from Auto.. as i set 1.290v in the bios and under load the voltage is 1.296v.. that's nice and enough for Rock Solid 5Ghz


Unfortunately my MB without "Cpu Loadline Calibration Control" settings
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You don't need LLC it if using Adaptive.


But for "Adaptive" I have variation of voltage between 1.30-1.38 V even if I setup in bios as 1.33V.
For "Override" I don`t see variation like this.


----------



## dmo580

Oh BTw, what do you guys use to monitor system stats including CPU temps and other stuff--is there something similar to Motherboard Monitor from back in the day?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Unfortunately my MB without "Cpu Loadline Calibration Control" settings
> But for "Adaptive" I have variation of voltage between 1.30-1.38 V even if I setup in bios as 1.33V.
> For "Override" I don`t see variation like this.


I've been trying to find out what's the problem from the last few posts from you

you don't necessarily need LLC

if you're voltage swings up and down between load and idle you try to set voltage in the bios that gives the best spot on voltage under load

if it's a bit high on idle it really does not matter

I think you said you reach kind off high temps at the clocks you're trying for

I have not seen you mention if the 7700k is delidded, but judging from temps, clocks and voltage it isn't?
also you don't specify which cooling solution you have

some normal air cooler for like 30€
a high end air cooler
AiO
custom loop

70ish to 80ish degrees could be completely normal

some of those chips run hotter than others
could be simply because Intel choose to put even more glue under the IHS
you know variances/tolerances in manufacturing

that's why some people see a temp drop of 15 degrees, others of 25

kaby lake OC is all voltage, temps and luck

you run into temp problems without a delid in many cases

look if you don't have a setting like LLC you can just enter a value that gives the voltage you're looking for *under load*

this would be a lot of trying out, but still ok

if you're concerned about temps and the voltage
well there is nothing you can do except a delid

if it's that voltage you need to be stable, then that's the voltage you need
there is no secondary voltage you could drop to decrease temps but doesn't affect you're overclock

messing with PLL voltage is just messing with the temp sensor

and while yes leaving it manually at the stock voltage (I think for you're board it's 1.1) is the right thing to do and *might* reduce temps
that comes from the fact the temp reading gets messed up with higher settings (more temp) and lower settings (less temps), and one user even broke the temp sensor on 1 core (by I think too high a value)
but its a readout error and not actually adding or reducing anything for real
and even if it would, not in any way that would make you comfortable

we had a long discussion about it here like 5 pages long

for clocks beneath 5.3 Ghz it's all vcore (messed up readouts from PLL aside, but at 4.8 they can't be that much different than standard value)

long story short

if you know the voltage you need to be stable then that's the voltage you need

temps are too high?

better cooling solution

better thermal paste, maybe

you sure you're cooler sits well on the CPU?

a delid drops temps in big numbers

you could try slightly less voltage, obviously this needs to be tested out stability wise
LLC is just making it more precise on what value you want
but overshooting or under by a little doesn't give you temps different like 10 degrees or more
we're talking a difference between 1.375v and 1.38-1.385vthat's not a huge difference in temps

and if you want to have 1.375 v under load
but you get 1.39 under load
then enter a value of 1.37 and see where it sits under load
as an example

but I can't imagine voltage swings by huge margins under load
like at load it swings from 1.35 to 1.39 while running prime at max load (example)

lastly
if it's high in stress testing, but lower in gaming that's ok as well

thermal throttling or even a shutdown doesn't happen until way higher temps
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *patman-dk*
> 
> what is stock pll oc voltage? i think I have auto on my asus mb


doesn't really matter until you go beyond 5.2 and way above really
if HWInfo readout is accurate it sits at the lowest value described in the bios on auto (err I think it read 0.55 something, I remember that value to be the lowest described in bios and HWInfo said it's that value)

for me at least

I think it cranks up noticeably from 5.3 and onwards if left on auto
but its not the only voltage that does so
just going from 5.2 to 5.3 increased my idle temps from 35 to 75 degrees

there was I think 4 different voltages I had to apply manually that applied too much voltage
like CPU standby voltage and others you normally don't touch
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Oh BTw, what do you guys use to monitor system stats including CPU temps and other stuff--is there something similar to Motherboard Monitor from back in the day?


first post under pre overclocking information
Quote:


> The recommended utility for looking at your stats is HWInfo


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Unfortunately my MB without "Cpu Loadline Calibration Control" settings
> But for "Adaptive" I have variation of voltage between 1.30-1.38 V even if I setup in bios as 1.33V.
> For "Override" I don`t see variation like this.


Oh, that's not acceptable for 180$ board..


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I've been trying to find out what's the problem from the last few posts from you
> 
> you don't necessarily need LLC
> 
> if you're voltage swings up and down between load and idle you try to set voltage in the bios that gives the best spot on voltage under load
> 
> if it's a bit high on idle it really does not matter
> 
> I think you said you reach kind off high temps at the clocks you're trying for
> 
> I have not seen you mention if the 7700k is delidded, but judging from temps, clocks and voltage it isn't?
> also you don't specify which cooling solution you have
> 
> some normal air cooler for like 30€
> a high end air cooler
> AiO
> custom loop
> 
> 70ish to 80ish degrees could be completely normal
> 
> some of those chips run hotter than others
> could be simply because Intel choose to put even more glue under the IHS
> you know variances/tolerances in manufacturing
> 
> that's why some people see a temp drop of 15 degrees, others of 25
> 
> kaby lake OC is all voltage, temps and luck
> 
> you run into temp problems without a delid in many cases
> 
> look if you don't have a setting like LLC you can just enter a value that gives the voltage you're looking for *under load*
> 
> this would be a lot of trying out, but still ok
> 
> if you're concerned about temps and the voltage
> well there is nothing you can do except a delid
> 
> if it's that voltage you need to be stable, then that's the voltage you need
> there is no secondary voltage you could drop to decrease temps but doesn't affect you're overclock
> 
> messing with PLL voltage is just messing with the temp sensor
> 
> and while yes leaving it manually at the stock voltage (I think for you're board it's 1.1) is the right thing to do and *might* reduce temps
> that comes from the fact the temp reading gets messed up with higher settings (more temp) and lower settings (less temps), and one user even broke the temp sensor on 1 core (by I think too high a value)
> but its a readout error and not actually adding or reducing anything for real
> and even if it would, not in any way that would make you comfortable
> 
> we had a long discussion about it here like 5 pages long
> 
> for clocks beneath 5.3 Ghz it's all vcore (messed up readouts from PLL aside, but at 4.8 they can't be that much different than standard value)
> 
> long story short
> 
> if you know the voltage you need to be stable then that's the voltage you need
> 
> temps are too high?
> 
> better cooling solution
> 
> better thermal paste, maybe
> 
> you sure you're cooler sits well on the CPU?
> 
> a delid drops temps in big numbers
> 
> you could try slightly less voltage, obviously this needs to be tested out stability wise
> LLC is just making it more precise on what value you want
> but overshooting or under by a little doesn't give you temps different like 10 degrees or more
> we're talking a difference between 1.375v and 1.38-1.385vthat's not a huge difference in temps
> 
> and if you want to have 1.375 v under load
> but you get 1.39 under load
> then enter a value of 1.37 and see where it sits under load
> as an example
> 
> but I can't imagine voltage swings by huge margins under load
> like at load it swings from 1.35 to 1.39 while running prime at max load (example)
> 
> lastly
> if it's high in stress testing, but lower in gaming that's ok as well
> 
> thermal throttling or even a shutdown doesn't happen until way higher temps
> doesn't really matter until you go beyond 5.2 and way above really
> if HWInfo readout is accurate it sits at the lowest value described in the bios on auto (err I think it read 0.55 something, I remember that value to be the lowest described in bios and HWInfo said it's that value)
> 
> for me at least
> 
> I think it cranks up noticeably from 5.3 and onwards if left on auto
> but its not the only voltage that does so
> just going from 5.2 to 5.3 increased my idle temps from 35 to 75 degrees
> 
> there was I think 4 different voltages I had to apply manually that applied too much voltage
> like CPU standby voltage and others you normally don't touch
> first post under pre overclocking information


Ok, my reply in sequence:
1. Yes I use this cpu 'out of the box' without delidded (on my previous 6700K I did it, but for 7700k I`m thinking about it but don`t see strong reason now) and thermal paste I use "Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut Thermal "
2. My cooling system now - water custom loop (240mm radiator), I`m going to install 2*420mm but when I get EK water block for my 1080ti.
3. Now I setup 1.35V for 4800Mhz and Auto or Overriden mode, because Adaptive works wrong (enstead of 1.35V will be between 1.30 - 1.38V)
4. Any lower voltage don`t work for 4800MHz (I checked), so now I`m stuck with 4800 and 1.35V and 75 Celcium degrees after 30min test in Intel Extreme Tuning Utility , by the way under load voltage will be 1.30V but for successfull pass test I have to setup 1.35V in bios.
5. And I use HWInfo too

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> Oh, that's not acceptable for 180$ board..


I know, maybe I need to sell this MB and buy new one for Z270 chipset, which can provide me more stable voltage for cpu.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*


I was in same situation as you and tough adaptive was not working..
I use to set V in Bios and in OS they were jumping all over the place...
Now after some changes it works Perfect!
Go couple of pages back and see what Jpmboy suggested me to do...if you don't find it or still need help post and I will try and re-type it here for you. (at work atm)


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I was in same situation as you and tough adaptive was not working..
> I use to set V in Bios and in OS they were jumping all over the place...
> Now after some changes it works Perfect!
> Go couple of pages back and see what Jpmboy suggested me to do...if you don't find it or still need help post and I will try and re-type it here for you. (at work atm)











I`m on my way ...


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*


well it would be great to get voltage stabilised, but even when you're spot on my guess would be it's not in a temp region you're looking for

going by these statistics, not only for kaby lake but also ivy and skylake

http://www.overclock.net/t/1313179/official-delidded-club-guide

as well as that nearly everyone here in the list did a delid
well it's nothing else left

you're already on a custom loop
you're not new to building a PC, and you use a good paste
and you even did a delid yourself once

I don't know what to tell you otherwise, I saw temps drop by 20 degrees myself, before and after at 5.1 Ghz
from 88 to 68 on an mid range air cooler
with more voltage (1.375v), a way weaker cooler and more frequency
and with an AiO I put 100 Mhz on top and dropped temps again

the delid is the only thing left to reduce temps
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I was in same situation as you and tough adaptive was not working..
> I use to set V in Bios and in OS they were jumping all over the place...
> Now after some changes it works Perfect!
> Go couple of pages back and see what Jpmboy suggested me to do...if you don't find it or still need help post and I will try and re-type it here for you. (at work atm)


well it would be great to get voltage stable

however I don't think that temps will drop into any region that would be satisfying without a delid
it's already a custom loop

without it he would probably see temps that are at least 80ish, maybe even approaching 90


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I was in same situation as you and tough adaptive was not working..
> I use to set V in Bios and in OS they were jumping all over the place...
> Now after some changes it works Perfect!
> Go couple of pages back and see what Jpmboy suggested me to do...if you don't find it or still need help post and I will try and re-type it here for you. (at work atm)


Ok, I found here is two your posts http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/1810#post_26007099
And here is reply from *Jpmboy* http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/1820#post_26007483
Or I missed something ?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Ok, I found here is two your posts http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/1810#post_26007099
> And here is reply from *Jpmboy* http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/1820#post_26007483
> Or I missed something ?


Yes...Also, try the settings posted here : http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/1870#post_26017093

if you see terminology or terms that you don't find in your bios try to google them and see what they do maybe they are under different name on your board, I highly doubt they were removed entirely....but rather named different.
If its stable that way and works good work from there and lower volts till you are no more stable than raise them back 2 steps ( every step should be 0.05 v).

And now..a question for everyone, or @Jpmboy (I know he has/had a m8i )
I pass every stress test....no whea errors....but when I leave hci running...if I am at the pc and every now and then move the mouse it passes 400% and over with 0 error...If I leave it unattended the screen turns off and it gets stuck there...and nothing works to wake it up...and I have to turn off the psu and start it again.
Cor V or DRAM need to be raised or ? there is no other problem ....boots fast (even cold boot) as I said no errors in any other stress program... just strange.









Currently at 1.345 adaptive....1.390 Dram 1.18 vccio 1.2 sa 1.125 pch ( playing with these 3 does not help )

EDIT: Found out that from my power plan my hdd was turning off after 20 min...turned that off, raised the core v to 1.346 and left it running again, will report later when I get back at PC.


----------



## loth

Hello everybody. I am new to the forum and kind of new to overclocking considered last time I did that was on my Core2Duo E7300. Recently I purchased a new high-end PC and I am interested in overclocking it. There are 170+ pages regarding this as far as I can see, but it is extremely hard to put all of that information for my particular case. So I was wondering if someone would be kind enough to spend their time guiding me into OC.

My PC components are:
CPU: i7-7700k
Mobo: Asus Z270G
Cooling: Nzxt Kraken X62
RAM: 2x8 Corsair Vengeance LPX 2400mhz
GPU: Asus GF GTX 1080Ti FE
PSU: 750 Seasonic Gold

I don't plan on deliding the cpu and I would like to get at best a fully stable and lasting overclock at 5ghz. But like I said I do not know the steps for this to happen. Long time ago, there was more than just setting multiplier and a frequency, but matching the fsb to the memory speed and other stuff like that which I have forgotten.

Thank you in advance!


----------



## CodingSquirrel

Would anyone be able to help troubleshooting the temps for my CPU, whether I've got the overclock configured correctly or if it might be an issue with the cooling?

I've delidded my 7700k and placed CLU under the IHS. I'm using Arctic Silver 5 under my water block. I've got 480 worth of rad (2x240) for my CPU and GPU. I'm running at 5GHz @ 1.33 adaptive voltage. I'm using the 3200 XMP profile for my RAM. I set IA AC Load Line and IA DC Load Line to 0.01. Everything else is set to Auto.

When running RealBench I get up to mid to high 80s in temps, and when gaming I've even seen it peak at 90C very infrequently. I tried reapplying the CLU which looked like it was a bit clumpy after I re-removed the IHS and it also seemed a bit light, so next time I applied a little more and this time it came out more liquid. First time I had used some RTV to glue the IHS down but this time it's just held in place by the motherboard bracket. Obviously I replaced the AS5 while doing this as well. Temps are basically the same as the first time. Just to prove that I didn't completely screw up my loop, my GPU maxes out around 45-50-ish (I don't keep much of an eye on it honestly, since it stays so cool) when under load. I also just quickly tried backing down to 4.9GHz 1.28v and the temps barely changed either.

Before delidding I couldn't even last 30 seconds stress testing the CPU at 5GHz 1.3v because it would thermal throttle at 100C almost immediately, so there definitely was an improvement from the delid. I've even managed to get a possibly stable 5.1GHz 1.35v but really didn't like the temps since they got a little over 90C in stress testing.

Some SS of bios and stress test with HWMonitor running:


----------



## patman-dk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CodingSquirrel*
> 
> Would anyone be able to help troubleshooting the temps for my CPU, whether I've got the overclock configured correctly or if it might be an issue with the cooling?
> 
> I've delidded my 7700k and placed CLU under the IHS. I'm using Arctic Silver 5 under my water block. I've got 480 worth of rad (2x240) for my CPU and GPU. I'm running at 5GHz @ 1.33 adaptive voltage. I'm using the 3200 XMP profile for my RAM. I set IA AC Load Line and IA DC Load Line to 0.01. Everything else is set to Auto.
> 
> When running RealBench I get up to mid to high 80s in temps, and when gaming I've even seen it peak at 90C very infrequently. I tried reapplying the CLU which looked like it was a bit clumpy after I re-removed the IHS and it also seemed a bit light, so next time I applied a little more and this time it came out more liquid. First time I had used some RTV to glue the IHS down but this time it's just held in place by the motherboard bracket. Obviously I replaced the AS5 while doing this as well. Temps are basically the same as the first time. Just to prove that I didn't completely screw up my loop, my GPU maxes out around 45-50-ish (I don't keep much of an eye on it honestly, since it stays so cool) when under load. I also just quickly tried backing down to 4.9GHz 1.28v and the temps barely changed either.
> 
> Before delidding I couldn't even last 30 seconds stress testing the CPU at 5GHz 1.3v because it would thermal throttle at 100C almost immediately, so there definitely was an improvement from the delid. I've even managed to get a possibly stable 5.1GHz 1.35v but really didn't like the temps since they got a little over 90C in stress testing.
> 
> Some SS of bios and stress test with HWMonitor running:


I think u can lower your VCCIO and VCCSA to 1,15 maybe even 1,05.

Im at 4900 aswell, but only 1,24 vcore in bios. 1,23 load. I have my memory at 3100mhz cl 15-17-17-35 T1 and only using 1,05 in both VCCIO and VCCSA stable. Maybe it will lower your cpu?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CodingSquirrel*


In Bios where you have your AVX negative offset put in 1 or 2
Also put XMP off..
Select ddr speed 3600
Go into DDR timing control sub menu and select 16 16 (16 if you have the 3rd opnion...but doubt it ) 38
Put Ddr Voltage to 1.35
Lower VCCIO to 1.125
Lower System agent to 1.125

See if that changes the temps


----------



## FanTasTik

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Yes...Also, try the settings posted here : http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/1870#post_26017093
> 
> if you see terminology or terms that you don't find in your bios try to google them and see what they do maybe they are under different name on your board, I highly doubt they were removed entirely....but rather named different.
> If its stable that way and works good work from there and lower volts till you are no more stable than raise them back 2 steps ( every step should be 0.05 v).
> 
> And now..a question for everyone, or @Jpmboy (I know he has/had a m8i )
> I pass every stress test....no whea errors....but when I leave hci running...if I am at the pc and every now and then move the mouse it passes 400% and over with 0 error...If I leave it unattended the screen turns off and it gets stuck there...and nothing works to wake it up...and I have to turn off the psu and start it again.
> Cor V or DRAM need to be raised or ? there is no other problem ....boots fast (even cold boot) as I said no errors in any other stress program... just strange.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Currently at 1.345 adaptive....1.390 Dram 1.18 vccio 1.2 sa 1.125 pch ( playing with these 3 does not help )
> 
> EDIT: Found out that from my power plan my hdd was turning off after 20 min...turned that off, raised the core v to 1.346 and left it running again, will report later when I get back at PC.


Hello,

I have the same issue with hci and realbench.
i can wake up my computer by unplugging/plugging my display port cable.
Tell me if it works for you.

(long time lurker here, i registered just to reply to you ;D )


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Oh BTw, what do you guys use to monitor system stats including CPU temps and other stuff--is there something similar to Motherboard Monitor from back in the day?


Personally I use AIDA64 customiseable sidebar gadget formerly Everest from back in the day see below


----------



## Inelastic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Oh BTw, what do you guys use to monitor system stats including CPU temps and other stuff--is there something similar to Motherboard Monitor from back in the day?


I use the CAM software by NZXT since it has an adroid app that allows me to display it on a tablet I have setup next to my computer.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *loth*
> 
> Hello everybody. I am new to the forum and kind of new to overclocking considered last time I did that was on my Core2Duo E7300. Recently I purchased a new high-end PC and I am interested in overclocking it. There are 170+ pages regarding this as far as I can see, but it is extremely hard to put all of that information for my particular case. So I was wondering if someone would be kind enough to spend their time guiding me into OC.
> 
> My PC components are:
> CPU: i7-7700k
> Mobo: Asus Z270G
> Cooling: Nzxt Kraken X62
> RAM: 2x8 Corsair Vengeance LPX 2400mhz
> GPU: Asus GF GTX 1080Ti FE
> PSU: 750 Seasonic Gold
> 
> I don't plan on deliding the cpu and I would like to get at best a fully stable and lasting overclock at 5ghz. But like I said I do not know the steps for this to happen. Long time ago, there was more than just setting multiplier and a frequency, but matching the fsb to the memory speed and other stuff like that which I have forgotten.
> 
> Thank you in advance!


Firstly welcome to the OCN forums







. Overclocking is so much easier these days relative to the old days of overclocking through the front side bus, best thing I can suggest is to read the opening post guide to overclocking KabyLake. Essentially all you need to do is change your Vcore and multiplier then test for stability using one of the recommended programs in the opening post. That's pretty much the basics once you establish the lowest Vcore for your overclock then start overclocking your memory (or use XMP) followed by your uncore also known as cache. Once you make a start Im sure most of us here will be happy to help if you have any problems.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Inelastic*
> 
> I use the CAM software by NZXT since it has an adroid app that allows me to display it on a tablet I have setup next to my computer.


Is cam software acurate for you?

Its kinda buggy for me... i wonder i should reinstall windows, as aida64 is also showing wrong things...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Is cam software acurate for you?
> 
> Its kinda buggy for me... i wonder i should reinstall windows, as aida64 is also showing wrong things...


What is AIDA64 showing wrong? AIDA64 does label things differently sometimes.


----------



## Inelastic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Is cam software acurate for you?
> 
> Its kinda buggy for me... i wonder i should reinstall windows, as aida64 is also showing wrong things...


It was buggy when I updated to the Creators ed. But I just uninstalled and reinstalled it. It works just fine now. I've never had any accuracy issues. The only issue I have is every now and then the android app stops updating and I have to restart the program on both ends, but that has been an ongoing problem.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Unfortunately my MB without "Cpu Loadline Calibration Control" settings
> But for "Adaptive" I have variation of voltage between 1.30-1.38 V even if I setup in bios as 1.33V.
> For "Override" I don`t see variation like this.


VID from the CPU is constantly changing Vcore do to load variation when running programs or idle loads. Adaptive adjust Vcore using Intel VID, thus using CPU load, multiplier and temperature. That is how all the 2011 and newer Intel CPUs in the world work stock or overclocked at 500MHz more from factory Turbo Boost maximum, using Adaptive.


----------



## loth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Firstly welcome to the OCN forums
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Overclocking is so much easier these days relative to the old days of overclocking through the front side bus, best thing I can suggest is to read the opening post guide to overclocking KabyLake. Essentially all you need to do is change your Vcore and multiplier then test for stability using one of the recommended programs in the opening post. That's pretty much the basics once you establish the lowest Vcore for your overclock then start overclocking your memory (or use XMP) followed by your uncore also known as cache. Once you make a start Im sure most of us here will be happy to help if you have any problems.


Hey and thanks for the reply. I've already read that, but before I proceed I'd like to be as informed as possible. I checked that the XMP profile is enabled by default on my memory, which is showing 1200 DRAM (2400mhz). However, I am kind of confused whether or not I should overclock that, because there's no other setting listed in there. Also, other advanced options which based on my pc specs should be tweaked accordingly. What would you recommend? I will be very grateful if you could provide me some sample on settings I should use. Thanks!

P.S. Is it bad that I have purchased 2400mhz ram?


----------



## CodingSquirrel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> In Bios where you have your AVX negative offset put in 1 or 2
> Also put XMP off..
> Select ddr speed 3600
> Go into DDR timing control sub menu and select 16 16 (16 if you have the 3rd opnion...but doubt it ) 38
> Put Ddr Voltage to 1.35
> Lower VCCIO to 1.125
> Lower System agent to 1.125
> 
> See if that changes the temps


Thanks for the tips. Helped a bit for RealBench temps, but gaming still got up to high 80s and grazed 90 still. I played around with voltage a bit and 4.9GHz at 1.25v seems to be giving me decent temps while still running stable, keeping it mostly in the 70s while gaming and only reaching 80 occasionally. Unless there's other things to play with to help further I might just leave it there for more comfortable temps.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *loth*
> 
> Hey and thanks for the reply. I've already read that, but before I proceed I'd like to be as informed as possible. I checked that the XMP profile is enabled by default on my memory, which is showing 1200 DRAM (2400mhz). However, I am kind of confused whether or not I should overclock that, because there's no other setting listed in there. Also, other advanced options which based on my pc specs should be tweaked accordingly. What would you recommend? I will be very grateful if you could provide me some sample on settings I should use. Thanks!
> 
> P.S. Is it bad that I have purchased 2400mhz ram?


Firstly I would disable your XMP profile and run the memory at 2133Mhz (stock) work on overclocking the core first, maybe try a multiplier of 50 and a Vcore of 1.3 ish volts with a base clock of 100Mhz leave the cache at auto for the time being. Give those settings a quick test with Cinebench R15 to get a rough idea of stability, if it passes that try Realbench or OCCT for an hour, if it fails increase your Vcore to 1.325V assuming temperature is not a problem. 2400Mhz memory is fine for general purpose use memory speed doesn't make a huge difference in the real world, that said 3200Mhz is the sweet spot cost vs performance.


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Ok, my reply in sequence:
> 1. Yes I use this cpu 'out of the box' without delidded (on my previous 6700K I did it, but for 7700k I`m thinking about it but don`t see strong reason now) and thermal paste I use "Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut Thermal "
> 2. My cooling system now - water custom loop (240mm radiator), I`m going to install 2*420mm but when I get EK water block for my 1080ti.
> 3. Now I setup 1.35V for 4800Mhz and Auto or Overriden mode, because Adaptive works wrong (enstead of 1.35V will be between 1.30 - 1.38V)
> 4. Any lower voltage don`t work for 4800MHz (I checked), so now I`m stuck with 4800 and 1.35V and 75 Celcium degrees after 30min test in Intel Extreme Tuning Utility , by the way under load voltage will be 1.30V but for successfull pass test I have to setup 1.35V in bios.
> 5. And I use HWInfo too
> 
> I know, maybe I need to sell this MB and buy new one for Z270 chipset, which can provide me more stable voltage for cpu.


My Gaming Pro Carbon is beast board.. no complain at all


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Firstly welcome to the OCN forums
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Overclocking is so much easier these days relative to the old days of overclocking through the front side bus, best thing I can suggest is to read the opening post guide to overclocking KabyLake. Essentially all you need to do is change your Vcore and multiplier then test for stability using one of the recommended programs in the opening post. That's pretty much the basics once you establish the lowest Vcore for your overclock then start overclocking your memory (or use XMP) followed by your uncore also known as cache. Once you make a start Im sure most of us here will be happy to help if you have any problems.


I kinda disagree because the days of upping FSB was actually pretty easy. You just upped FSB and compensated Vcore. I feel like you need to worry about a few more things nowadays especially with multiple Vcore methods. Either way it's not significantly different--the basics remain the same. Keep testing for stability as you up settings bit by bit.

It might be a bit easier given most people just leave BCLK at 100 and up the multiplier bit by bit now. You'd have way too many combinations back when you were just upping FSB bit by bit. With that said I felt like Bloomfield/Nehalem overclocking was a pain.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> I kinda disagree because the days of upping FSB was actually pretty easy. You just upped FSB and compensated Vcore. I feel like you need to worry about a few more things nowadays especially with multiple Vcore methods. Either way it's not significantly different--the basics remain the same. Keep testing for stability as you up settings bit by bit.
> 
> It might be a bit easier given most people just leave BCLK at 100 and up the multiplier bit by bit now. You'd have way too many combinations back when you were just upping FSB bit by bit. With that said I felt like Bloomfield/Nehalem overclocking was a pain.


Really it is much easier now all you have to do is up the Vcore a little at a time in Bios until it is stable. That is all I do since 2011 when they introduced Adaptive/Dynamic Vcore, I don't watch anything besides temperature during stress testing with Prime95.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> I kinda disagree because the days of upping FSB was actually pretty easy. You just upped FSB and compensated Vcore. I feel like you need to worry about a few more things nowadays especially with multiple Vcore methods. Either way it's not significantly different--the basics remain the same. Keep testing for stability as you up settings bit by bit.
> 
> It might be a bit easier given most people just leave BCLK at 100 and up the multiplier bit by bit now. You'd have way too many combinations back when you were just upping FSB bit by bit. With that said I felt like Bloomfield/Nehalem overclocking was a pain.


In context of what loth was talking about which would have been the days of C2D and C2Q X38 and X48 things are in my opinion much easier than they were back then, these things are a walk in the park even relative to Haswell, far less voltages to play with. Given he has knowledge of those days Kaby Lake should be simple for him once he gets his head around the changes in terminology, the method is relatively the same though


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FanTasTik*
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have the same issue with hci and realbench.
> i can wake up my computer by unplugging/plugging my display port cable.
> Tell me if it works for you.
> 
> (long time lurker here, i registered just to reply to you ;D )


I have an old monitor with DVI Port...plugin that of/on does not help...still testing, but its a pain in the back, for every little change I have to leave it running for 2-3h and than try to move the mouse and see if the screen turns on


----------



## patman-dk

Im at 1.23-1.24 at 4900, 4700 w avx.



5ghz wont Even post at 1.3.

Did someone try to run 102 or 103 bclk?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Yes...Also, try the settings posted here : http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/1870#post_26017093
> if you see terminology or terms that you don't find in your bios try to google them and see what they do maybe they are under different name on your board, I highly doubt they were removed entirely....but rather named different.
> If its stable that way and works good work from there and lower volts till you are no more stable than raise them back 2 steps ( every step should be 0.05 v).
> And now..a question for everyone, or @Jpmboy (I know he has/had a m8i )
> I pass every stress test....no whea errors....but when I leave hci running...if I am at the pc and every now and then move the mouse it passes 400% and over with 0 error...If I leave it unattended the screen turns off and it gets stuck there...and nothing works to wake it up...and I have to turn off the psu and start it again.
> Cor V or DRAM need to be raised or ? there is no other problem ....boots fast (even cold boot) as I said no errors in any other stress program... just strange.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Currently at 1.345 adaptive....1.390 Dram 1.18 vccio 1.2 sa 1.125 pch ( playing with these 3 does not help )
> EDIT: Found out that from my power plan my hdd was turning off after 20 min...turned that off, raised the core v to 1.346 and left it running again, will report later when I get back at PC.


if you allow the screen to blank or turn off during HCi waking it can take a very long time and multiple attempts. Once you get the "mouse on a blank/black screen, keep at it. It has notrgin to do with the M8I... does the same on all my rigs.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you allow the screen to blank or turn off during HCi waking it can take a very long time and multiple attempts. Once you get the "mouse on a blank/black screen, keep at it. It has notrgin to do with the M8I... does the same on all my rigs.


I don't even get to the white mouse on the black screen...the screen stays off...


----------



## patman-dk

yay got stable at 5ghz (49x102.x) Batch L649H322. 7600k at only 1.3 vcore. Trying to get it lower. Not delidded. +2 avx offset.

Posting a stable SS later

http://imgur.com/a/FlL0w some minutes of realbench just to check.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *patman-dk*
> 
> yay got stable at 5ghz (49x102.x) Batch L649H322. 7600k at only 1.3 vcore. Trying to get it lower. Not delidded. +2 avx offset.
> 
> Posting a stable SS later
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/FlL0w some minutes of realbench just to check.


RealBench uses AVX, while not being so heavy on it like recent prime, you're CPU clocks down while stress testing

I can see it in the screenshot, and tested it myslef to see if it works on my Z170 chipset

you should confirm it's stable at 5Ghz with a Stresstest that's not using AVX if you want to use the AVX offset

confirming a stable overclock is more for you than for us you know

literally all apps or games you're using will run with 5ghz
you want to know it's stable

RealBench isn't even the most difficult to pass to begin with all things considered even
according to Asus, RealBench is supposed to be as close to a heavy real world usage as one can make it

not hunting for prime numbers or being all synthetics and theory

ultimately it's up to you

but you know if you set an offset to pass a stresstest or to keep temps down in that stresstest you will not really know if you're stable at a speed without the offset kicking in

just be aware of that


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thank you guys!
> One more question: which will be prefer ? Seller proposed choose


My question is kind of the same..
Are there any batch letters that often are successful for OC @ 5Ghz? (With watercooling)

When I look at the sheet/chart in this topic, cpu with batch letter L***G*** are successful at OC & 5Ghz +
Is that save to say?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> My question is kind of the same..
> Are there any batch letters that often are successful for OC @ 5Ghz? (With watercooling)
> 
> When I look at the sheet/chart in this topic, cpu with batch letter L***G*** are successful at OC & 5Ghz +
> Is that save to say?


As of 2/22/17, the top 59% of tested 7700Ks were able to hit 5.0GHz or greater.
Link: https://siliconlottery.com/collections/lga-1151/products/7700k50g


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *areczek1987*
> 
> Anyone have a Vietnam chip here? X....B846 is the one ive got... On the time its only Malesian posted?


Vietnam here, L706B501

I'll run it on air to get everything squared away, then delid/water.


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> My question is kind of the same..
> Are there any batch letters that often are successful for OC @ 5Ghz? (With watercooling)
> 
> When I look at the sheet/chart in this topic, cpu with batch letter L***G*** are successful at OC & 5Ghz +
> Is that save to say?


There is no connection between batch code and OC, I already bought my and can say cpu is stable in 4800Mhz and quite low voltage but I can`t run more even with high voltage, so as always - lottery.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> There is no connection between batch code and OC, I already bought my and can say cpu is stable in 4800Mhz and quite low voltage but I can`t run more even with high voltage, so as always - lottery.


So if there is no connection between batch number why is it every L639F977 chip is a great overclocking chip according to the chart in the opening post?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Vietnam here, L706B501
> 
> I'll run it on air to get everything squared away, then delid/water.


Vietnam chips start with an X prefix not L, L is a Malay chip.


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> As of 2/22/17, the top 59% of tested 7700Ks were able to hit 5.0GHz or greater.
> Link: https://siliconlottery.com/collections/lga-1151/products/7700k50g


This is little information..
Some questions raising from that post:
Do they pick certain batches?
59% of all the production dates?
I had a i7700K L644H*** cpu and it was stuck @ 4.8Ghz - 1.365 Vcore (adaptive mode)


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> So if there is no connection between batch number why is it every L639F977 chip is a great overclocking chip according to the chart in the opening post?


Coz most of them came pre binned from SL. Yes that batch was better on avg, but doesn't mean there weren't turds in there too.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> This is little information..
> Some questions raising from that post:
> Do they pick certain batches?
> 59% of all the production dates?
> I had a i7700K L644H*** cpu and it was stuck @ 4.8Ghz - 1.365 Vcore (adaptive mode)


All silicon lottery statistics mean is that of what they have tested which would be literately hundreds maybe even a thousand or more that 59% reached 5.0Ghz.


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> So if there is no connection between batch number why is it every L639F977 chip is a great overclocking chip according to the chart in the opening post?


My thoughts exactly!


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Coz most of them came pre binned from SL. Yes that batch was better on avg, but doesn't mean there weren't turds in there too.


As far as Im aware mine was the only binned one from that batch which in itself was just luck.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> This is little information..
> Some questions raising from that post:
> Do they pick certain batches?
> 59% of all the production dates?
> I had a i7700K L644H*** cpu and it was stuck @ 4.8Ghz - 1.365 Vcore (adaptive mode)


Siliconlottery buys bulk CPUs then overclock's to the maximum. After testing they separate into bins for your purchase.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Vietnam chips start with an X prefix not L, L is a Malay chip.


I'd come close to agreeing with you if I wasn't looking at it at this very moment.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> As far as Im aware mine was the only binned one from that batch which in itself was just luck.


Hmnn. That batch is good for sure (I've had personal confirmation from SL himself). But I'm pretty sure there were some turds in there too.

I've had a few CPUs from the same batch as my best ambient CPU (2nd only to Jpm's) & the others weren't nearly as good.


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> So if there is no connection between batch number why is it every L639F977 chip is a great overclocking chip according to the chart in the opening post?


Сoincidence


----------



## scracy

If there was no correlation between good batches and great overclocking chips why is it the "experts" extreme overclocking professionals look for certain batch numbers? Could they know less than we do?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Сoincidence


5 or more L639F977 chips is more than coincidence my friend


----------



## rt123

There's a slight correlation for sure. But it is not absolute.

XOCers are more worried about sub zero scaling then ambient results.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Vietnam chips start with an X prefix not L, L is a Malay chip.


Stick this in your database:


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Stick this in your database:


That's odd previous generations have had an X as a prefix for Vietnam as have some the current ones


----------



## D13mass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> 5 or more L639F977 chips is more than coincidence my friend


Ok, I``m not going to argue with you







let it be "statistic"
As I understand correct - all time here is many variables to get stable and good OC: cpu+motherboard+memory etc.
I have 23:13 and I`m going to bed, have a nice day !


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> So if there is no connection between batch number why is it every L639F977 chip is a great overclocking chip according to the chart in the opening post?


All baches all good overclocker according to the chart.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> All baches all good overclocker according to the chart.


Because only the good ones get charted so probably slightly skewed stats


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Because only the good ones get charted so probably slightly skewed stats


Not all posters post the required specs of the OC either..


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> That's odd previous generations have had an X as a prefix for Vietnam as have some the current ones


I'll probably be a steaming pile, I never get any golden chip anything. We'll know something here in a half hour or so.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I'll probably be a steaming pile, I never get any golden chip anything. We'll know something here in a half hour or so.


Hopefully not







I feel your frustration I have never been lucky enough to score a golden chip either which is why I buy pre binned.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> Not all posters post the required specs of the OC either..


Probably, what Im getting at is that the people that have a relatively bad CPU don't bother trying to enter the chart which is a shame because the whole purpose of the chart is to get data as a whole, not just e-peen value.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Probably, what Im getting at is that the people that have a relatively bad CPU don't bother trying to enter the chart which is a shame because the whole purpose of the chart is to get data as a whole, not just e-peen value.


I never post a processor that is a dud, why would anyone?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

OK, it boots and all my ram shows up.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Probably, what Im getting at is that the people that have a relatively bad CPU don't bother trying to enter the chart which is a shame because the whole purpose of the chart is to get data as a whole, not just e-peen value.


This. Considering I need 1.42v to get 5ghz, my chip sucks. Plus given that stress testing is so variable with temps, I feel like these charts aren't accurate anymore.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> If there was no correlation between good batches and great overclocking chips why is it the "experts" extreme overclocking professionals look for certain batch numbers? Could they know less than we do?


It really comes down to where on the substrate the die is cut from and the level of imperfections in lattice (some "imperfections" are necessary for the silicon to work at all) . There's an "edge effect" and other factors that really drives the Luck aspect of this. So... Batches come from a lot. [pack or lots of wafers, and the whole prediction of performance of the end product is so empirical that even Intel sets VID individually, not by batch. AFAIK, batch may best correlate with the QC/acceptance dept more than anything else.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Stick this in your database:


lol - Irrefutable proof.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I'm happy so far, I got the 3600 C15 Trident Z and it boots (I saw several people claim a dead stick with that particular RAM), gotta read Raja's OC guide and check on BIOS revisions before I do anything else. Haven't even put power to the TXp, still running iGPU.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - Irrefutable proof.


Off topic a bit, but did you hear about the early release of Skylake-X, announcement maybe in June.

On topic:
Where is the best place to get a delidding tool, and what tool is good?


----------



## Dude970

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Off topic a bit, but did you hear about the early release of Skylake-X, announcement maybe in June.
> 
> On topic:
> Where is the best place to get a delidding tool, and what tool is good?


https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/


----------



## encrypted11

What's the voltage sweetspot to boot Windows at for a quick sanity check for OC headroom at any particular frequency?

i.e. Booting with 1.25V, 5.1GHz and working my way backwards? Suggestions? Might have 1-2 retail chips incoming.

https://valid.x86.fr/ljbs3s


----------



## jameyscott

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dude970*
> 
> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/


Can attest to the rocket kit! Has my 7700k at 5.0 with XMP at 1.32v running at 65C max load temp. 15c drop after delid from the original 80C.


----------



## FedericoUY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dude970*
> 
> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/


WIthout a doubt this is a great tool! I recommend it too...


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Probably, what Im getting at is that the people that have a relatively bad CPU don't bother trying to enter the chart which is a shame because the whole purpose of the chart is to get data as a whole, not just e-peen value.


I disagree. The chart seems more like a competition to me. I'd post my OC but with my current cooling wouldn't be fair. When my new cooler arrives I'll post the results. So far 4.7 GHz @ 1.22 V is what I can use for stress testing, on 4.8 GHz reaches above 80 degrees at 1.25 V. The chip is promising but we'll see next week.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Off topic a bit, but did you hear about the early release of Skylake-X, announcement maybe in June.
> 
> On topic:
> Where is the best place to get a delidding tool, and what tool is good?


June... if only.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I disagree. The chart seems more like a competition to me. I'd post my OC but with my current cooling wouldn't be fair. When my new cooler arrives I'll post the results. So far 4.7 GHz @ 1.22 V is what I can use for stress testing, on 4.8 GHz reaches above 80 degrees at 1.25 V. The chip is promising but we'll see next week.


nah, it's no where near a competition. not one phase change cooling entry. However it is a useful data set. I posted my 7350K .. may be the worst cpu Intel let out of QC this generation.








http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/1580_20#post_25986949
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I'm happy so far, I got the 3600 C15 Trident Z and it boots (I saw several people claim a dead stick with that particular RAM), gotta read Raja's OC guide and check on BIOS revisions before I do anything else. Haven't even put power to the TXp, still running iGPU.


I heard there were a few bad 3600c15 kits, but if you got it running, it;s th ebest bin from GSkill. Should do 3866c15-16-16-38-1T, train at 1.45V, eventual at 1.425V with tight secondaries.
for what help it may be:


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I disagree. The chart seems more like a competition to me. I'd post my OC but with my current cooling wouldn't be fair. When my new cooler arrives I'll post the results. So far 4.7 GHz @ 1.22 V is what I can use for stress testing, on 4.8 GHz reaches above 80 degrees at 1.25 V. The chip is promising but we'll see next week.


That's what Im saying it appears to be a competition which to my understanding of it it is not meant to be, I thought the chart was being compiled to give owners and prospective owners an idea of where they stand or what to expect frequency wise. As it stands I don't think it gives a genuine reflection of what to expect because those of us that don't have a great chip simply are not submitting their results.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> June... if only.


You know what I'll be getting though...lol
Still gonna keep the 7700k, the wife will get that one so I can still play with it, going to delid soon


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> You know what I'll be getting though...lol
> Still gonna keep the 7700k, the wife will get that one so I can still play with it, going to delid soon


let's hope the rumors are correct.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> It really comes down to where on the substrate the die is cut from and the level of imperfections in lattice (some "imperfections" are necessary for the silicon to work at all) . There's an "edge effect" and other factors that really drives the Luck aspect of this. So... Batches come from a lot. [pack or lots of wafers, and the whole prediction of performance of the end product is so empirical that even Intel sets VID individually, not by batch. AFAIK, batch may best correlate with the QC/acceptance dept more than anything else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol - Irrefutable proof.


Lol yep my mistake seems Intel have changed things this generation for some reason.


----------



## becks

Will post my CPU data today as well for the record.
It's a great little chip.. boots OS and passes Cpu Z validation at 1.32 but needs 1.365 for Prime.
Running 5.1 Core 5.1 Uncore...3733 Ram 16-16-16-28-Cr1 at 1.39....
The only downside is that It wont do 5.2 not even at 1.5








Temps are fine....50-60 gaming.... 74 max under prime / RB...
Under Air cooler...


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> It really comes down to where on the substrate the die is cut from and the level of imperfections in lattice (some "imperfections" are necessary for the silicon to work at all) . There's an "edge effect" and other factors that really drives the Luck aspect of this. So... Batches come from a lot. [pack or lots of wafers, and the whole prediction of performance of the end product is so empirical that even Intel sets VID individually, not by batch. AFAIK, batch may best correlate with the QC/acceptance dept more than anything else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol - Irrefutable proof.


Intel might be setting VID individually but I have no clue what they've done (or ASUS). On stock settings RealBench crashes in the first few minutes. I have to raise the voltage manually from auto to make it stable. On the ASUS ROG forums they say this is normal behaviour. Excuse me?!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> That's what Im saying it appears to be a competition which to my understanding of it it is not meant to be, I thought the chart was being compiled to give owners and prospective owners an idea of where they stand or what to expect frequency wise. As it stands I don't think it gives a genuine reflection of what to expect because those of us that don't have a great chip simply are not submitting their results.


A true statistical chart would include multiple frequencies with settings for each CPU or batch number so if somebody doesn't want or can't (because of cooling or other limitations) overclock that far, he could pretty much copy the settings and expect a decent stability. That would include every multiplier from stock to max. But that's pretty time consuming so I don't expect anyone to do that.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I disagree. *The chart seems more like a competition to me. I'd post my OC but with my current cooling wouldn't be fair.* When my new cooler arrives I'll post the results. So far 4.7 GHz @ 1.22 V is what I can use for stress testing, on 4.8 GHz reaches above 80 degrees at 1.25 V. The chip is promising but we'll see next week.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> A true statistical chart would include multiple frequencies with settings for each CPU or batch number so if somebody doesn't want or can't (because of cooling or other limitations) overclock that far, he could pretty much copy the settings and expect a decent stability. That would include every multiplier from stock to max. But that's pretty time consuming so I don't expect anyone to do that.


Aren't you part of the problem that you have with the current "competition" chart?

You want a "true statistical chart" with "multiple frequencies with settings for each CPU or batch number", but you don't want to post your current overclock results because you want to wait for better cooling and post a better (more competitive) OC?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*


I don't know the exact terminology and I am not in front of my pc at the moment but my m8i motherboard has an option in bios to use asus algorithm or intel for the vid (or something of that nature, as I said I don't have the exact terminology).. which might be the answer why yours was not working...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I heard there were a few bad 3600c15 kits, but if you got it running, it;s th ebest bin from GSkill. Should do 3866c15-16-16-38-1T, train at 1.45V, eventual at 1.425V with tight secondaries.
> for what help it may be:


Thanks, nice little guideline. Not sure if my kit/rig can pull those numbers, but nice to know it's possible. And 1T, wasn't expecting that


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> let's hope the rumors are correct.


Can't come soon enough. I want to do some 3D, Ryzen ain't gonna cut it & BW-E I ain't buyin it.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Thanks, nice little guideline. Not sure if my kit/rig can pull those numbers, but nice to know it's possible. And 1T, wasn't expecting that


Apart from the Trident Z 3600 C15 kit Jpmboy recommended, the Trident Z 3600 C16 kit is also an excellent kit for overclocking and with good sticks, can go as high as 4133-4200 C12 for benching and also does upto 4266 C19 on the right board, such as the Asrock Z170 MOCF, or the Asus Z170 Impact or the Asus Z270 Apex.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Apart from the Trident Z 3600 C15 kit Jpmboy recommended, the Trident Z 3600 C16 kit is also an excellent kit for overclocking and with good sticks, can go as high as 4133-4200 C12 for benching and also does upto 4266 C19 on the right board, such as the Asrock Z170 MOCF, or the Asus Z170 Impact or the Asus Z270 Apex.


I have dismal luck with RAM OCing, if I can just get the stuff to run 3600 C15 I'll be stoked. I bet the 3600 C16 kit is cheaper, though.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Intel might be setting VID individually *but I have no clue what they've done (or ASUS)*. On stock settings RealBench crashes in the first few minutes. I have to raise the voltage manually from auto to make it stable. On the ASUS ROG forums they say this is normal behaviour. Excuse me?!
> A true statistical chart would include multiple frequencies with settings for each CPU or batch number so if somebody doesn't want or can't (because of cooling or other limitations) overclock that far, he could pretty much copy the settings and expect a decent stability. That would include every multiplier from stock to max. But that's pretty time consuming so I don't expect anyone to do that.


what has you "befuddled". wait - are you the guy with the bent socket pins?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Aren't you part of the problem that you have with the current "competition" chart?
> 
> You want a "true statistical chart" with "multiple frequencies with settings for each CPU or batch number", but you don't want to post your current overclock results because you want to wait for better cooling and post a better (more competitive) OC?











Straight.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I don't know the exact terminology and I am not in front of my pc at the moment but my m8i motherboard has an option in bios to use asus algorithm or intel for the vid (or something of that nature, as I said I don't have the exact terminology).. which might be the answer why yours was not working...


I suspect you are referring to the Multicore Enhancement, this only affects the per-core max turbo multiplier when the system is used at stock (Auto). Once you overclock and set a multiplier manually, neither the Intel ME or ASus ME are enabled.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Can't come soon enough. I want to do some 3D, Ryzen ain't gonna cut it & BW-E I ain't buyin it.


yeah.. just don't plug it into something like this:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






(lol - couldn't resist - nice job in the GSkill comp







)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I have dismal luck with RAM OCing, if I can just get the stuff to run 3600 C15 I'll be stoked. I bet the 3600 C16 kit is cheaper, though.


the 3600c16 kit is a good one, and yes. Cheaper. I find the c15s to be a bit more "pliable" with 24/7 settings. tknight is correct tho, the c16s can bench as well. It's a chance thing tho, the c15 I have actually work better at high clocks and voltage than the 4266c19-19-19 kit I have, but nearly identically in the 3600-3866 range.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah.. just don't plug it into something like this:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (lol - couldn't resist - nice job in the GSkill comp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Hey hey hey.... function over form. Or atleast that's what I keep telling myself when I look at that atrocity.









Thanks man. Ran of cold juice. Mem had more freq left in it. I would've made the cut if best of 6 chips wasn't 200Mhz behind others. There's only so much I can make up for. Oh well.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Aren't you part of the problem that you have with the current "competition" chart?
> 
> You want a "true statistical chart" with "multiple frequencies with settings for each CPU or batch number", but you don't want to post your current overclock results because you want to wait for better cooling and post a better (more competitive) OC?


I agree, I'm part of the problem. Actually I could send some OC results but only between stock and 4.7 GHz and it wouldn't be complete as my chip should handle more. I can't even go up to 1.25 V without overheating. I don't think that the 4.4-4.7 GHz would be really interesting to anyone as probably any 7700K can reach these overclocks without any issue. My new cooler should arrive until 24th April if Amazon decides to finally ship it... Then I can post a wider range of results.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what has you "befuddled". wait - are you the guy with the bent socket pins?


Yes I am but the pins have nothing to do with it. Was unstable on stock frequencies right out of the box. The pins were bent after a month of usage during cleaning.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I agree, I'm part of the problem. Actually I could send some OC results but only between stock and 4.7 GHz and it wouldn't be complete as my chip should handle more. I can't even go up to 1.25 V without overheating. I don't think that the 4.4-4.7 GHz would be really interesting to anyone as probably any 7700K can reach these overclocks without any issue. My new cooler should arrive until 24th April if Amazon decides to finally ship it... Then I can post a wider range of results.
> Yes I am but the pins have nothing to do with it. Was unstable on stock frequencies right out of the box. The pins were bent after a month of usage during cleaning.


But it would be interesting to someone whom may have the same cooling or similar setup as you currently have in regards to what they might realistically achieve if they purchase a Kaby lake CPU. Not everyone is going to achieve the current average of 5.1ghz. Call me crazy but even if I had got a bad chip I still would have tried to enter the statics chart simply because of its name statistics which means good, bad or plain ugly lol.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Intel might be setting VID individually but I have no clue what they've done (or ASUS). On stock settings RealBench crashes in the first few minutes. I have to raise the voltage manually from auto to make it stable. On the ASUS ROG forums they say this is normal behaviour. Excuse me?!


I had that stock Vcore problem with one of my CPU, so I did a RMA with Intel and that fixed it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Thanks, nice little guideline. Not sure if my kit/rig can pull those numbers, but nice to know it's possible. And 1T, wasn't expecting that


depending on the cpu imc, you should be able to plug and play. The secondaries are set "by the rules". eg, FAW being no less than 4xRDDs, tRAS = CAS + RCD+ RTP (+/-2) etc... if the RTLs don't line up after several training attempts, just set 55/56. 7/7 manually.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> But it would be interesting to someone whom may have the same cooling or similar setup as you currently have in regards to what they might realistically achieve if they purchase a Kaby lake CPU. Not everyone is going to achieve the current average of 5.1ghz. Call me crazy but even if I had got a bad chip I still would have tried to enter the statics chart simply because of its name statistics which means good, bad or plain ugly lol.


You're actually right. I'll try to do a longer stress test, but it might be only a 2-3 hour long run in RealBench or custom x264. If @Darkwizzie doesn't have anything against it, he'll enter it in the spreadsheet and hopefully it will be helpful to someone.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I had that stock Vcore problem with one of my CPU, so I did a RMA with Intel and that fixed it.


Thank you for letting me know that my chip is ont the only one. It doesn't bother me that much to send it back and wait a month for a replacement and sit without a PC and return to my 10 year old laptop. I'll RMA it once I'll be selling it as new and unboxed


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> You're actually right. I'll try to do a longer stress test, but it might be only a 2-3 hour long run in RealBench or custom x264. If @Darkwizzie doesn't have anything against it, he'll enter it in the spreadsheet and hopefully it will be helpful to someone.
> Thank you for letting me know that my chip is ont the only one. It doesn't bother me that much to send it back and wait a month for a replacement and sit without a PC and return to my 10 year old laptop. I'll RMA it once I'll be selling it as new and unboxed


Intel crossed shipped the processor overnight for free.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel crossed shipped the processor overnight for free.


Really? I thought first you ship them the malfunctioning CPU then they start an investigation that would take weeks and IF they found it defective they send you another one. But if that's the case as you say that's awesome. I just don't know if it would work in Hungary as well because I might have to send the CPU to the webshop I ordered from then they have to RMA it to Intel but I should probably ask the shop about it.

I will OC this once Amazon decides to finally dispatch my cooler after a week since I ordered it and see how it handles. If it's a good OC potential I might keep it as it's possible that I would get a worse one. I wonder if I could also choose a CPU with a specific batch number.

Does anyone know anything about this one? *L640G413*


----------



## Zorgon

I was stable at 4.9GHz @1.344V-1.376V but then did a bios update on my Z270I Strix. Now when I run Realbench, the mouse freezes multiple times during the stress test, but the result hashes match. I reverted the bios to what I was using before, but this issue repeats itself even at stock settings. What gives?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Really? I thought first you ship them the malfunctioning CPU then they start an investigation that would take weeks and IF they found it defective they send you another one. But if that's the case as you say that's awesome. I just don't know if it would work in Hungary as well because I might have to send the CPU to the webshop I ordered from then they have to RMA it to Intel but I should probably ask the shop about it.
> 
> I will OC this once Amazon decides to finally dispatch my cooler after a week since I ordered it and see how it handles. If it's a good OC potential I might keep it as it's possible that I would get a worse one. I wonder if I could also choose a CPU with a specific batch number.
> 
> Does anyone know anything about this one? *L640G413*


I have L640G2xx Works charms till 5.1, very good IMC mem goes up to 4133 without hassle but that's it....not passing RB at 5.2 not even at 1.5 v









Edit: on Air cooler, will push further at the end of month when I go under custom loop ( 2x240 rad)


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zorgon*
> 
> I was stable at 4.9GHz @1.344V-1.376V but then did a bios update on my Z270I Strix. Now when I run Realbench, the mouse freezes multiple times during the stress test, but the result hashes match. I reverted the bios to what I was using before, but this issue repeats itself even at stock settings. What gives?


What bios before and after?


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zorgon*
> 
> I was stable at 4.9GHz @1.344V-1.376V but then did a bios update on my Z270I Strix. Now when I run Realbench, the mouse freezes multiple times during the stress test, but the result hashes match. I reverted the bios to what I was using before, but this issue repeats itself even at stock settings. What gives?


I'm having the same thing happen, I think it's either a recent windows update or Nvidia driver update.


----------



## Zorgon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> I'm having the same thing happen, I think it's either a recent windows update or Nvidia driver update.


I was running an RX 470 at the time. Used DDU and issue is persisting with IGP. Perhaps it's the Creator's Update? I'm running Realbench 2.44.

Edit:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> What bios before and after?


There have only been 3 bios releases to date for the Strix Z270I. Pretty sure I was on the Optane (2nd) bios previously. After updating to the most recent one and encountering issues, I have since tried all 3 bios versions and am still experiencing the same issue. I am preparing to do a clean install to see if that changes anything.


----------



## wholeeo

Username: wholeeo
CPU Model: i7-7700K
Base Clock: 100.
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency: 5200
Cache Frequency: 4800
Vcore in UEFI: 1.385
Vcore: 1.395
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delidded / Watercooling
Stability Test: Realbench 2.54 8 Hours Stress Test

Batch Number: Malaysia L639G010
Ram Speed: 3600 18-18-18-38 CR2
Ram Voltage: 1.43
VCCIO: 1.169
VCCSA: 1.277
Motherboard: Asus Z270G Strix
LLC Setting: 7
Misc Comments: No AVX Offset utilized.


----------



## briank

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zorgon*
> 
> I was stable at 4.9GHz @1.344V-1.376V but then did a bios update on my Z270I Strix. Now when I run Realbench, the mouse freezes multiple times during the stress test, but the result hashes match. I reverted the bios to what I was using before, but this issue repeats itself even at stock settings. What gives?


You might want to check in on this thread with your BIOS problem:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1619957/asus-z270-motherboards-north-america-q-a-thread/780


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Username: wholeeo
> CPU Model: i7-7700K
> Base Clock: 100.
> Core Multiplier: 52
> Core Frequency: 5200
> Cache Frequency: 4800
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.385
> Vcore: 1.395
> FCLK: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Delidded / Watercooling
> Stability Test: Realbench 2.54 8 Hours Stress Test
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L639G010
> Ram Speed: 3600 18-18-18-38 CR2
> Ram Voltage: 1.43
> VCCIO: 1.169
> VCCSA: 1.277
> Motherboard: Asus Z270G Strix
> LLC Setting: 7
> Misc Comments: No AVX Offset utilized.


nice cpu !


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nice cpu !


Thanks!


----------



## rt123

Nice CPU indeed.









NVM.


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *seven7thirty30*





> Originally Posted by *skingun*





> Originally Posted by *patman-dk*





> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*


Charted.
seven, I'm looking for the vcore measurement not the VID under load for the chart.


Sample Size40  Average OC5.06Median OC5.10Average Vcore1.37Median Vcore

1.37





> Originally Posted by *stryfetew*


No picture confirmation found, charted into secondary chart.


----------



## JBrutWhat

I just wanted to thank you for this guide! It was really helpful to me in overclocking my 7700k to 5.1 GHz (4.8 GHz uncore) at 1.47 volts (~1.44-1.45 V under load) on my GA Z270X Gaming 7 which passed a 1 hour OCCT stress test. Still had some issues getting my RAM from above 3866 MHz, but a quality OC nonetheless.

I actually just sold that PC (for a little profit of course) and I am building a new extreme PC. Unfortunately, that means I cannot give you proof This time I am going to get an ASUS IX Hero instead of going gigabyte, which i purchased due to familiarity with their bios. I am looking forward to it learning the new bios and uploading my results. The PC should be all built by this Friday and I will hopefully have some results to show you all within a few days.

I do have one suggestion: perhaps you could start requesting people to include their PSU in the form? It is my understanding that the quality of PSU can seriously affect the voltage regulation. Thus, certain PSUs provide significantly more stable voltage to the motherboard and subsequently, the CPU. This can result in a much more stable OC at a given voltage than if the identical chip is being supplied power by a lower quality PSU.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JBrutWhat*
> 
> I just wanted to thank you for this guide! It was really helpful to me in overclocking my 7700k to 5.1 GHz (4.8 GHz uncore) at 1.47 volts (~1.44-1.45 V under load) on my GA Z270X Gaming 7 which passed a 1 hour OCCT stress test. Still had some issues getting my RAM from above 3866 MHz, but a quality OC nonetheless.
> 
> I actually just sold that PC (for a little profit of course) and I am building a new extreme PC. Unfortunately, that means I cannot give you proof This time I am going to get an ASUS IX Hero instead of going gigabyte, which i purchased due to familiarity with their bios. I am looking forward to it learning the new bios and uploading my results. The PC should be all built by this Friday and I will hopefully have some results to show you all within a few days.
> 
> I do have one suggestion: perhaps you could start requesting people to include their PSU in the form? It is my understanding that the quality of PSU can seriously affect the voltage regulation. Thus, certain PSUs provide significantly more stable voltage to the motherboard and subsequently, the CPU. This can result in a much more stable OC at a given voltage than if the identical chip is being supplied power by a lower quality PSU.


Thank you for the kind words, and I will consider it.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Really?


I live in the USA and I first started a case with Intel, then they insisted that I cross ship my processor to solve all my problems with Voltage, it was painless, free and fast.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JBrutWhat*
> 
> I do have one suggestion: perhaps you could start requesting people to include their PSU in the form? It is my understanding that the quality of PSU can seriously affect the voltage regulation. Thus, certain PSUs provide significantly more stable voltage to the motherboard and subsequently, the CPU. This can result in a much more stable OC at a given voltage than if the identical chip is being supplied power by a lower quality PSU.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Thank you for the kind words, and I will consider it.


I was thinking about the same thing. A good PSU might be a huge factor in overclocking but it should be tested with multiple PSU's including cheaper ones using the same OC settings. But I suspect that it mostly affects VRM's lifetime as those have to work harder. Maybe somebody did it already and posted it somewhere on the internet.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I live in the USA and I first started a case with Intel, then they insisted that I cross ship my processor to solve all my problems with Voltage, it was painless, free and fast.


Yeah, I would have expected that in the USA but not in Hungary where Intel is not present only in neighbour countries. Did you wrote them an email or how did you contact them?


----------



## JBrutWhat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I was thinking about the same thing. A good PSU might be a huge factor in overclocking but it should be tested with multiple PSU's including cheaper ones using the same OC settings. But I suspect that it mostly affects VRM's lifetime as those have to work harder. Maybe somebody did it already and posted it somewhere on the internet.
> Yeah, I would have expected that in the USA but not in Hungary where Intel is not present only in neighbour countries. Did you wrote them an email or how did you contact them?


Check out this source which is quoting a supposed expert:

https://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/02/27/how_does_my_power_supply_impact_overclocking/?m=0

The fact is that a PSU that supplies a more constant voltage and has significantly improved ripple control can DEFINITELY help with overclocking your CPU and GPU.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JBrutWhat*
> 
> Check out this source which is quoting a supposed expert:
> 
> https://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/02/27/how_does_my_power_supply_impact_overclocking/?m=0
> 
> The fact is that a PSU that supplies a more constant voltage and has significantly improved ripple control can DEFINITELY help with overclocking your CPU and GPU.


aww come one
it doesn't say it's a huge factor
Quote:


> Ripple/noise have what I would call a moderate amount of impact on overclocking per se in the short term unless the values are massively out of specification. However, the closer you are to a clean output the less work that is done by the downstream VRMs, MOSFETs, and capacitors. Less work means the less wear


same about voltage stability

of course it could hinder you're OC

however traditionally people that build custom PC's (especailly for overclocking) have gone with too high rated PSU's from some good brand anyways

I would even venture so far that it would be hard to find a really bad PSU these days
it's not like you're gonna save big bucks on being cheap on the PSU


----------



## dmo580

Do you guys recommend buying Silicon Lottery do you at least get a decent CPU to start with?


----------



## JBrutWhat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> aww come one
> it doesn't say it's a huge factor
> same about voltage stability
> 
> of course it could hinder you're OC
> 
> however traditionally people that build custom PC's (especailly for overclocking) have gone with too high rated PSU's from some good brand anyways
> 
> I would even venture so far that it would be hard to find a really bad PSU these days
> it's not like you're gonna save big bucks on being cheap on the PSU


Well I never said it was a huge factor but it is a factor nonetheless! Certainly a variable to be considered along with the MOBO and CPU.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Do you guys recommend buying Silicon Lottery do you at least get a decent CPU to start with?


Absolutely yes! I have purchased 3 CPUs from them a [email protected]/1.275V which actually did [email protected] a [email protected] which did as advertised and now a [email protected]/1.375V but needs 1.39V on my set up. Reasonably priced relative to other companies that bin chips


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Absolutely yes! I have purchased 3 CPUs from them a [email protected]/1.275V which actually did [email protected] a [email protected] which did as advertised and now a [email protected]/1.375V but needs 1.39V on my set up. Reasonably priced relative to other companies that bin chips


You bought the 5.2ghz 7700k? It's quite pricey


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> You bought the 5.2ghz 7700k? It's quite pricey


Relative to what Overclockers UK charge for the same frequency chip (900 GBP) it isn't.


----------



## JBrutWhat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Relative to what Overclockers UK charge for the same frequency chip (900 GBP) it isn't.


Guess we are lucky in some areas of the US. We can buy a 7700k from some stores and return no questions asked...

Of course, if you delid it, you can't return it...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JBrutWhat*
> 
> Guess we are lucky in some areas of the US. We can buy a 7700k from some stores and return no questions asked...
> 
> Of course, if you delid it, you can't return it...


Depends on your circumstances too, for me to pull apart my custom hardline loop to bin chips is a pain not to mention selling off the duds. People here aren't stupid they know a current CPU that has been opened is more than likely not a good overclocker.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I was thinking about the same thing. A good PSU might be a huge factor in overclocking but it should be tested with multiple PSU's including cheaper ones using the same OC settings. But I suspect that it mostly affects VRM's lifetime as those have to work harder. Maybe somebody did it already and posted it somewhere on the internet.
> Yeah, I would have expected that in the USA but not in Hungary where Intel is not present only in neighbour countries. Did you wrote them an email or how did you contact them?


I contacted Intel by phone for everything including the free cross shipping.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Relative to what Overclockers UK charge for the same frequency chip (900 GBP) it isn't.


Oh certainly I understand what you're saying. I'm more looking at it from a frequency vs $ perspective.

If you buy a 5.1 GHz vs 5.2 GHz chip you're paying almost 30% more for 100 MHz more. I get that for some that's not an issue but I guess if you want to win an OC competition that certainly is necessary.

But it sounds like your experiences with Silicon Lottery are that their voltages on their site are conservative? For instance if I buy a 5.1 GHz, I probably wouldn't want to run at 1.4vcore 24/7, so is there even a point? Or is it likely the 1.408 they listed is fairly conservative and I could very well be seeing a chip that does 1.35?


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I was talking about Adaptive/Dynamic DVID. So the Vcore according to VID will go up and down according to CPU load.
> 
> Example Auto LLC, DVID/Adaptive full load prime95 1.332v, RealBench 1.284v, IDLE ~0.600v. No Vdroop.


BTW I re-read what you wrote and thought about how Gigabyte doesn't have an Adaptive mode. You're right DVID mode on Gigabyte = use VID table from CPU.

I believe in that case your Vdroop should be measuring the difference between Vcore and VID?

Anyhow, the reason I ended up not using DVID mode is because I noticed it would give my chip a LOT more volts than necessary. Like easily 0.1v more than needed. Doing an offset of -0.1v can be risky because at lower speeds you could then BSOD. So yes I ended up returning my board just so I could get one with Adaptive mode. I never would've thought that would be an issue given I used offset mode on my Gigabyte X58A board (back before adaptive existed). I think I just got pickier because there are other better options out there.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Oh certainly I understand what you're saying. I'm more looking at it from a frequency vs $ perspective.
> 
> If you buy a 5.1 GHz vs 5.2 GHz chip you're paying almost 30% more for 100 MHz more. I get that for some that's not an issue but I guess if you want to win an OC competition that certainly is necessary.
> 
> But it sounds like your experiences with Silicon Lottery are that their voltages on their site are conservative? For instance if I buy a 5.1 GHz, I probably wouldn't want to run at 1.4vcore 24/7, so is there even a point? Or is it likely the 1.408 they listed is fairly conservative and I could very well be seeing a chip that does 1.35?


I went for 5.2Ghz for personal reasons which some of you that know me understand







. 5.1Ghz is probably the sweet spot in terms of value, I know Silicon lottery do allow a bit of wiggle room regarding voltage around 20mV or so. Keep in mind dellidding can gain you some increase in frequency potentially as well as a slight decrease in Vcore, all their CPU's are tested pre delid. You can ask them to find you a lower voltage sample than they offer at a given frequency but expect it to cost more and be prepared to wait. You will find they are easy to deal with.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I went for 5.2Ghz for personal reasons which some of you that know me understand
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . 5.1Ghz is probably the sweet spot in terms of value, I know Silicon lottery do allow a bit of wiggle room regarding voltage around 20mV or so. Keep in mind dellidding can gain you some increase in frequency potentially as well as a slight decrease in Vcore, all their CPU's are tested pre delid. You can ask them to find you a lower voltage sample than they offer at a given frequency but expect it to cost more and be prepared to wait. You will find they are easy to deal with.


Gotcha. Yeah I was figuring the 5.1 is kinda solid in terms of value. But then I'd have to sell my current CPU. Trying to weigh decisions in my head right now


----------



## Bride

Hi Guys,
I'm running a 7600k at 5GHz, but I'm not sure about the voltage parameters, any advice will be appreciated:

Vcore +250mV (i can add additionals 50mV)
BIOS 1.350V
VCC PL 1.250V (i can add additionals 50mV)


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Gotcha. Yeah I was figuring the 5.1 is kinda solid in terms of value. But then I'd have to sell my current CPU. Trying to weigh decisions in my head right now


I guess it depends on how much you want to spend vs performance gains, roughly 2% gain per 100Mhz increase is not worth it to some.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> Hi Guys,
> I'm running a 7600k at 5GHz, but I'm not sure about the voltage parameters, any advice will be appreciated:
> 
> Vcore +250mV (i can add additionals 50mV)
> BIOS 1.350V
> VCC PL 1.250V (i can add additionals 50mV)


At 96 degrees C without AVX I would not be adding any more Vcore, seriously consider a delid







and better cooling


----------



## Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> At 96 degrees C without AVX I would not be adding any more Vcore, seriously consider a delid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and better cooling


Thanks man,
In fact it's already delidded with MX4 thermal grease and heatsink Phanteks PH-TC14PE, so probably I have to think about a water cooled system...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> Thanks man,
> In fact it's already delidded with MX4 thermal grease and heatsink Phanteks PH-TC14PE, so probably I have to think about a water cooled system...


Or consider lowering your overclock and Vcore, did you use MX4 under the lid?


----------



## Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Or consider lowering your overclock and Vcore, did you use MX4 under the lid?


I'm using the MX4 under and over the lid. At 4.8GHz i can use +150mV for the core, that's probably a better solution waiting a water cooled system...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> I'm using the MX4 under and over the lid. At 4.8GHz i can use +150mV for the core, that's probably a better solution waiting a water cooled system...


Try using liquid ultra under the lid it will make a significant difference








http://www.coollaboratory.com/product/coollaboratory-liquid-ultra/


----------



## czin125

core freq / nb freq / ram freq / ram timings

Do all of the above increase cpu heat load?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> core freq / nb freq / ram freq / ram timings
> 
> Do all of the above increase cpu heat load?


Anything that involves the transistors within the CPU to switch will cause heat output. The faster a transistor has to switch (frequency) the higher the heat output. Increasing frequency usually involves an increase in voltage which in turn increases heat with load.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> I'm using the MX4 under and over the lid. At 4.8GHz i can use +150mV for the core, that's probably a better solution waiting a water cooled system...


there may be a difference up to 10 degrees by using a liquid metal paste *under* the IHS










also with liquid metal the difference in height shouldn't matter that much

but with more conventional paste it matters again how thickly the glue gets applied (if you used it)

and even if not
there could be the slightest gap between IHS and DIE, so even the best (traditional) thermal paste would just not achieve the same effectiveness as any liquid metal one
normal TIM works by filling up the slightest imperfections between 2 surfaces
if those 2 are even a little apart then heat transfer becomes a lot more difficult (that's why a cooler, or IHS with a concave surface is just the worst)

btw

I did 5.1 Ghz with you're voltage, with a 35€ air cooler at 68 degrees in RealBench (after delid)

*before* delid I had 88 degrees
so something seems just not right


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Really? I thought first you ship them the malfunctioning CPU then they start an investigation that would take weeks and IF they found it defective they send you another one. But if that's the case as you say that's awesome. I just don't know if it would work in Hungary as well because I might have to send the CPU to the webshop I ordered from then they have to RMA it to Intel but I should probably ask the shop about it.
> 
> I will OC this once Amazon decides to finally dispatch my cooler after a week since I ordered it and see how it handles. If it's a good OC potential I might keep it as it's possible that I would get a worse one. I wonder if I could also choose a CPU with a specific batch number.
> 
> Does anyone know anything about this one? *L640G413*


I have been asking around at shops for batch numbers. Not all shops want to share them.
Some of the shops have and they have a lot chips with batch L70*D***
It looks like new chips made in 2017
Does anyone have knowledge about these?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> core freq / nb freq / ram freq / ram timings
> 
> Do all of the above increase cpu heat load?


I did not notice any significant temperature increase (only in the margins of error) by increasing ram timings without voltage. But adding more voltage to ram definetly increases the heat, potentially by 5-10 degrees from 2133 @1.2 V to 3200 MHz @ 1.35 V.


----------



## Bride

Added Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra, Vcore +280mV







are normal these frequency drops under AVX test?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> Added Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra, Vcore +280mV
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are normal these frequency drops under AVX test?


AVX instruction set increases temps significantly, looks like you have also increased your Vcore slightly as well but still a slight improvement from your previous post, perhaps look at a good AIO cooler as opposed to air







Without using the AVX linpack option what are your temps like? I would have expected more than a 5 degree c drop assuming same ambient.


----------



## BoredErica

Silicon Lottery removes the chance that I get a bad chip which negates the point of an entire upgrade for someone like me. However it also limits how good the chip can be, otherwise it would be binned into the next 100mhz category. Also keep in mind what you are buying... a chip that passes 1.4xxv at Realbench for 1 hr. My chart's not Realbench 1hr, it's 8 times that minimum.


----------



## Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> AVX instruction set increases temps significantly, looks like you have also increased your Vcore slightly as well but still a slight improvement from your previous post, perhaps look at a good AIO cooler as opposed to air
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Without using the AVX linpack option what are your temps like? I would have expected more than a 5 degree c drop assuming same ambient.


Here we are


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> Here we are


From 96 degrees C to 78 degrees C under load using same stress test, assuming same ambient that's a good result


----------



## becks

Will post my 8h Rb and data today....
But its such a ride....
For 8h Rb I need 1.325...
For 1h Prime I need 1.375+
For Memtest HCI I need 1.365...

And I can go on and on....
But I think I will try and find the middle one so that it works well with all of them than I will stop here at the moment, as it is i'm in high 70's low 80's with the temp on Air cooler.

5.1 Core / 5.0 Uncore 1 Avx (5.0 under Avx load) 3733 16-16-16-28 Cr1 Ram...


----------



## becks

P.S. Forgot to add...will add the rig under water in a week time..









2x240 Rads...Will see if I can hit the magic 5.2/5.3 than...


----------



## budgy

I've just built a 7600K system and am getting some confusing monitoring information and was wondering if anybody could offer some clarification on some temperature concerns.

First attempt was with a Gigabyte ZA270X-Gaming K5 and Thermalright Le Grand Macho RT. No extensive messing around with settings, just using the built in profiles. Could not reliably get 4.6GHz to work, but stable at 4.4GHz with poor temps at over 80c load in HWInfo (and various other temperature monitoring tools). Second 7600K, second Gaming K5 and Noctua DH-15S, overclock profile of 4.6GHz stable and temps comfortably below 80c load. I was reasonably happy with this speed/temperature balance but for various issues I've had to change from the Gigabyte board.

Now I have an Asus TUF Mark 1. Not played with this much so far, but have tested with auto tuning at 4.5GHz and this appears stable. However, HWInfo is already reporting core temps spiking up to around 80c. In Asus' AI Suite 3 temps are being reported as being approx 15c lower and as such, the fans aren't spinning up as expected - the Gigabyte was aggressively spinning up all the time. Before I attempt to push this further, back to the 4.6GHz I was happy to settle with, which temperature reading should I be trusting or worrying about? I've read that Asus monitors and reports from the socket rather than the cores themselves and HWInfo does have a line that corresponds to the temperature reported in AI Suite, but this is very different to the line(s) that other people seem to be reporting/basing their temperatures on.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *budgy*
> 
> I've just built a 7600K system and am getting some confusing monitoring information and was wondering if anybody could offer some clarification on some temperature concerns.
> 
> First attempt was with a Gigabyte ZA270X-Gaming K5 and Thermalright Le Grand Macho RT. No extensive messing around with settings, just using the built in profiles. Could not reliably get 4.6GHz to work, but stable at 4.4GHz with poor temps at over 80c load in HWInfo (and various other temperature monitoring tools). Second 7600K, second Gaming K5 and Noctua DH-15S, overclock profile of 4.6GHz stable and temps comfortably below 80c load. I was reasonably happy with this speed/temperature balance but for various issues I've had to change from the Gigabyte board.
> 
> Now I have an Asus TUF Mark 1. Not played with this much so far, but have tested with auto tuning at 4.5GHz and this appears stable. However, HWInfo is already reporting core temps spiking up to around 80c. In Asus' AI Suite 3 temps are being reported as being approx 15c lower and as such, the fans aren't spinning up as expected - the Gigabyte was aggressively spinning up all the time. Before I attempt to push this further, back to the 4.6GHz I was happy to settle with, which temperature reading should I be trusting or worrying about? I've read that Asus monitors and reports from the socket rather than the cores themselves and HWInfo does have a line that corresponds to the temperature reported in AI Suite, but this is very different to the line(s) that other people seem to be reporting/basing their temperatures on.


Firstly I would suggest ditching the profiles as they in best case only overshoot everything....like msi 1 button 5.0 GHz one putting the CPU at 1.5v.
Secondly go trough @Jpmboy signature overclocking guide (asus website)...
For temps, go with Core Temp or Hwinfo...ai suite is really for automated / beginner stuff.. for anything more you ditch ai suite / key bot and other software like that...
Also if the difference in temps keeps on going try and check your PLL voltage in Bios...A value of 1.1 - 1.2 should be fine...
Report back once you do this and will see where to go from there. What freq is your ram at ? XMP ON ? Try putting XMP off and set freq manually.

Hope it helps..


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Gotcha. Yeah I was figuring the 5.1 is kinda solid in terms of value. But then I'd have to sell my current CPU. Trying to weigh decisions in my head right now


If you want a 5.1/5.2 (delidded) chip cheaper than Silicon lottery, LMK.


----------



## encrypted11

Got a potato 7700k L701D055 (VID 1.296) today.









~1.305V for 4.8GHz, VID 1.296. Couldn't scale any further without a delid (probably 1.35x-1.36 for 4.9.

My 6700k L548B994 (VID 1.168) does 4.8 1.412 delidded with some further scaling potential though a core fails anything AVX beyond 4.5GHz
Though I'm running multicore acceleration ratios 50-50-48-48 stable with speedshift as a daily driver.

Feels like a downgrade, and its not exactly rock stable at that voltage yet.


----------



## CodingSquirrel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CodingSquirrel*
> 
> Would anyone be able to help troubleshooting the temps for my CPU, whether I've got the overclock configured correctly or if it might be an issue with the cooling?
> 
> I've delidded my 7700k and placed CLU under the IHS. I'm using Arctic Silver 5 under my water block. I've got 480 worth of rad (2x240) for my CPU and GPU. I'm running at 5GHz @ 1.33 adaptive voltage. I'm using the 3200 XMP profile for my RAM. I set IA AC Load Line and IA DC Load Line to 0.01. Everything else is set to Auto.
> 
> When running RealBench I get up to mid to high 80s in temps, and when gaming I've even seen it peak at 90C very infrequently. I tried reapplying the CLU which looked like it was a bit clumpy after I re-removed the IHS and it also seemed a bit light, so next time I applied a little more and this time it came out more liquid. First time I had used some RTV to glue the IHS down but this time it's just held in place by the motherboard bracket. Obviously I replaced the AS5 while doing this as well. Temps are basically the same as the first time. Just to prove that I didn't completely screw up my loop, my GPU maxes out around 45-50-ish (I don't keep much of an eye on it honestly, since it stays so cool) when under load. I also just quickly tried backing down to 4.9GHz 1.28v and the temps barely changed either.
> 
> Before delidding I couldn't even last 30 seconds stress testing the CPU at 5GHz 1.3v because it would thermal throttle at 100C almost immediately, so there definitely was an improvement from the delid. I've even managed to get a possibly stable 5.1GHz 1.35v but really didn't like the temps since they got a little over 90C in stress testing.
> 
> Some SS of bios and stress test with HWMonitor running:


Well the good news is I might have figured out what my problem is. Based on a random comment elsewhere about making sure that your microchannels are perpendicular to the jet plane, I realized I hadn't considered that to even be something to worry about. So I checked my water block and what do you know, I have it parallel instead of perpendicular. Thankfully I had clear liquid and could tell the problem without pulling things apart.

I feel like a dolt for running it wrong like that for a little over a month now. So looks like I'm dismantling my loop again tonight to fix it. Really hoping this gets my temps more under control.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Vietnam here, L706B501
> 
> I'll run it on air to get everything squared away, then delid/water.


Ran first "something", clean install so I don't have any CPU benches loaded. Wanted to see if my vid card was operational before putting the water block on it, so I ran TimeSpy and Fire Strike. CPU boosting to [email protected] 1.28v, top temp 68C w/NH-D14 and whatever stock fan curve the bios applied, this is all still stock bios settings so Asus auto rules on the voltages. Never thought to look at the reported idle voltage in bios, these readings were HWinfo64 based.

Edit: 1.168v shown on the same bios screen encrypted11 shows in #2045


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> BTW I re-read what you wrote and thought about how Gigabyte doesn't have an Adaptive mode. You're right DVID mode on Gigabyte = use VID table from CPU.
> 
> I believe in that case your Vdroop should be measuring the difference between Vcore and VID?
> 
> Anyhow, the reason I ended up not using DVID mode is because I noticed it would give my chip a LOT more volts than necessary. Like easily 0.1v more than needed. Doing an offset of -0.1v can be risky because at lower speeds you could then BSOD. So yes I ended up returning my board just so I could get one with Adaptive mode. I never would've thought that would be an issue given I used offset mode on my Gigabyte X58A board (back before adaptive existed). I think I just got pickier because there are other better options out there.


My Gigabyte does not have Vdroop at the Vcore.

Example with all power saving features off Auto LLC, DVID/Adaptive full load prime95 1.332v, RealBench 1.284v, IDLE ~1.296v. No Vdroop.

Also DIVD at -0.1v is not risky because it only lowers the turbo Voltage, idle voltage is not effected I checked.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Got a potato 7700k L701D055 (VID 1.296) today.
> 
> ~1.305V for 4.8GHz, VID 1.296. Couldn't scale any further without a delid (probably 1.35x-1.36 for 4.9.
> 
> My 6700k L548B994 (VID 1.168) does 4.8 1.412 delidded with some further scaling potential though a core fails anything AVX beyond 4.5GHz
> Though I'm running multicore acceleration ratios 50-50-48-48 stable with speedshift as a daily driver.
> 
> Feels like a downgrade, and its not exactly rock stable at that voltage yet.


Yeah I run 1.3 for 4.8ghz also. It's not great


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Got a potato 7700k L701D055 (VID 1.296) today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ~1.305V for 4.8GHz, VID 1.296. Couldn't scale any further without a delid (probably 1.35x-1.36 for 4.9.
> 
> My 6700k L548B994 (VID 1.168) does 4.8 1.412 delidded with some further scaling potential though a core fails anything AVX beyond 4.5GHz
> Though I'm running multicore acceleration ratios 50-50-48-48 stable with speedshift as a daily driver.
> 
> Feels like a downgrade, and its not exactly rock stable at that voltage yet.


That sucks man!
Love to see the chip in the OC chart though. Could post the required info for it?


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Yeah I run 1.3 for 4.8ghz also. It's not great


Same batch?


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> That sucks man!
> Love to see the chip in the OC chart though. Could post the required info for it?


Boxed it in the clamshell plastic. Its going back to Intel and I need my (usable) PC back.
Even at stock during the diagnostic process with XTU testing I was having issues with the chip cooking for brief moments.
Some regular applications like firefox with script/adblock (single threaded) were generating enough temperature ramps causing it to quit or exhibit erratic behaviour.


Its likely a combination of both poorer silicon lottery and the TIM/silicone gasket issue than a dud chip per se.
Though it didn't meet the rated spec when this sample was released as a 7700K SKU.

My cooling solution:
H80i V2 with Dual Servo AP-15 2150 static pressure fans that brings it to Noctua D15 levels of heat dissipation or mildly better.

Late edit: added pic if it matters but I don't think the info will be useful. .


----------



## dirtyred

It seems like that my OC will have to wait because Amazon is incompetent as my cooler is still not dispatched after 9 days and customer support is saying that it might be out of stock. Interestingly they had 6 in stock when I placed my order. On a sidenote, Gigabyte screwes me over by not honouring my warranty because the GPU was not sold by their hungarian distributor.


----------



## wholeeo

Going to try for 49 on cache. Left RB running this morning. Hopefully all is good when I get back home.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> Same batch?


My batch is L642G095


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> It seems like that my OC will have to wait because Amazon is incompetent as my cooler is still not dispatched after 9 days and customer support is saying that it might be out of stock. Interestingly they had 6 in stock when I placed my order. On a sidenote, Gigabyte screwes me over by not honouring my warranty because the GPU was not sold by their hungarian distributor.


Gigabyte goes by the S/N in the USA.


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> Same batch?


Well if I had to add on with the phenomenon that people aren't charting the potato Kabylakes, it takes effort to do so as well. In my case it wasn't worth the effort.

Adding on to the discussion that the chart seems overly-competitive than better sampling (like with the Skylake thread).
It might help if there's a secondary chart for highlighting potatoes without listing reqs.
Or perhaps, just cinebench R15 + CPU-Z voltage screenies for quick and dirty numbers for potatoes.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Well if I had to add on with the phenomenon that people aren't charting the potato Kabylakes, it takes effort to do so as well. In my case it wasn't worth the effort.
> 
> Adding on to the discussion that the chart seems overly-competitive than better sampling (like with the Skylake thread).
> It might help if there's a secondary chart for highlighting potatoes without listing reqs.
> Or perhaps, just cinebench R15 + CPU-Z voltage screenies for quick and dirty numbers for potatoes.


I don't understand why it's not worth the effort. Whether you do well or not has no bearing on whether providing statistics is worth it or not.

The point of verification and standards is so we don't get overly high overclocks that are not remotely stable. It was to bring clocks down. I don't know what I can do to remove the incentive for people to want to compete with others.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I don't understand why it's not worth the effort. Whether you do well or not has no bearing on whether providing statistics is worth it or not.
> 
> The point of verification and standards is so we don't get overly high overclocks that are not remotely stable. It was to bring clocks down. *I don't know what I can do to remove the incentive for people to want to compete with others.*


Well, having the top frequencies at the top of the chart doesn't help much in that regard. Maybe sort by core voltage (high->low or low->high) instead?

I kind of agree it would be nice to have maybe a separate chart for quick and easy cinebench runs- could get more people posting.


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Well, having the top frequencies at the top of the chart doesn't help much in that regard. Maybe sort by core voltage (high->low or low->high) instead?
> 
> I kind of agree it would be nice to have maybe a separate chart for quick and easy cinebench runs- could get more people posting.


The good part about cinebench is it takes just a minute or 2 per run.

And as most of us know, these CPUs including Skylake/Kabylake do have a "slow mode" operation (usually undervoltage) where they'd score/perform about 100MHz less than they normally would. Cinebench picks this up in under 2 minutes. (i.e. a 4.9GHz scoring like a 4.8GHz).
The takeaway with such a chart isn't stability, but "Voltage for optimal performance" for keeping track of even chips at the bottom 25 percentile that aren't usually charted imo.

Would be a nice data point to have, for users who can interpret the scores correctly. I think scracy made some good points on the competition issue as well.


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Well, having the top frequencies at the top of the chart doesn't help much in that regard. Maybe sort by core voltage (high->low or low->high) instead?
> 
> I kind of agree it would be nice to have maybe a separate chart for quick and easy cinebench runs- could get more people posting.


I guess it's doable. Sorting my alphabetical order would give the least possible incentive but that would make the order of the chart basically nonexistent.



> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> The good part about cinebench is it takes just a minute or 2 per run.
> 
> And as most of us know, these CPUs including Skylake/Kabylake do have a "slow mode" operation (usually undervoltage) where they'd score/perform about 100MHz less than they normally would. Cinebench picks this up in under 2 minutes. (i.e. a 4.9GHz scoring like a 4.8GHz).
> The takeaway with such a chart isn't stability, but "Voltage for optimal performance" for keeping track of even chips at the bottom 25 percentile that aren't usually charted imo.
> 
> Would be a nice data point to have, for users who can interpret the scores correctly. I think scracy made some good points on the competition issue as well.


I'm not sure which scracy post you are referring to, I scroll up quite a bit and didn't find anything. Might have missed something.

People who want to submit without hitting the requirements are free to do so and their results will be posted into the second chart which has existed since Skylake, it's just nobody bothers.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I guess it's doable. Sorting my alphabetical order would give the least possible incentive but that would make the order of the chart basically nonexistent.
> 
> I'm not sure which scracy post you are referring to, I scroll up quite a bit and didn't find anything. Might have missed something.
> 
> People who want to submit without hitting the requirements are free to do so and their results will be posted into the second chart which has existed since Skylake, it's just nobody bothers.


I for one think you've done a great job with the design and maintenance of the chart as it is. You and I know that no matter how you change it, some people won't be happy. We're starting to get a bit too sensitive these days. The sad thing is that we're teaching all this "non competitive" poop to our kids and following generations. Keep doing what you do @Darkwizzie


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

It's up to the users to contribute. If only the top OCs get submitted, then it's a self fulfilling prophecy that the results look like a contest to those less than stellar examples. Good, bad, or ugly, I'll post my results. Put me on the bottom of the heap - it's just a chip, not the scorecard of my life.


----------



## peter2k

the chart is fine

this isn't about competition but to give others an idea about what to expect from kaby lake
so duds would be good to have in the list as well

but even if not

someone could see easily if they have a good CPU or a bad one by having a look at the chart

this thread is a guide and about realistic 24h OC
it's awesome it's here

if you're not getting a high place in the chart it's nothing personal or about skill
just bad luck in silicon lottery (also info on batch numbers *are* nice to have)
if you're worried about competition and benching this is not the thread you should be posting in about it

there's not a single entry with ln2, so no one is actually serious about competition here


----------



## TheADLA

Hi there,

havn't been on for ages








just upgraded and got a new MoBo and a 7700K. Didn't start OC yet. I guess, I will first use the Auto OC from my MoBo to see what the values are to get an idea where I can go.
Board told me if I hit OK, it will go to 4.8 Ghz. I guess I see from there how voltage and everything is to get an idea where to go.

That is so far the untouched result quickly done with XTU. I see a spike at 1.299v @4.5 but it was usually around 1.26v ish. No clue whether thats good or not.
Temps can be ignored for now since I guess the Paste has to cure as well as my H110i GTX is on Quiet Mode plus Smart Fan Mode on the MoBo for the rest, so the fans didnt do anything during the run.

Let's see what will happen


----------



## briank

OK, time to report my overclock:

Username: briank
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 51
Core Frequency: 5100
Cache Frequency: 4500
Vcore in UEFI: 1.4
Vcore: 1.408
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delidded, Noctua NH-D15
Stability Test: 8 hours realbench

Batch Number: Malaysia L649H691
Ram Speed: (3200 16-18-18-38)
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: Auto
Ram Voltage: 1.356
Motherboard: Asus Strix Z270F
LLC Setting: 6
Misc Comments: Adaptive voltage. No AVX offset. All C states / Speed Step enabled. SL binned 5.1.


----------



## garyd9

I'm a new user trying to get up to speed on the basics of o/c'ing kaby lake, so please pardon the potentially stupid question:

If Intel sets VID tables in the chip based on the specific chip's performance, would it be useful for the chart on the first post to include a "VID at stock turbo speeds" column? Could that information be used to determine a "better" or "worse" chip before pushing the multipliers?

For example (using fictional numbers), if my i7-7700k requests a VID of 1.190 with all cores at 4.4, but the majority of better overclocking chips in the table have a VID < 1.16, wouldn't that indicate that my chip likely won't get anywhere near 5 GHz at a reasonable voltage?

Thanks
Gary


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> I'm a new user trying to get up to speed on the basics of o/c'ing kaby lake, so please pardon the potentially stupid question:
> 
> If Intel sets VID tables in the chip based on the specific chip's performance, would it be useful for the chart on the first post to include a "VID at stock turbo speeds" column? Could that information be used to determine a "better" or "worse" chip before pushing the multipliers?
> 
> For example (using fictional numbers), if my i7-7700k requests a VID of 1.190 with all cores at 4.4, but the majority of better overclocking chips in the table have a VID < 1.16, wouldn't that indicate that my chip likely won't get anywhere near 5 GHz at a reasonable voltage?
> 
> Thanks
> Gary


What is your VID at 4.5GHz? Taking about VID is a lost art, we use to do it all the time a long time ago.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is your VID at 4.5GHz? Taking about VID is a lost art, we use to do it all the time a long time ago.


Mine, with all cores loaded, not overclocked (which puts them all at 4.4, not 4.5) is 1.17.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Mine, with all cores loaded, not overclocked (which puts them all at 4.4, not 4.5) is 1.17.


Clock it up to 4.5GHz then run Prime 95 stress test, the VID will go that high. VID now works with max turbo clock speed and CPU load variation.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Clock it up to 4.5GHz then run Prime 95 stress test, the VID will go that high. VID now works with max turbo clock speed and CPU load variation.


I think you might be missing my point... The idea is to be able to compare without any overclocking whatsoever - in order to measure the potential.

If a person takes a brand new i7-7700k and puts it into a m/b with no overclocking options enabled, and does anything that maxes all the cores (which can be as simple as just moving a window around the screen), the 4 cores will go to 4400 (not 4500) and the corresponding VID could (in theory) be compared. (It's much easier to get 4 cores to 4400 than to stress only a single core in order to see 4500.)

On my machine, with completely default BIOS settings (er.. UEFI settings) - left to intel defaults, all 4 cores jump to 4400 with a VID of 1.170 if I run 8 threads of linpack or if I just move a chrome window around rapidly.

If you, for example, were to do the exact same thing, but your VID was only 1.15 with all 4 cores at 4400, you'd probably have a better chip.

From what I've seen, the VID (as reported by HWMonitor and HWInfo) doesn't seem to be impacted by actual load, only by clock speed.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> I think you might be missing my point... The idea is to be able to compare without any overclocking whatsoever - in order to measure the potential.
> 
> If a person takes a brand new i7-7700k and puts it into a m/b with no overclocking options enabled, and does anything that maxes all the cores (which can be as simple as just moving a window around the screen), the 4 cores will go to 4400 (not 4500) and the corresponding VID could (in theory) be compared. (It's much easier to get 4 cores to 4400 than to stress only a single core in order to see 4500.)
> 
> On my machine, with completely default BIOS settings (er.. UEFI settings) - left to intel defaults, all 4 cores jump to 4400 with a VID of 1.170 if I run 8 threads of linpack or if I just move a chrome window around rapidly.
> 
> If you, for example, were to do the exact same thing, but your VID was only 1.15 with all 4 cores at 4400, you'd probably have a better chip.
> 
> From what I've seen, the VID (as reported by HWMonitor and HWInfo) doesn't seem to be impacted by actual load, only by clock speed.


I just ran Prime95 and VID was 1.275v then RealBench was 1.227v. VID adjust to load in the CPU. Overclocking does not change what the maximum VID is at 4.5GHz for your CPU. Test and see for your self, VID is set in the CPU and can't be changed. I do this testing all the time for folks like you.


----------



## Ins1de

Hi guys, I'm new to overclocking.
I have Asus Z270f Strix (latest bios 906), 7700K, Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200Mhz.
All settings are in Auto mode and everything is fine, but after the XMP mode is on, the VCCIO, VCCSA and Standby voltages are slightly overestimated.
Should i worry about this and change them manually? Sorry for my english


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Test and see for your self, VID is set in the CPU and can't be changed. I do this testing all the time for folks like you.


Exactly... the VID is set in the CPU. It's set by Intel as a "stable" voltage for the given frequency. No, it can't be changed. We're on the same page with this.

So if, for a given frequency of 4400, my i7 has a VID of 1.17 and yours has a VID of 1.16, then wouldn't that indicate that Intel, when they set the VID's, felt that your chip required less voltage for 4400 when compared to mine?

The reason for using 4400 is that it's much easier to cause all 4 cores to go to 4400 than it is to get 1 core to 4500 (when using default intel settings for the chip.)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I just ran Prime95 and VID was 1.275v then RealBench was 1.227v. VID adjust to load in the CPU. Overclocking does not change what the maximum VID is at 4.5GHz for your CPU.


This doesn't agree with my own testing even while I type this. I have HWInfo open (which reports a VID for each of the 4 cores) and the only "stress" on the machine is me moving the browser window around. That causes all 4 cores to pop to a 44x multiplier, and VID on all 4 of them to 1.170.

I stop moving the browser window, and all 4 cores drop to a 8x multiplier (800MHz) and the VID drops to 0.800 for each of them. (There are occasional spikes for single cores as Windows does stuff in the background.)

Now I start 8 threads of linpack (via linx.exe) and the cores jump back to 44x (4400 MHz) with a VID of 1.170. Linpack starts by getting the memory buffers populated... during that time, my temps jump to 50C. After a few seconds, linpack starts actually processing AVX instructions and my temps jump to ~80C, but the frequency (multiplier) and VID are still the same (4400 and 1.170.) Obviously, while processing the AVX instructions, the load is much greater, but the VID isn't.

I'll attach a screen snippet (capture.png) showing the pattern. In the "Clock" graph you can see that the core jumps to and stays at 4400. As well, the VID jumps to and stays at 1.17 (or 1.169), but the temperature graph shows obvious differences of load...


----------



## encrypted11

The default VID overclockers normally refer to are just the name (designation) of a "VID table" a chip is designed to work with and cannot be changed. How many different "bins" or vid designations are available, 10, 20, 30? You'd have to work at Intel to find out.

But it essential for the CPU (punching in 00, ff etc) to dial in voltage state it requests from the motherboard and is related to power management.

In the case of ASUS Z bioses, the adaptive voltage are set in such a way that it scales with the chip's VID table. Overclocks are based on tweaking the Turboboost state multiplier.

And since Intel only guarantees reliability within the chip's rated frequencies, options like the following can help "stabilise" your CPU's required voltages for the turbo multipliers you've set manually.
-Offset (Adaptive mode - applies to just turbo multipliers)
-LLC
-IA DC Load Line

Regular overclockers may have a preference to manual, offsets, adaptive + offset, Auto.

My personal preference is Adaptive + Offset + Speedshift (HWP). Adaptive is going to makes a barely noticeable difference in idle power consumption. *However*, it allows your chip (vary as with silicon lottery) to run noticeably cooler on idle..
My skylake runs at a typical of 0 to + 5C (+ small spikes from application launches) above ambient on normal light usage.

Some may argue DPC latency in power states can occur. However HWP (than speedstep) has reduced this significantly to make it a worthwhile tradeoff.

Remember with speedstep, I had to keep the min freq state to 80%. Before DPC latency becomes a problem with the massive frequency flips.

But on HWP, it is completely stable like a locked chip even at min freq 5%.Though its pretty sad Asus took about 9 months after inception of HWP to a year to implement the first BIOS With this capability (Around 3101 beta for Z170).

There are a select few users who use this method of OCing as an "extended frequency range" OC with full power management capabilities enabled. But YMMV as always.


----------



## skingun

@Darkwizzie Please update my line in the spreadsheet









Username: skingun
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4800
Vcore in UEFI: 1.4
Vcore: 1.440
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delidded, Custom Loop
Stability Test: 8 hours RealBench v.2.44

Batch Number: unknown
Ram Speed: (3200 15-17-17-35-1T)
VCCIO: 1.160
VCCSA: 1.152
Ram Voltage: 1.350
Motherboard: Asus Apex
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: Adaptive voltage. No AVX offset. All C states / Speed Step enabled.


----------



## SweWiking

How high would you dare to push the cpu volt for 24/7 ? I run a full cusom loop, EK block on the cpu. The cpu is delid and atm i run it at 5100mhz (1.360v). While gaming ther cpu is around 37-48c and while stressing it in cinebench it tops around 61-63c.

Ofc i wanna run it as fast as possible, 5.2 or 5.3, but it takes around 1.435v for it to boot on 5.3.
Would 1.450v be okay for 24/7 if the cpu never goes over 75c ?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> How high would you dare to push the cpu volt for 24/7 ? I run a full cusom loop, EK block on the cpu. The cpu is delid and atm i run it at 5100mhz (1.360v). While gaming ther cpu is around 37-48c and while stressing it in cinebench it tops around 61-63c.
> 
> Ofc i wanna run it as fast as possible, 5.2 or 5.3, but it takes around 1.435v for it to boot on 5.3.
> Would 1.450v be okay for 24/7 if the cpu never goes over 75c ?


Same exact situation here! Lets see what guys say


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SweWiking*
> 
> How high would you dare to push the cpu volt for 24/7 ? I run a full cusom loop, EK block on the cpu. The cpu is delid and atm i run it at 5100mhz (1.360v). While gaming ther cpu is around 37-48c and while stressing it in cinebench it tops around 61-63c.
> 
> Ofc i wanna run it as fast as possible, 5.2 or 5.3, but it takes around 1.435v for it to boot on 5.3.
> Would 1.450v be okay for 24/7 if the cpu never goes over 75c ?












if we only knew
there are users that have around here, but not kaby lake

I'm kinda in the same boat
my 7600k is fine with 1.375v for 5.2
but 5.3 needs 1.44v to boot and not lock up after a minute or so
for actual benching I would need more

see you found the sweet spot on you're CPU as did I, once you have to really ramp up voltage for an additional 100Mhz you know when the chip is at an end
getting it stable even in RealBench might require actually more than 1.45v

just saying

if be fine with 1.45v, if that really is the end of it
my temps are fine (hint, you have to set a few additional voltages manually if you're using an Asus, as they just jump through the roof if left on auto once you hit 5.3)

at the end of the day
of you want to
shrug
why not
if it degrades you have to drop down to 5Ghz most likely
in a year or 2
if it degrades
many sandy have not degraded while living on the edge
others have


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Same exact situation here! Lets see what guys say


Personally I would not exceed 1.4V 24/7 with C states enabled assuming temps are ok. That said whilst voltage does play a part it's mostly current that kills CPU's so I guess it comes down to what you use your P.C for, constant heavy work loads obviously isn't going to help.


----------



## becks

Username: becks
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 51
Core Frequency: 5100
Cache Frequency: 5100
Vcore in UEFI: 1.360
Vcore Non-Avx: 1.376
Vcore Avx: 1.392
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delidded, NH-D14
Stability Test: 8 hours RealBench v.2.54

Batch Number: L642G264 (Nice anagram Intel







)
Ram Speed: (3733 16-16-16-28-1T) F4-3200C15D-32GTZ
VCCIO: 1.08750
VCCSA: 1.13750
Ram Voltage: 1.395
Motherboard: Maximus VIII Impact
LLC Setting: 6
Misc Comments: Adaptive voltage.
No AVX offset.
All C states / Speed Step / SpeedShift enabled.
PLL Termination V 0.910
PCH V: 1.0250
CPU Standby: 1.00
IA AC / IA DC Load line: 0.01
MRC / Fast Boot: Enable


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









EDIT: Have to stop here for now due to temperature.
71-73 Load Non-Avx
77-82 Load Avx
Gelid GC Extreme IHS - Cooler
Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut under IHS


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Username: becks
> CPU Model: 7700k
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 51
> Core Frequency: 5100
> Cache Frequency: 5100
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.360
> Vcore Non-Avx: 1.376
> Vcore Avx: 1.392
> FCLK: Reminder: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Delidded, NH-D14
> Stability Test: 8 hours RealBench v.2.54
> 
> Batch Number: L642G264 (Nice anagram Intel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> Ram Speed: (3733 16-16-16-28-1T) F4-3200C15D-32GTZ
> VCCIO: 1.08750
> VCCSA: 1.13750
> Ram Voltage: 1.395
> Motherboard: Maximus VIII Impact
> LLC Setting: 6
> Misc Comments: Adaptive voltage.
> No AVX offset.
> All C states / Speed Step / SpeedShift enabled.
> PLL Termination V 0.910
> PCH V: 1.0250
> CPU Standby: 1.00
> IA AC / IA DC Load line: 0.01
> MRC / Fast Boot: Enable
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Have to stop here for now due to temperature.
> 71-73 Load Non-Avx
> 77-82 Load Avx
> Gelid GC Extreme IHS - Cooler
> Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut under IHS


And there goes another 5100ghz stable 7700k . It feels like its becoming a standart









Good job man !


----------



## skingun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Personally I would not exceed 1.4V 24/7 with C states enabled assuming temps are ok. That said whilst voltage does play a part it's mostly current that kills CPU's so I guess it comes down to what you use your P.C for, constant heavy work loads obviously isn't going to help.


The Intel datasheet for the 7th Gen Intel® Processor Family for S Platforms suggests a maximum operating voltage of 1.52 for a 7700k. See Table 7-2 pg.144

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html

Unless I am missing something, provide temps are in check and the measurement of vcore is 'real', it is safe to use up to 1.52V


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> And there goes another 5100ghz stable 7700k . It feels like its becoming a standart
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good job man !


Thank you







5.2 and up is to big of a jump with my current cooling but will try some more settings when I get under water.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skingun*
> 
> The Intel datasheet for the 7th Gen Intel® Processor Family for S Platforms suggests a maximum operating voltage of 1.52 for a 7700k. See Table 7-2 pg.144
> 
> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html


Would that be like 1.52 v. 24/7 ?

Well asuming that this is not for a dellidet cpu and that they know that the chip is hot itself and on 1.5 even hotter... sound kinda fantastic in our favor


----------



## Frosted racquet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skingun*
> 
> The Intel datasheet for the 7th Gen Intel® Processor Family for S Platforms suggests a maximum operating voltage of 1.52 for a 7700k. See Table 7-2 pg.144
> 
> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html
> 
> Unless I am missing something, provide temps are in check and the measurement of vcore is 'real', it is safe to use up to 1.52V


No, that only means that according to VID table the CPU in theory could request up to 1.52v, NOT that it's a safe voltage to be delivered to the CPU by the VRM to use 24/7 regardless of temps.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skingun*
> 
> The Intel datasheet for the 7th Gen Intel® Processor Family for S Platforms suggests a maximum operating voltage of 1.52 for a 7700k. See Table 7-2 pg.144
> 
> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html


I was aware of the 1.52V Intel spec but personally for 24/7 use I would not run it that high, maybe for benchmarks occasionally that's fine. I can't quite remember where I read it might have been on another forum but 1.4V for Skylake (closest thing to Kabylake) was the equivalent to 1.3V for Haswell. Truth is nobody really knows at this stage, time will tell.


----------



## skingun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Would that be like 1.52 v. 24/7 ?


The table refers to notes 1, 2, 3, 7 and 12. Note 7 states 'Long term reliability cannot be assured in conditions above or below Min/Max function limits. One would infer that provided the max is not exceeded long term stability is viable. However, as we all, know assumption is the mother of all evil. Without a comment directly from Intel I would hesitate to give a solid answer.

I'm running my chip with vcore at 1.4v in BIOS using adaptive mode which gives a range of 1.264v to 1.440v in HWiNFO64 v5.50-3130. Granted this is still a long way from 1.52v. The CPU temperature peaks at 76 degrees running at 5Ghz with 0 AVX offfset. Yes, my CPU is a potato


----------



## skingun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Frosted racquet*
> 
> No, that only means that according to VID table the CPU in theory could request up to 1.52v, NOT that it's a safe voltage to be delivered to the CPU by the VRM to use 24/7 regardless of temps.


If the CPU could potentially request this, and referring to note 7 in the table, how could it not be safe? Please excuse me ignorance.


----------



## Frosted racquet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skingun*
> 
> If the CPU could potentially request this, and referring to note 7 in the table, how could it not be safe? Please excuse me ignorance.


Here you go:


----------



## skingun

+rep


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skingun*
> 
> If the CPU could potentially request this, and referring to note 7 in the table, how could it not be safe? Please excuse me ignorance.


As I stated in an earlier post quoted from Asus O/C guide "Now, if you happen to be the type of user that spends more time running Prime95 than using a PC for other tasks, then we advise you reduce the maximum Vcore. "By how much?", you ask. Well, you're on your own for that. Remember, it's current that degrades or kills a CPU. Be mindful of how much load you're placing on the chip long-term and act accordingly. There's nothing worse than pushing insane levels of current through the die and then moaning when the there's degradation"


----------



## skingun

While I cannot speak for others, my personal situation does not utilise heavy AVX loads. I just game and browse the internet.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Exactly... the VID is set in the CPU. It's set by Intel as a "stable" voltage for the given frequency. No, it can't be changed. We're on the same page with this.
> 
> So if, for a given frequency of 4400, my i7 has a VID of 1.17 and yours has a VID of 1.16, then wouldn't that indicate that Intel, when they set the VID's, felt that your chip required less voltage for 4400 when compared to mine?
> 
> The reason for using 4400 is that it's much easier to cause all 4 cores to go to 4400 than it is to get 1 core to 4500 (when using default intel settings for the chip.)
> This doesn't agree with my own testing even while I type this. I have HWInfo open (which reports a VID for each of the 4 cores) and the only "stress" on the machine is me moving the browser window around. That causes all 4 cores to pop to a 44x multiplier, and VID on all 4 of them to 1.170.
> 
> I stop moving the browser window, and all 4 cores drop to a 8x multiplier (800MHz) and the VID drops to 0.800 for each of them. (There are occasional spikes for single cores as Windows does stuff in the background.)
> 
> Now I start 8 threads of linpack (via linx.exe) and the cores jump back to 44x (4400 MHz) with a VID of 1.170. Linpack starts by getting the memory buffers populated... during that time, my temps jump to 50C. After a few seconds, linpack starts actually processing AVX instructions and my temps jump to ~80C, but the frequency (multiplier) and VID are still the same (4400 and 1.170.) Obviously, while processing the AVX instructions, the load is much greater, but the VID isn't.
> 
> I'll attach a screen snippet (capture.png) showing the pattern. In the "Clock" graph you can see that the core jumps to and stays at 4400. As well, the VID jumps to and stays at 1.17 (or 1.169), but the temperature graph shows obvious differences of load...


I don't think you are doing the testing correctly. Do you clear HWiNFO64 in between testing, also what you are testing might be the same load for voltage.

Here is two tests to prove my point correctly. VID Prime95 Value 1.239v Maximum 1.277v RealBench Value 1.176 Maximum 1.220v.


----------



## skingun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> As I stated in an earlier post quoted from Asus O/C guide "Now, if you happen to be the type of user that spends more time running Prime95 than using a PC for other tasks, then we advise you reduce the maximum Vcore. "By how much?", you ask. Well, you're on your own for that. Remember, it's current that degrades or kills a CPU. Be mindful of how much load you're placing on the chip long-term and act accordingly. There's nothing worse than pushing insane levels of current through the die and then moaning when the there's degradation"


I've lost count of how many times I have read that guide


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skingun*
> 
> The Intel datasheet for the 7th Gen Intel® Processor Family for S Platforms suggests a maximum operating voltage of 1.52 for a 7700k. See Table 7-2 pg.144
> 
> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html
> 
> Unless I am missing something, provide temps are in check and the measurement of vcore is 'real', it is safe to use up to 1.52V


that 1.52V max vcore requires that other conditions are met (see the foot notes). These are current(amperage/TDP), and temperature, etc. ... so, I'm not sayin you shouldn't run 1.52V, just be aware that the value is not to be taken alone when thinking 24/7 and durability.

Edit - the VID request bin depends on frequency AND load, not only on frequency and when a CPU experiences load change the VID request can pull a higher value from the table momentarily.


----------



## rt123

Not an entry, just testng a chip. 1.4V in BIOS LLC5.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't think you are doing the testing correctly. Do you clear HWiNFO64 in between testing...


Not always unless I'm doing a long running test. For the screen shots I provided earlier in the thread, I just eyeballed the "current" column. It doesn't invalidate that the VID is going to 1.17 no matter what load is on the processor iff all 4 cores are running at 4400. Once the cores slow down, the VID drops.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> ..., also what you are testing might be the same load for voltage.


Are you saying that moving a 'Chrome' browser window around the desktop on an otherwise idle machine uses the same load as running 8 threads of linpack? They both showed the same VID of 1.17...

Perhaps defining "load" might be a good idea. My definition for the purpose of this discussion is "how hard the processor is having to work at a given frequency." I usually guess the difference of two loads by comparing the "CPU Package Power" parameter in HWInfo (assuming both tests cause all cores to use a 44x multiplier.)

So, using linpack as an example again, on my processor, when linpack is loading up memory, 4 cores are at 4400, VCore is at 1.12, VID is at 1.17, and CPU power is at only 40 to 42 watts. When linpack is done loading up memory and actually starts chewing data with AVX instructions, the core speeds, vcore, and VID are still the same, but the CPU's package power fluctuates between 91 and 95 watts.

Obviously, there's a massively different load on the processor between the two.

(Oh, and when the machine is idle, moving the chrome browser window around causes the power to jump to 21W, with 4x cores at 4400, VID at 1.17, and VCore at...1.12)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Here is two tests to prove my point correctly. VID Prime95 Value 1.239v Maximum 1.277v RealBench Value 1.176 Maximum 1.220v.
> ...


I don't doubt that you are seeing something different than I am.







The massive difference is that I'm running everything with stock intel settings (and even disabling the Asus crap that throws extra voltage at the CPU.) Perhaps if you were to record/save your current BIOS settings, reset them to defaults, turn off anything on your board that auto-OC's or tries to be "helpful" with voltages, and try again you might see results similar to mine with the VID staying the same when the cores are all at max (4400.)

I'm NOT saying that you're wrong and I'm right. However, I'm trying to demonstrate with the least common denominator of stock intel settings, while your contrasting that with overclocked settings. We might as well be speaking different languages..

It'd be considerably easier for you to match my current settings (which are just stock defaults for intel) than for me to try and match your settings (which would likely be impossible as we don't even have the same motherboard.)

Otherwise, you and I comparing things doesn't make much sense.

Remember, please, that my original suggestion was to publish VID's for loaded cores with STOCK INTEL settings.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Not always unless I'm doing a long running test. For the screen shots I provided earlier in the thread, I just eyeballed the "current" column. It doesn't invalidate that the VID is going to 1.17 no matter what load is on the processor iff all 4 cores are running at 4400. Once the cores slow down, the VID drops.
> Are you saying that moving a 'Chrome' browser window around the desktop on an otherwise idle machine uses the same load as running 8 threads of linpack? They both showed the same VID of 1.17...
> 
> Perhaps defining "load" might be a good idea. My definition for the purpose of this discussion is "how hard the processor is having to work at a given frequency." I usually guess the difference of two loads by comparing the "CPU Package Power" parameter in HWInfo (assuming both tests cause all cores to use a 44x multiplier.)
> 
> So, using linpack as an example again, on my processor, when linpack is loading up memory, 4 cores are at 4400, VCore is at 1.12, VID is at 1.17, and CPU power is at only 40 to 42 watts. When linpack is done loading up memory and actually starts chewing data with AVX instructions, the core speeds, vcore, and VID are still the same, but the CPU's package power fluctuates between 91 and 95 watts.
> 
> Obviously, there's a massively different load on the processor between the two.
> 
> (Oh, and when the machine is idle, moving the chrome browser window around causes the power to jump to 21W, with 4x cores at 4400, VID at 1.17, and VCore at...1.12)
> I don't doubt that you are seeing something different than I am.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The massive difference is that I'm running everything with stock intel settings (and even disabling the Asus crap that throws extra voltage at the CPU.) Perhaps if you were to record/save your current BIOS settings, reset them to defaults, turn off anything on your board that auto-OC's or tries to be "helpful" with voltages, and try again you might see results similar to mine with the VID staying the same when the cores are all at max (4400.)
> 
> I'm NOT saying that you're wrong and I'm right. However, I'm trying to demonstrate with the least common denominator of stock intel settings, while your contrasting that with overclocked settings. We might as well be speaking different languages..
> 
> It'd be considerably easier for you to match my current settings (which are just stock defaults for intel) than for me to try and match your settings (which would likely be impossible as we don't even have the same motherboard.)
> 
> Otherwise, you and I comparing things doesn't make much sense.
> 
> Remember, please, that my original suggestion was to publish VID's for loaded cores with STOCK INTEL settings.


Why don't you do a test like I did and show your results using Prime95 and Realbench so you can see like I have done already many times.

If I test like you I have the same results moving windows around causing a full load for the VID,why do you think the multiplier goes up to 4.4GHz doing that. That kind of test is meaningless.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Why don't you do a test like I did and show your results using Prime95 and Realbench so you can see like I have done already many times.
> 
> If I test like you I have the same results moving windows around causing a full load for the VID,why do you think the multiplier goes up to 4.4GHz doing that. That kind of test is meaningless.


And comparing an overclocked processor to a stock processor isn't?

The ROG test had the lower VID for you, correct? Here's ROG "Stress" test set at the default 4GB running for a few minutes. I changed the graphing to show Core0 clock, Core0 VID and the CPU Package power.

The significant point here is that while ROG Stress was running, the package power never went over 61 watts, and.... wait for it... the VID was constant at 1.170 (+/- 0.001) the entire time that the cores were at 4400. (I stopped the test before taking the screen snippet. ROG stress makes user interface interactions jumpy for me.)



Here's a few minutes of linpack. Cores at 4400, VID constant at 1.17 (+/- 0.001), and package power going between around 41W and ~95W depending on what linpack is doing. (This is setting linpack to use 16GB of memory for a problem size of 46290.)



Does that satisfy you that I'm not clueless? Being that I performed the test you asked for (as close as I'm able to with what I have installed), how about you do the same for me? Load up intel stock defaults for your processor, run any stress test (ROG bench, prime95, whatever) and see what happens with VID while the cores are all at 4400. (If they aren't at 4400, you aren't stock.)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> And comparing an overclocked processor to a stock processor isn't?
> 
> The ROG test had the lower VID for you, correct? Here's ROG "Stress" test set at the default 4GB running for a few minutes. I changed the graphing to show Core0 clock, Core0 VID and the CPU Package power.
> 
> The significant point here is that while ROG Stress was running, the package power never went over 61 watts, and.... wait for it... the VID was constant at 1.170 (+/- 0.001) the entire time that the cores were at 4400. (I stopped the test before taking the screen snippet. ROG stress makes user interface interactions jumpy for me.)
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a few minutes of linpack. Cores at 4400, VID constant at 1.17 (+/- 0.001), and package power going between around 41W and ~95W depending on what linpack is doing. (This is setting linpack to use 16GB of memory for a problem size of 46290.)
> 
> 
> 
> Does that satisfy you that I'm not clueless? Being that I performed the test you asked for (as close as I'm able to with what I have installed), how about you do the same for me? Load up intel stock defaults for your processor, run any stress test (ROG bench, prime95, whatever) and see what happens with VID while the cores are all at 4400. (If they aren't at 4400, you aren't stock.)


I don't know how you are doing the voltage capture however you are not doing something correctly.

loaded stock optimized defaults. Prime95 maximum VID 1.193v RealBench maximum VID 1.124v.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't know how you are doing the voltage capture however you are not doing something correctly.


Well, that IS confusing. I'm using HWInfo to capture the VID. Are you using ROG benchmark or ROG stress? I am kind of annoyed that you assume an unexplained difference between your testing and mine must mean that I'm the one doing something wrong. I admit that its possible, but how many ways can a person get HWInfo or HWMonitor to read a VID differently?

I just loaded up HWMonitor (from CPUID.) It's version 1.30.0 and it ALSO reports my VID as 1.170:


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Well, that IS confusing. I'm using HWInfo to capture the VID. Are you using ROG benchmark or ROG stress? I am kind of annoyed that you assume an unexplained difference between your testing and mine must mean that I'm the one doing something wrong. I admit that its possible, but how many ways can a person get HWInfo or HWMonitor to read a VID differently?
> 
> I just loaded up HWMonitor (from CPUID.) It's version 1.30.0 and it ALSO reports my VID as 1.170:


I'm using RealBench stress test. I don't know what is going on with your rig. VID has adjusted for load since 2011 with sandy bridge.

Serial Voltage Identification "SVID": A few generations back, Intel introduced serial voltage identification (SVID) which is a protocol the CPU uses to communicate with the voltage regulator. The power control unit inside the CPU uses SVID to communicate with the PWM controller that controls the voltage regulator. This allows the CPU to pick its optimum voltage depending on current conditions (temperature, frequency, load, etc.). You can actually use a combination of SVID and LLC to get an optimal VCore instead of manually setting it. If you start your system without making any changes, your VID (which some refer to as the stock voltage) might be 1.25v, but if you lower your CPU multiplier and restart, you will find your VID has dropped automatically. The reverse happens if you increase your clock and do not set any VCore. Intel's latest CPUs are able to pick their own voltage, and this comes into play if you want to utilize "offset" / "adaptive" voltage. The good news is that if you come from Haswell, you should look forward to a CPU that has the same or better durability.

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/guides/7481/tweaktowns-ultimate-intel-skylake-overclocking-guide/index5.html


----------



## patman-dk

i made the delid http://imgur.com/a/SXPVE

temps at 4.9 ghz (4.7 avx) has improved by 19!

I put CLU on the die and mx4 between ihs and my cobber waterblock









http://imgur.com/a/K90Cv

More OC inc


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Not always unless I'm doing a long running test. For the screen shots I provided earlier in the thread, I just eyeballed the "current" column. It doesn't invalidate that the VID is going to 1.17 no matter what load is on the processor iff all 4 cores are running at 4400. Once the cores slow down, the VID drops.
> Are you saying that moving a 'Chrome' browser window around the desktop on an otherwise idle machine uses the same load as running 8 threads of linpack? They both showed the same VID of 1.17...
> 
> Perhaps defining "load" might be a good idea. My definition for the purpose of this discussion is "how hard the processor is having to work at a given frequency." I usually guess the difference of two loads by comparing the "CPU Package Power" parameter in HWInfo (assuming both tests cause all cores to use a 44x multiplier.)
> 
> So, using linpack as an example again, on my processor, when linpack is loading up memory, 4 cores are at 4400, VCore is at 1.12, VID is at 1.17, and CPU power is at only 40 to 42 watts. When linpack is done loading up memory and actually starts chewing data with AVX instructions, the core speeds, vcore, and VID are still the same, but the CPU's package power fluctuates between 91 and 95 watts.
> 
> Obviously, there's a massively different load on the processor between the two.
> 
> (Oh, and when the machine is idle, moving the chrome browser window around causes the power to jump to 21W, with 4x cores at 4400, VID at 1.17, and VCore at...1.12)
> I don't doubt that you are seeing something different than I am.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The massive difference is that I'm running everything with stock intel settings (and even disabling the Asus crap that throws extra voltage at the CPU.) Perhaps if you were to record/save your current BIOS settings, reset them to defaults, turn off anything on your board that auto-OC's or tries to be "helpful" with voltages, and try again you might see results similar to mine with the VID staying the same when the cores are all at max (4400.)
> 
> I'm NOT saying that you're wrong and I'm right. However, I'm trying to demonstrate with the least common denominator of stock intel settings, while your contrasting that with overclocked settings. We might as well be speaking different languages..
> 
> It'd be considerably easier for you to match my current settings (which are just stock defaults for intel) than for me to try and match your settings (which would likely be impossible as we don't even have the same motherboard.)
> 
> Otherwise, you and I comparing things doesn't make much sense.
> 
> Remember, please, that my original suggestion was to publish VID's for loaded cores with STOCK INTEL settings.


But what exactly are you trying to achieve or prove, by running at 4400mhz per core and focusing so much on what the VID is at stock level, to the point where it looks like you are obsessing over a VID of 1.12 to 1.17?

At those voltages and frequencies, it is not even worth worrying about anything whatsoever.


----------



## briank

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> But what exactly are you trying to achieve or prove, by running at 4400mhz per core and focusing so much on what the VID is at stock level, to the point where it looks like you are obsessing over a VID of 1.12 to 1.17?
> 
> At those voltages and frequencies, it is not even worth worrying about anything whatsoever.


I think the point is to see if there a correlation between the VID range set at the Intel fab for a Kaby Lake sample versus what the overclock performance is. I think its an interesting question. One might predict that a sample with a lower factory set VID range would be a better overclocker, but we won't know until we see the data.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *briank*
> 
> I think the point is to see if there a correlation between the VID range set at the Intel fab for a Kaby Lake sample versus what the overclock performance is. I think its an interesting question. One might predict that a sample with a lower factory set VID range would be a better overclocker, but we won't know until we see the data.


I don't think VID has any bearing on overclocking whatsoever, because the VID range of my 7700K at stock clocks, with all cores running at 4500mhz and cpu cache at 4200mhz is 1.19-1.23 volts, depending on load.

Yet I run my 7700K at the above stock clocks, with a manual voltage of 1.10 volts for 24/7 use. And when overclocking above 4.5ghz, to 5ghz for example, then it actually runs at a manual voltage of 1.21 volts.

So trying to determine how your cpu will overclock, based on VID is not accurate at all.


----------



## briank

This isn't about what Vcore your part will actually run at, this is about what Intel sets for a VID range vs the final overclocking result (Max stable frequency, Vcore & temps). Also you should never draw a conclusion from one sample.

I don't see why you are so against people suggesting or trying to collect this data. If people want to spend their time to collect data and compare notes to see if there is a correlation, let them. You haven't proven there isn't a correlation so the question still is open. I'd suggest that a separate thread be started called "Stock VID range versus overclock" for those that want to be part of the experiment.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *briank*
> 
> This isn't about what Vcore your part will actually run at, this is about what Intel sets for a VID range vs the final overclocking result (Max stable frequency, Vcore & temps). Also you should never draw a conclusion from one sample.
> 
> I don't see why you are so against people suggesting or trying to collect this data. If people want to spend their time to collect data and compare notes to see if there is a correlation, let them. You haven't proven there isn't a correlation so the question still is open. I'd suggest that a separate thread be started called "Stock VID range versus overclock" for those that want to be part of the experiment.


The fact that my overclocking voltage is below my stock VID volts, at the same or higher frequencies than stock clocks, proves there is no correlation between VID and overclocking.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> But what exactly are you trying to achieve or prove, by running at 4400mhz per core and focusing so much on what the VID is at stock level,...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *briank*
> 
> I think the point is to see if there a correlation between the VID range set at the Intel fab for a Kaby Lake sample versus what the overclock performance is.


Yes. This. It would be reasonable to guess (without seeing any data) that if a chip is able to function with less voltage at Intel's max all core frequency, that it might also be a "better chip." However, without any supporting data, it's only a guess. This could be useful for some, as they'd be able to stick a new processor in a machine and instantly read the VID at stock settings. From there, they MIGHT be able to make reasonable assumptions about the level of overclocking that the particular chip might reach.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> I don't think VID has any bearing on overclocking whatsoever, because the VID range of my 7700K at stock clocks, with all cores running at 4500mhz and cpu cache at 4200mhz is 1.19-1.23 volts, depending on load.


If your running all cores at 4500, you aren't running at stock clocks. Intel i7-7700k turbo maxes at 4400 for 4 cores. What is being brought up in the discussion, however, is the possibility that VID at 4400x4 isn't constant per chip. This is different from what I'm seeing on my own platform, which is.. confusing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> So trying to determine how your cpu will overclock, based on VID is not accurate at all.


Consider that Intel programs a chip specific VID table into each processor based on some internal testing. Assume two processors with identical clock speeds and load; if "Processor A" has a VID of 1.16 and "Processor B" has a VID of 1.25, then Intel determined that Processor A needs less voltage to perform stability for that speed/load. That, in turn, suggests that Processor A _might_ require less voltage at overclocked frequencies as well. (The whole point of charting the data would be to determine if this is actually the case, and then to potential use the data to predict better overclocking processors.)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> The fact that my overclocking voltage is below my stock VID volts, at the same or higher frequencies than stock clocks, proves there is no correlation between VID and overclocking.


No, that proves nothing of the sort. It only reflect that Intel sets the VID conservatively with allowances for vdroop, low performing voltage regulation, etc. Your statement is similar to me saying that if I let my Asus motherboard o/c my chip for me, it sets voltage to 1.4 with a 48 multiplier, and therefore my chip must require 1.4v for 4.8GHz. Asus didn't check MY chip, and their built in profiles assume processors in the lower 25 percentile.

Please pardon me while I delve into a bit of sarcasm...

I'm getting the very strong impression that folks in this thread don't actually want to collect data to determine if VID at stock can have any correlation to overclocking ability. Instead of looking at it and saying "it might or might not, but it doesn't hurt to look to try and determine if it does", most people are rejecting it out of hand and even attacking it. So far, no one has made a reasonable argument as to why there'd be harm in collecting the data.

Hey, that's fine. I was under the (seemingly false) impression that the chart (and therefore this thread) was about trying to collect information about overclocking and not a contest. It seemed to me that the VID at a known state would be a better indicator of overclockability than.. a batch code.

Take care
Gary


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Yes. This. It would be reasonable to guess (without seeing any data) that if a chip is able to function with less voltage at Intel's max all core frequency, that it might also be a "better chip." However, without any supporting data, it's only a guess. This could be useful for some, as they'd be able to stick a new processor in a machine and instantly read the VID at stock settings. From there, they MIGHT be able to make reasonable assumptions about the level of overclocking that the particular chip might reach.
> If your running all cores at 4500, you aren't running at stock clocks. Intel i7-7700k turbo maxes at 4400 for 4 cores. What is being brought up in the discussion, however, is the possibility that VID at 4400x4 isn't constant per chip. This is different from what I'm seeing on my own platform, which is.. confusing.
> Consider that Intel programs a chip specific VID table into each processor based on some internal testing. Assume two processors with identical clock speeds and load; if "Processor A" has a VID of 1.16 and "Processor B" has a VID of 1.25, then Intel determined that Processor A needs less voltage to perform stability for that speed/load. That, in turn, suggests that Processor A _might_ require less voltage at overclocked frequencies as well. (The whole point of charting the data would be to determine if this is actually the case, and then to potential use the data to predict better overclocking processors.)
> No, that proves nothing of the sort. It only reflect that Intel sets the VID conservatively with allowances for vdroop, low performing voltage regulation, etc. Your statement is similar to me saying that if I let my Asus motherboard o/c my chip for me, it sets voltage to 1.4 with a 48 multiplier, and therefore my chip must require 1.4v for 4.8GHz. Asus didn't check MY chip, and their built in profiles assume processors in the lower 25 percentile.
> 
> Please pardon me while I delve into a bit of sarcasm...
> 
> I'm getting the very strong impression that folks in this thread don't actually want to collect data to determine if VID at stock can have any correlation to overclocking ability. Instead of looking at it and saying "it might or might not, but it doesn't hurt to look to try and determine if it does", most people are rejecting it out of hand and even attacking it. So far, no one has made a reasonable argument as to why there'd be harm in collecting the data.
> 
> Hey, that's fine. I was under the (seemingly false) impression that the chart (and therefore this thread) was about trying to collect information about overclocking and not a contest. It seemed to me that the VID at a known state would be a better indicator of overclockability than.. a batch code.
> 
> Take care
> Gary


I'm interested to know this as well.

What I imagine is that a chip with a low stock VID will indeed need less volts going up the multis. There would probably be a point for each chip where they start to hit a voltage wall which would likely be different for each chip. So some chips with a very low VID might get easily to 4.9 and then start to require a lot more voltage for 5.0+ whereas other chips that has a bit higher VID at stock might not hit a wall until a bit later.

Just guessing here, but I'll happily add my data to a list if someone starts one.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Yes. This. It would be reasonable to guess (without seeing any data) that if a chip is able to function with less voltage at Intel's max all core frequency, that it might also be a "better chip." However, without any supporting data, it's only a guess. This could be useful for some, as they'd be able to stick a new processor in a machine and instantly read the VID at stock settings. From there, they MIGHT be able to make reasonable assumptions about the level of overclocking that the particular chip might reach.
> If your running all cores at 4500, you aren't running at stock clocks. Intel i7-7700k turbo maxes at 4400 for 4 cores. What is being brought up in the discussion, however, is the possibility that VID at 4400x4 isn't constant per chip. This is different from what I'm seeing on my own platform, which is.. confusing.
> Consider that Intel programs a chip specific VID table into each processor based on some internal testing. Assume two processors with identical clock speeds and load; if "Processor A" has a VID of 1.16 and "Processor B" has a VID of 1.25, then Intel determined that Processor A needs less voltage to perform stability for that speed/load. That, in turn, suggests that Processor A _might_ require less voltage at overclocked frequencies as well. (The whole point of charting the data would be to determine if this is actually the case, and then to potential use the data to predict better overclocking processors.)
> No, that proves nothing of the sort. It only reflect that Intel sets the VID conservatively with allowances for vdroop, low performing voltage regulation, etc. Your statement is similar to me saying that if I let my Asus motherboard o/c my chip for me, it sets voltage to 1.4 with a 48 multiplier, and therefore my chip must require 1.4v for 4.8GHz. Asus didn't check MY chip, and their built in profiles assume processors in the lower 25 percentile.
> 
> Please pardon me while I delve into a bit of sarcasm...
> 
> I'm getting the very strong impression that folks in this thread don't actually want to collect data to determine if VID at stock can have any correlation to overclocking ability. Instead of looking at it and saying "it might or might not, but it doesn't hurt to look to try and determine if it does", most people are rejecting it out of hand and even attacking it. So far, no one has made a reasonable argument as to why there'd be harm in collecting the data.
> 
> Hey, that's fine. I was under the (seemingly false) impression that the chart (and therefore this thread) was about trying to collect information about overclocking and not a contest. It seemed to me that the VID at a known state would be a better indicator of overclockability than.. a batch code.
> 
> Take care
> Gary


If by 'folks in this thread' you mean 'one guy you quoted' then yeah...

I dunno, if I can grab a sample of 10 Vids and it seems to show something then I can add a column for that.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Yes. This. It would be reasonable to guess (without seeing any data) that if a chip is able to function with less voltage at Intel's max all core frequency, that it might also be a "better chip." However, without any supporting data, it's only a guess. This could be useful for some, as they'd be able to stick a new processor in a machine and instantly read the VID at stock settings. From there, they MIGHT be able to make reasonable assumptions about the level of overclocking that the particular chip might reach.


*Unfortunately that will never be the case, as the VID has been proven to vary from board to board for the same cpu and even be a different figure on the same board, depending on the Voltage method used.*
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> If your running all cores at 4500, you aren't running at stock clocks.


*It is stock clocks with Mutlicore Enhancement enabled.*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Intel i7-7700k turbo maxes at 4400 for 4 cores. What is being brought up in the discussion, however, is the possibility that VID at 4400x4 isn't constant per chip. This is different from what I'm seeing on my own platform, which is.. confusing.
> 
> Consider that Intel programs a chip specific VID table into each processor based on some internal testing. Assume two processors with identical clock speeds and load; if "Processor A" has a VID of 1.16 and "Processor B" has a VID of 1.25, then Intel determined that Processor A needs less voltage to perform stability for that speed/load. That, in turn, suggests that Processor A _might_ require less voltage at overclocked frequencies as well. (The whole point of charting the data would be to determine if this is actually the case, and then to potential use the data to predict better overclocking processors.)


*No it does not suggest that at all. When it comes to overclocking a cpu, every single cpu performs differently and requires different amounts of voltages when being overclocked and it is irrelevant of the VID.*
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> No, that proves nothing of the sort. It only reflect that Intel sets the VID conservatively with allowances for vdroop, low performing voltage regulation, etc. Your statement is similar to me saying that if I let my Asus motherboard o/c my chip for me, it sets voltage to 1.4 with a 48 multiplier, and therefore my chip must require 1.4v for 4.8GHz. Asus didn't check MY chip, and their built in profiles assume processors in the lower 25 percentile.


*Your example of your Asus motherboard overclocking your chip for you, has nothing to do with the VID reading and is not similar to what I said about the fact that since the overclocking voltage is below the VID voltage, that then you cannot ascertain any correlation between VID and actual volts used for overclocking. In your example you are referring to the boards AUTO RULES not the VID, that are setting the voltage based on what Asus has programmed into its boards bios rules, as to what they think is a safe voltage for that overclock. The AUTO RULES do not change the VID.*
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Please pardon me while I delve into a bit of sarcasm...
> 
> I'm getting the very strong impression that folks in this thread don't actually want to collect data to determine if VID at stock can have any correlation to overclocking ability. Instead of looking at it and saying "it might or might not, but it doesn't hurt to look to try and determine if it does", most people are rejecting it out of hand and even attacking it. So far, no one has made a reasonable argument as to why there'd be harm in collecting the data.
> 
> Hey, that's fine. I was under the (seemingly false) impression that the chart (and therefore this thread) was about trying to collect information about overclocking and not a contest. It seemed to me that the VID at a known state would be a better indicator of overclockability than.. a batch code.


*I am not objecting to you performing your tests, you are free to perform whatever tests you like, I was merely asking why you were doing it and that from actual experience of having overclocked many cpus and having found that the VID is not even anywhere near close to the actual voltages used, when overclocking to higher frequencies, that I think what you are doing is a pointless exercise and that it will not show any way to get a true indication or true measure of a cpu's overclocking ability and voltage required, as each cpu is completely different to the next and no two are ever alike.

Take a look at the following thread and you will see how the VID, does not have a bearing on the voltage used when overclocking, for there are examples in that thread of two cpu's with the exact same VID and they require different voltages when being overclocked. There are also examples of one cpu with a lower VID requiring more voltage when being overclocked to a certain frequency, than a cpu with a higher VID

http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=165308
*


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Yes. This. It would be reasonable to guess (without seeing any data) that if a chip is able to function with less voltage at Intel's max all core frequency, that it might also be a "better chip." However, without any supporting data, it's only a guess. This could be useful for some, as they'd be able to stick a new processor in a machine and instantly read the VID at stock settings. From there, they MIGHT be able to make reasonable assumptions about the level of overclocking that the particular chip might reach.
> If your running all cores at 4500, you aren't running at stock clocks. Intel i7-7700k turbo maxes at 4400 for 4 cores. What is being brought up in the discussion, however, is the possibility that VID at 4400x4 isn't constant per chip. This is different from what I'm seeing on my own platform, which is.. confusing.
> Consider that Intel programs a chip specific VID table into each processor based on some internal testing. Assume two processors with identical clock speeds and load; if "Processor A" has a VID of 1.16 and "Processor B" has a VID of 1.25, then Intel determined that Processor A needs less voltage to perform stability for that speed/load. That, in turn, suggests that Processor A _might_ require less voltage at overclocked frequencies as well. (The whole point of charting the data would be to determine if this is actually the case, and then to potential use the data to predict better overclocking processors.)
> No, that proves nothing of the sort. It only reflect that Intel sets the VID conservatively with allowances for vdroop, low performing voltage regulation, etc. Your statement is similar to me saying that if I let my Asus motherboard o/c my chip for me, it sets voltage to 1.4 with a 48 multiplier, and therefore my chip must require 1.4v for 4.8GHz. Asus didn't check MY chip, and their built in profiles assume processors in the lower 25 percentile.
> 
> Please pardon me while I delve into a bit of sarcasm...
> 
> I'm getting the very strong impression that folks in this thread don't actually want to collect data to determine if VID at stock can have any correlation to overclocking ability. Instead of looking at it and saying "it might or might not, but it doesn't hurt to look to try and determine if it does", most people are rejecting it out of hand and even attacking it. So far, no one has made a reasonable argument as to why there'd be harm in collecting the data.
> 
> Hey, that's fine. I was under the (seemingly false) impression that the chart (and therefore this thread) was about trying to collect information about overclocking and not a contest. It seemed to me that the VID at a known state would be a better indicator of overclockability than.. a batch code.
> 
> Take care
> Gary


Im also interested in that. Ill also be happy to apload my data if a colum will be added.
Btw batch nr is kinda also a good indicator , i mean it helps you if the store like Microcenter has about 20 cpus in front of you and lets you pick one you want....


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Yes. This. It would be reasonable to guess (without seeing any data) that if a chip is able to function with less voltage at Intel's max all core frequency, that it might also be a "better chip." However, without any supporting data, it's only a guess. This could be useful for some, as they'd be able to stick a new processor in a machine and instantly read the VID at stock settings. From there, they MIGHT be able to make reasonable assumptions about the level of overclocking that the particular chip might reach.
> If your running all cores at 4500, you aren't running at stock clocks. Intel i7-7700k turbo maxes at 4400 for 4 cores. What is being brought up in the discussion, however, is the possibility that VID at 4400x4 isn't constant per chip. This is different from what I'm seeing on my own platform, which is.. confusing.
> Consider that Intel programs a chip specific VID table into each processor based on some internal testing. Assume two processors with identical clock speeds and load; if "Processor A" has a VID of 1.16 and "Processor B" has a VID of 1.25, then Intel determined that Processor A needs less voltage to perform stability for that speed/load. That, in turn, suggests that Processor A _might_ require less voltage at overclocked frequencies as well. (The whole point of charting the data would be to determine if this is actually the case, and then to potential use the data to predict better overclocking processors.)
> No, that proves nothing of the sort. It only reflect that Intel sets the VID conservatively with allowances for vdroop, low performing voltage regulation, etc. Your statement is similar to me saying that if I let my Asus motherboard o/c my chip for me, it sets voltage to 1.4 with a 48 multiplier, and therefore my chip must require 1.4v for 4.8GHz. Asus didn't check MY chip, and their built in profiles assume processors in the lower 25 percentile.
> 
> Please pardon me while I delve into a bit of sarcasm...
> 
> I'm getting the very strong impression that folks in this thread don't actually want to collect data to determine if VID at stock can have any correlation to overclocking ability. Instead of looking at it and saying "it might or might not, but it doesn't hurt to look to try and determine if it does", most people are rejecting it out of hand and even attacking it. So far, no one has made a reasonable argument as to why there'd be harm in collecting the data.
> 
> Hey, that's fine. I was under the (seemingly false) impression that the chart (and therefore this thread) was about trying to collect information about overclocking and not a contest. It seemed to me that the VID at a known state would be a better indicator of overclockability than.. a batch code.
> 
> Take care
> Gary


If you test with one thread so turbo runs 4.5GHz VID goes up. Run Prime95 v28.10 with one thread.


----------



## EDK-TheONE

I think mine is good cpu
4600 @ 1.125 (bios) 1.128(idle) 1.120 (load cinebench and h264 encoding 10 loops real bench) llc=auto MB=MSI z170a Gaming pro carbon


----------



## garyd9

Trying to understand why my VID is steady at a given frequency, and other's aren't, I've been playing in BIOS. I did the Asus "automagic" 5GHz overclock (which was perfectly stable running linpack), and VID would fluctuate with power (as others have mentioned.) So, I tried to restore my previous BIOS settings and found that my entire system would lock up in BIOS when trying to restore the settings.

One CMOS clear later (thank you for that external button, Asus), I reconfigured my settings and I think I figured it out: Since my z97 board (and continuing with my z170 and z270 boards) the motherboards seem to try to be "helpful" by dumping extra voltage to the processor with completely default settings. The way I normally work around that is to change the processor voltage to "offset" or "adaptive" modes, and leave the offsets as "auto."

An example of the difference is that my current 7700k will run ~1.2volts vcore with completely stock m/b settings. However, when I'm in offset or adaptive mode (with no values specified for the offsets), my vcore reaches 1.136. However, it appears that this offset/adaptive mode is also doing something to cause the VID to lock at a specific voltage for a given frequency. I don't know if it's locking it at a higher number or a lower number.

That leaves me wondering how two people can create identical loads to compare VID's. As others have mentioned, it might not be feasible to compare them if a consistent mechanism isn't available.

Edit/Update: I typed too soon. I just went back to completely "auto" on my core voltage, and VID is still constant for a given frequency regardless of load. The only other thing I've changed IRT to voltage is setting LLC 5. Perhaps something IS wrong with this m/b?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Trying to understand why my VID is steady at a given frequency, and other's aren't, I've been playing in BIOS. I did the Asus "automagic" 5GHz overclock (which was perfectly stable running linpack), and VID would fluctuate with power (as others have mentioned.) So, I tried to restore my previous BIOS settings and found that my entire system would lock up in BIOS when trying to restore the settings.
> 
> One CMOS clear later (thank you for that external button, Asus), I reconfigured my settings and I think I figured it out: Since my z97 board (and continuing with my z170 and z270 boards) the motherboards seem to try to be "helpful" by dumping extra voltage to the processor with completely default settings. The way I normally work around that is to change the processor voltage to "offset" or "adaptive" modes, and leave the offsets as "auto."
> 
> An example of the difference is that my current 7700k will run ~1.2volts vcore with completely stock m/b settings. However, when I'm in offset or adaptive mode (with no values specified for the offsets), my vcore reaches 1.136. However, it appears that this offset/adaptive mode is also doing something to cause the VID to lock at a specific voltage for a given frequency. I don't know if it's locking it at a higher number or a lower number.
> 
> That leaves me wondering how two people can create identical loads to compare VID's. As others have mentioned, it might not be feasible to compare them if a consistent mechanism isn't available.
> 
> Edit/Update: I typed too soon. I just went back to completely "auto" on my core voltage, and VID is still constant for a given frequency regardless of load. The only other thing I've changed IRT to voltage is setting LLC 5. Perhaps something IS wrong with this m/b?


There is something off with your VID reading because with a given load variations your Vcore jumps around from using VID calibration like it is suppose to. When measuring Vcore or VID using Adaptive or stock settings I always record the Maximum readings after a duration when stress testing and there always the same amount.

I can tell you are starting to figure things out however your board sounds like it is having trouble showing the change in VID, however looking at the screenshots you have a Vcore change with load like your supposes to.


----------



## garyd9

I'm starting to think there's something wonky with this m/b... The VID thing seems odd, but it's possible it might be by design. I could probably convince myself of that if I weren't seeing other BIOS related oddities.

For example, the asus bios allows saving your bios settings into "profiles" that you can later restore. If I try to restore anything saved in the #1 slot on my board, however, the board instantly locks up as soon as I confirm I want to load it. The other profile slots are fine.

The board is less than 1 week old, so I'm wondering if I should just exchange it to be safe. Perhaps I'll get a "code" instead of a "hero." I just need to figure out what about the "code" board makes it better than the "hero." Perhaps that extra piece of plastic trapping all the heat against the m/b helps keep GPU temps lower?


----------



## Xperimental

What would be the best best batch named in the OC chart list so far?


----------



## EDK-TheONE

OC PLL Voltage @ 1.120


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If you test with one thread so turbo runs 4.5GHz VID goes up. Run Prime95 v28.10 with one thread.


Can someone explain regarding 7700k turbo speeds? I remember out of the box in full auto on both my Gigabyte and ASUS boards the chip was doing 4.5 GHz on all 4 cores. Meanwhile I read on Intel's own specs the 7700k is only 4.2 GHz for all 4 cores? How does that work?


----------



## EDK-TheONE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Can someone explain regarding 7700k turbo speeds? I remember out of the box in full auto on both my Gigabyte and ASUS boards the chip was doing 4.5 GHz on all 4 cores. Meanwhile I read on Intel's own specs the 7700k is only 4.2 GHz for all 4 cores? How does that work?


as default 4 core @ 4.4
1 core @ 4.5
but some boards are running 4 core @ 4.5


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

My 7700K boots up @ 4.2, boosts to 4.5 on Asus board with bios defaults.


----------



## KyleAPowers

just finished my bios update and with AIsuite 3 im at 5.2GHz with my i7 7700K.

I'll upload charts with benchmarks 
shortly


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KyleAPowers*
> 
> just finished my bios update and with AIsuite 3 im at 5.2GHz with my i7 7700K.
> 
> I'll upload charts with benchmarks
> shortly


Really alsuite 3 made it go to 5.2? Heh nice when i had asus board alsuite 3 would do a bad Oc.

What voltage it managed to put for 5.2?
Now, my Msi auto tuning makes 5.1 at 1.5v







insane


----------



## KyleAPowers

yep AI suite3 has worked great for me, I just needed to run it about 4 times until i found the optimal 1-click overclock, ill have to go into my bios to determine the exact voltage setting.

EDIT: According to AI Suite 3 this is the result from the 5-way optimization report:
Max Watts: 92.7
Max Voltage: 1.263
Max Temp: 74.0 C

Also I'll update my system specs here shortly.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KyleAPowers*
> 
> 
> yep AI suite3 has worked great for me, I just needed to run it about 4 times until i found the optimal 1-click overclock, ill have to go into my bios to determine the exact voltage setting.
> 
> EDIT: According to AI Suite 3 this is the result from the 5-way optimization report:
> Max Watts: 92.7
> Max Voltage: 1.263
> Max Temp: 74.0 C
> 
> Also I'll update my system specs here shortly.


Thats vid voltage right? Kinda seems low if thats a v core. But if it is , well thats a damn good chip
Would it pass cb 15 at that settings?


----------



## KyleAPowers

That's CPU voltage as far as I can tell through the AI Suite 3 Software.









EDIT: can you provide a link for the benchmark that you mentioned?

I'll download it and run it for kicks.

Also how do i make a link to my rig that i created under my account for this forum so that it will show up in my signature like some of the other users above me?
Thanks in advance!


----------



## cxmachi

Hi All,

I have a question that I'm having a very difficult time in finding people online who are having the same issue. I have a 7700K and an Asus Maximus IX Hero and I'm trying to overclock to 4.8 GHz.

I've set the following in the BIOS:
Core Ratio: 48
IA AC/DC Load Line = 0.01
LCC = 5
Adaptive Mode
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Voltage: 1.25V
XMP profiles for my RAM

Through some trial and error, I think I found my stable voltage at 1.25V, but I'll have to test further. My question is this though:

For some reason, whenever I'm running anything that has AVX2 instructions like x264 and RealBench, I am getting a reading of Vcore = 1.28V in HWInfo64. When gaming, I am getting what is expected, which is 1.248V. What is causing this additional 0.03V voltage? I have been Googling all day and it looks like this used to happen in Haswell, but should not happen for Kaby Lake and Skylake anymore.

Am I missing a BIOS setting and is this normal? Any input and ideas would be super helpful.

I also found this in a Haswell guide. Does this still happen for Kaby Lake? (note that my additional voltage is 0.03V and not 0.1V as stated below)

"Adaptive Mode: Adaptive voltage affects voltage for Turbo multiplier ratios only. Unlike Offset, using Adaptive does not affect idle/light load Vcore. Therefore, Adaptive mode is the preferred method for overclocking Haswell processors if one wishes to retain dynamic voltage changes according to processor load without running into issues with idle Vcore becoming too low..
There is one issue with Offset and Adaptive Mode that needs to be taken into account. The processor contains a power control unit which requests voltage based upon software load. When the PCU detects AVX instructions, it will ramp Vcore automatically beyond normal load voltage. There is no way to lock Vcore to prevent this if using Offset or Adapative Mode. This is pre-programmed by Intel into the PCU. As an example, a CPU is perfectly stable at 1.25V using a manual voltage (static), if Adaptive or Offset Mode is used instead, it is impossible to lock the core voltage when running software that contains AVX instruction sets - stress tests such as AIDA and Prime contain AVX instruction sets. When the AVX instructions are detected by the PCU, the core voltage will be ramped an additional ~0.1V over your target voltage - so 1.25V will become ~1.35V under AVX load. If you intend to run heavy load AVX software, we recommend using Manual Vcore, NOT Adaptive or Offset Mode.
Most of us do not run AVX related software, so this is a non-issue. Either way, dialing in an overclock using Manual Vcore to determine how much voltage the processor needs under full load is best - Adaptive or Offset mode can be used to match the stable voltage later on. Simply type the target load voltage into the entry box "Additional Turbo Mode CPU core voltage" to set adaptive voltage"

https://rog.asus.com/articles/maximus-motherboards/maximus-vi-series-uefi-guide-for-overclocking/


----------



## schoolofmonkey

@cxmachi

AVX will draw more power at those clocks.
Best thing to do is set a AVX offset of 2, which gives you the default 4.5Ghz when running AVX loads.

Realistically 4.8Ghz vs 4.5Ghz in real world AVX loads (encoding etc) is not noticeable other than higher temps and voltages.


----------



## cxmachi

Interesting, so it will draw more power and ignore my adaptive voltage settings in the BIOS?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cxmachi*
> 
> Interesting, so it will draw more power and ignore my adaptive voltage settings in the BIOS?


It will go off the cpus VID and draw more power, this only happens with adaptive voltages.
If you set a manual voltage it won't.


----------



## dmo580

Code:

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> It will go off the cpus VID and draw more power, this only happens with adaptive voltages.
> If you set a manual voltage it won't.


I've been troubleshooting with @cxmachi on Reddit and honestly I don't see the same issue he does. I too have a Maximus IX Hero and 7700k. I even took some vcore measurements while playing BF4 (unfortunately I don't have BF1 like him) and comparing against both Prime 95 and Realbench.

FWIW I don't run any AVX offset either so I'm kinda confused.

The screenshot below shows the first 90% with me playing BF4. I then close it and open Prime 95 and start benching (note the gap where my CPU Vcore drops down below the Adaptive 1.35V I've set). Same vcore readout. While I realize these are software measurements he's indicating a bigger difference that should definitely be detectable by software measurements. Could it just be different hardware behaving differently?? VRM differences?



*Edit:* On another note it looks like my max CPU temps bumped up a bit more since my last 8 hour Prime 95 run. I wonder if some of my CLU is pumping out from my delid or somehow flowing weird


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> Code:


I've been troubleshooting with @cxmachi on Reddit and honestly I don't see the same issue he does. I too have a Maximus IX Hero and 7700k. I even took some vcore measurements while playing BF4 (unfortunately I don't have BF1 like him) and comparing against both Prime 95 and Realbench.

FWIW I don't run any AVX offset either so I'm kinda confused.

What can I say, it was the same with my 5820k, 6900k and now the 7700k.
Using adaptive voltage running any heavy AVX load will put the voltages over the set in BIOS unless you us manual.

Adaptive won't go any lower than what is set by the cpu's VID, which can vary from CPU to CPU, don't worry I was confused at first too, the guys explained it to me over on the x99 threads.

Here's my CPU VID, even though I have adaptive set as 1.25v, this was under a realbench load, which does use AVX.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> What can I say, it was the same with my 5820k, 6900k and now the 7700k.
> Using adaptive voltage running any heavy AVX load will put the voltages over the set in BIOS unless you us manual.
> 
> Adaptive won't go any lower than what is set by the cpu's VID, which can vary from CPU to CPU, don't worry I was confused at first too, the guys explained it to me over on the x99 threads.
> 
> Here's my CPU VID, even though I have adaptive set as 1.25v, this was under a realbench load, which does use AVX.


And I'm telling you I'm using Adaptive voltage with my max set at 1.35V. My benchmark was Prime 95 28.10, so definitely there's heavy AVX loads going on.

Here's a screenshot of my Vcore (1.344) versus VID (1.359). I suppose one could argue it's "close enough" within the 0.016 resolution that we have? However if I look in my notes I have recorded load Vcore from 1.312 all the way up to 1.344 as I tried to obtain stability at 4.9 GHz. So the fact that my load Vcore in Prime 95 can go that low suggests my chip was able to go below VID (assuming it's been 1.359 all the time) at turbo.



Perhaps @cxmachi perhaps you can measure your VID and Vcore both under load in BF1 and Realbench.


----------



## dmo580

On another note I got a BSOD today doing nothing. D1 error says Windows Reliability tool. Does that suggest more vcore? I did pass 8 hours of Prime 95 though. Perhaps I should look at RAM? Dunno.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> On another note I got a BSOD today doing nothing. D1 error says Windows Reliability tool. Does that suggest more vcore? I did pass 8 hours of Prime 95 though. Perhaps I should look at RAM? Dunno.


From what I understand if it happens at idle it means the idle voltages are too low.
You idle voltages are much lower than mine from what I see in your screenshots.
Mine - 0.774v vs Yours - 0.675v

What was your LLC setting?

Just updating BF1 so I can measure your VID and Vcore there.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EDK-TheONE*
> 
> I think mine is good cpu
> 4600 @ 1.125 (bios) 1.128(idle) 1.120 (load cinebench and h264 encoding 10 loops real bench) llc=auto MB=MSI z170a Gaming pro carbon
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


if that's the load vcore it's a great chip.








try 50/45 cinebench r15.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> My 7700K boots up @ 4.2, boosts to 4.5 on Asus board with bios defaults.


multicore enhancement... intel MCE unsynch's cores, asus MCE runs all cores at the max multi.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> multicore enhancement... intel MCE unsynch's cores, asus MCE runs all cores at the max multi.


The 4.2/4.5 I mentioned was what the board runs after a clear CMOS state, I don't recall if that sets the Asus or Intel multicore. I really didn't spend much time in the bios, ran thru Raja's guide - I don't think he even touched on multicore enhancement - got it stable at 4.8, didn't touch cache clock, 3200 on the ram and then tore it down to delid.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> What can I say, it was the same with my 5820k, 6900k and now the 7700k.
> Using adaptive voltage running any heavy AVX load will put the voltages over the set in BIOS unless you us manual.
> 
> Adaptive won't go any lower than what is set by the cpu's VID, which can vary from CPU to CPU, don't worry I was confused at first too, the guys explained it to me over on the x99 threads.
> 
> Here's my CPU VID, even though I have adaptive set as 1.25v, this was under a realbench load, which does use AVX.


I'm sure you know this, but if not, you can set a negative offset within your adaptive configuration to drop below VID if your chip is good enough to do it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> What can I say, it was the same with my 5820k, 6900k and now the 7700k.
> Using adaptive voltage running any heavy AVX load will put the voltages over the set in BIOS unless you us manual.
> 
> Adaptive won't go any lower than what is set by the cpu's VID, which can vary from CPU to CPU, don't worry I was confused at first too, the guys explained it to me over on the x99 threads.
> 
> Here's my CPU VID, even though I have adaptive set as 1.25v, this was under a realbench load, which does use AVX.
> [
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> IMG ALT=""]http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3019024/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]


if you want to know the stock VID, clrcmos, enter bios, set voltage control to offset and leave everything on Auto, F10, and re-enter bios - the voltage displayed in bios for vcore is the stock VID.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> The 4.2/4.5 I mentioned was what the board runs after a clear CMOS state, I don't recall if that sets the Asus or Intel multicore. I really didn't spend much time in the bios, ran thru Raja's guide - I don't think he even touched on multicore enhancement - got it stable at 4.8, didn't touch cache clock, 3200 on the ram and then tore it down to delid.


yeah, multicore enhancement is only operational at default settings. Pretty pointless on a "K" or "X" class cpu. That said, at stock ASUS ME on Auto will use the ASUS rules. Disable it to use the Intel rules... and ignore it completely if you OC your K chip as it was meant to be.


----------



## becks

Assuming you are not limited by Voltage or Temp when overclocking the 7700K... what would be the next "culprit" for not being able to go +100 mhz on core...is it the chip itself not being able to provide more ?


----------



## EDK-TheONE

Username: EDK-TheOne
CPU Model: i7-7700K
Base Clock: 100.
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4500
Vcore Mode: Adaptive
Vcore in UEFI: 1.305
Vcore: 1.296-1.305
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: NotDelidded / AIO H100i / Chill Factor 3
Stability Test: One round Cinebench ---> after two or three round BSOD! it seems it occurred because of temperature of core two or one.









Batch Number: Malaysia L639G772
Ram Speed: 2666 (4x4GB) 15-15-15-35 CR2
Ram Voltage: 1.20
VCCIO: 1.150
VCCSA: 1.150
Motherboard: MSI Z170A Gaming Pro Carbon (Bios ver: 1.7)
LLC Setting: Auto
Misc Comments: Auto


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> From what I understand if it happens at idle it means the idle voltages are too low.
> You idle voltages are much lower than mine from what I see in your screenshots.
> Mine - 0.774v vs Yours - 0.675v
> 
> What was your LLC setting?
> 
> Just updating BF1 so I can measure your VID and Vcore there.


I'm not running any negative offsets, so I'm surprised it's doing it happened at idle. In fact it wasn't even deep idle where my system was doing nothing. I was doing a copy of files from one HDD to another as I wanted to wipe an old drive and convert it to GPT and enable Bitlocker. Either way I didn't see the CPU pushing turbo speeds for that. IIRC 0.67v or so was what my system was doing previously. in full auto mode.

Running LLC5.

I'm not pushing my system to crazy limits too (I bench tested 4.9GHz @ 1.34V so I gave it an extra 0.01 cushion for regular use), and set XMP. VCCIO and VCCSA at 1.2 should be enough for 3200 RAM...


----------



## EDK-TheONE

Another nice result:

Username: EDK-TheOne
CPU Model: i7-7700K
Batch Number: Malaysia L639G772
Base Clock: 100.
Core Multiplier: 46
Core Frequency: 4600
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore Mode: Auto
Vcore in UEFI: 1.120
Vcore: Load=1.112 Idle=1.120








FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: NotDelidded / AIO H100i / Chill Factor 3
PSU: Green 700HP
Stability Test: Real Bench H264 Encode 10 loops







Max CPU Package Power=73 Watts /// Playing One hour BF1 Rock Solid Stable!

Ram Speed: 2666 (4x4GB) 15-15-15-35 CR2
Ram Voltage: 1.20
VCCIO: 1.100
VCCSA: 1.050
Motherboard: MSI Z170A Gaming Pro Carbon (Bios ver: 1.7)
LLC Setting: Auto
Misc Comments:


----------



## cxmachi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> What can I say, it was the same with my 5820k, 6900k and now the 7700k.
> Using adaptive voltage running any heavy AVX load will put the voltages over the set in BIOS unless you us manual.
> 
> Adaptive won't go any lower than what is set by the cpu's VID, which can vary from CPU to CPU, don't worry I was confused at first too, the guys explained it to me over on the x99 threads.
> 
> Here's my CPU VID, even though I have adaptive set as 1.25v, this was under a realbench load, which does use AVX.


Interesting, so what was your average Vcore during RealBench, was it 1.28V? If so, that matches the behaviour I'm getting at 4.8GHz using AVX loads. Bios is set to 1.25V adaptive and LLC5 as mentioned. Gaming stays at 1.25V which is what I want. This is so strange, since other users are not getting the same behaviour. I'll chart my Vcore and VID in BF1 and RealBench when I get home tonight and see if there's a correlation.

I'm just super super confused because there are posts from this very thread, indicating that what you said isn't true. Like this one:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/300#post_25824364


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> It will go off the cpus VID and draw more power, this only happens with adaptive voltages.
> If you set a manual voltage it won't.


I did a test running DVID and web browsing VID request just as much as AVX.

DVID, Auto LLC, Prime95 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.284v, Web browsing Max 1.320v idle ~ 0.200v-0.800v,


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cxmachi*
> 
> Interesting, so what was your average Vcore during RealBench, was it 1.28V? If so, that matches the behaviour I'm getting at 4.8GHz using AVX loads. Bios is set to 1.25V adaptive and LLC5 as mentioned. Gaming stays at 1.25V which is what I want. This is so strange, since other users are not getting the same behaviour. I'll chart my Vcore and VID in BF1 and RealBench when I get home tonight and see if there's a correlation.
> 
> I'm just super super confused because there are posts from this very thread, indicating that what you said isn't true. Like this one:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/300#post_25824364


VID in the CPU works according to CPU load, multiplier, temperature.









Serial Voltage Identification "SVID": A few generations back, Intel introduced serial voltage identification (SVID) which is a protocol the CPU uses to communicate with the voltage regulator. The power control unit inside the CPU uses SVID to communicate with the PWM controller that controls the voltage regulator. This allows the CPU to pick its optimum voltage depending on current conditions (temperature, frequency, load, etc.). You can actually use a combination of SVID and LLC to get an optimal VCore instead of manually setting it. If you start your system without making any changes, your VID (which some refer to as the stock voltage) might be 1.25v, but if you lower your CPU multiplier and restart, you will find your VID has dropped automatically. The reverse happens if you increase your clock and do not set any VCore. Intel's latest CPUs are able to pick their own voltage, and this comes into play if you want to utilize "offset" / "adaptive" voltage. The good news is that if you come from Haswell, you should look forward to a CPU that has the same or better durability.

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/guides/7481/tweaktowns-ultimate-intel-skylake-overclocking-guide/index5.html


----------



## cxmachi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> VID in the CPU works according to CPU load, multiplier, temperature.


Yes, but I'm still stuck wondering what exactly is going on with my voltages? Isn't setting a voltage for adaptive voltage supposed to ignore the VID and set your stated voltage in the UEFI?

Again, my end goal here is to have 1.25V Vcore when I'm at full load, regardless if it's AVX or non-AVX. Currently, with my UEFI settings, I'm getting 1.28V during AVX loads and 1.25V during non-AVX loads like gaming. Bumping down LLC from 5 to 4, I can get 1.264V on full load on AVX, and 1.232V on non-AVX/gaming (which I'm not confident will be stable since 1.25V is what I tested stability on)

Is there no way to do this when using adaptive voltage? Is this a common issue/normal?


----------



## dirtyred

@Darkwizzie A few days ago we were arguing that not only high overclocks should be submitted and included in the chart. So here's mine before my Phanteks PH-TC14PE cooler arrives in the next days.

It's not a high overclock, it's more to show the limits of the Arctic Freezer i32 cooler (and similar) when overclocking. It's a decent cooler, similar to Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo in both price and performance. Silent and would be perfect match for an i3, i5 or slightly overclocked i7.

Did only a 2 hours test because I did not have more time and it's just to show what to expect with a cheaper cooler while staying below 80 °C. Temperatures averaged 76 °C with only a couple spikes to 85 °C, nothing to worry about.

So here's my submission, purely for statistics.

Username: dirtyred
CPU Model: i7-7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 47
Core Frequency: 4700
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore in UEFI: 1.24 (Adaptive: Turbo 1.22 V, Offset 0.02 V)
Vcore: 1.216 V (mostly stable, occasional spikes to 1.232 V, never below)
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Arctic Freezer i32, not delidded
Stability Test: RealBench 2 hours (I know it's on the edge of stability, crashes if Vcore is set 0.02 - 0.03 V lower)

Batch Number: L640G413 Malaysia
Ram Speed: 3000 16-16-16-28-2T (tightest while stable on 1.2 V)
Ram Voltage: 1.2 V (to keep CPU temps as low as possible)
VCCIO: 1 V
VCCSA: 1.05 V
Motherboard: Z270 Asus Prime Z270-K (BIOS 0610)
LLC Setting: LLC Level 5
Misc Comments: Just a quick benchmark to test how far can you overclock with this cooler while staying below 80 °C. AVX offset 2 (45, could force 46 but temps are a bit too high for my taste).


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cxmachi*
> 
> Yes, but I'm still stuck wondering what exactly is going on with my voltages? Isn't setting a voltage for adaptive voltage supposed to ignore the VID and set your stated voltage in the UEFI?
> 
> Again, my end goal here is to have 1.25V Vcore when I'm at full load, regardless if it's AVX or non-AVX. Currently, with my UEFI settings, I'm getting 1.28V during AVX loads and 1.25V during non-AVX loads like gaming. Bumping down LLC from 5 to 4, I can get 1.264V on full load on AVX, and 1.232V on non-AVX/gaming (which I'm not confident will be stable since 1.25V is what I tested stability on)
> 
> Is there no way to do this when using adaptive voltage? Is this a common issue/normal?


Adaptive works off VID with a scaling that you set with maximum Vcore.

Example DVID, Auto LLC, Prime95 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.284v, Web browsing Max 1.320v idle ~ 0.200v-0.800v, idle power saving fetures off 1.296v


----------



## cxmachi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Adaptive works off VID with a scaling that you set with maximum Vcore.
> 
> Example DVID, Auto LLC, Prime95 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.284v, Web browsing Max 1.320v idle ~ 0.200v-0.800v, idle power saving fetures off 1.296v


So maximum Vcore in UEFi isn't really maximum then? It just scales off of that value? Since I'm clearly going over that value in AVX loads.


----------



## cxmachi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> And I'm telling you I'm using Adaptive voltage with my max set at 1.35V. My benchmark was Prime 95 28.10, so definitely there's heavy AVX loads going on.
> 
> Here's a screenshot of my Vcore (1.344) versus VID (1.359). I suppose one could argue it's "close enough" within the 0.016 resolution that we have? However if I look in my notes I have recorded load Vcore from 1.312 all the way up to 1.344 as I tried to obtain stability at 4.9 GHz. So the fact that my load Vcore in Prime 95 can go that low suggests my chip was able to go below VID (assuming it's been 1.359 all the time) at turbo.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps @cxmachi perhaps you can measure your VID and Vcore both under load in BF1 and Realbench.


I just did this but I forgot to do graphs. I also used BF4 in this case so as to match yours.

Basically, the results are as follows:

30 minutes of BF4: 1.248V Vcore, 1.255V VID. Both averages.
1 run of x264: 1.28V Vcore, 1.299V VID. Both averages also.

It's close like yours but my Vcore is able to go below VID here. I don't really know what to make of this. Like I said, I'm getting conflicting answers from all of my questions on here.


----------



## dmo580

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cxmachi*
> 
> I just did this but I forgot to do graphs. I also used BF4 in this case so as to match yours.
> 
> Basically, the results are as follows:
> 
> 30 minutes of BF4: 1.248V Vcore, 1.255V VID. Both averages.
> 1 run of x264: 1.28V Vcore, 1.299V VID. Both averages also.
> 
> It's close like yours but my Vcore is able to go below VID here. I don't really know what to make of this. Like I said, I'm getting conflicting answers from all of my questions on here.


True but I wouldn't make too much of Vcore going under VID given that we only have 0.016V resolution on our boards. Not to mention the measured Vcore isn't always correct. But it's interesting to note taht you basically are seeing the VID dictate your voltage, which is why X264 is forcing a higher VID and therefore your VCore is higher.

I'm going to try some more testing but I remember intially trying like 1.32vcore. It's not stable enough for Prime 95 but I think I can get a few minutes out of it. I'll record the Vcore and VID again to see if there's a difference.


----------



## cxmachi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmo580*
> 
> True but I wouldn't make too much of Vcore going under VID given that we only have 0.016V resolution on our boards. Not to mention the measured Vcore isn't always correct. But it's interesting to note taht you basically are seeing the VID dictate your voltage, which is why X264 is forcing a higher VID and therefore your VCore is higher.
> 
> I'm going to try some more testing but I remember intially trying like 1.32vcore. It's not stable enough for Prime 95 but I think I can get a few minutes out of it. I'll record the Vcore and VID again to see if there's a difference.


Yeah, that is the weird part since almost everything I see online basically says that at adaptive voltage mode, and at the turbo ratio, it's supposed to ignore VID and looks at the voltage you set in the UEFI. Which isn't what I'm seeing here. Thanks btw, you can also try the x264 stress test linked in the OP, I think you should be able to run 1 loop of that atleast.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cxmachi*
> 
> So maximum Vcore in UEFi isn't really maximum then? It just scales off of that value? Since I'm clearly going over that value in AVX loads.


Depends how the motherboard manufacture sets up the Adaptive VID voltage ramping calibration to the actual Vcore. All you need to know is VID scales with Vcore when using Adaptive.

My Gigabyte maximum DVID/Adaptive Vcore is what I set exactly in Bios. My rig CPU Vcore 1.260 + Dynamic DVID +0.075 = 1.335v

Gigabyte DVID, Auto LLC, Prime95 v28.10 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.284v, Web browsing Max 1.320v idle ~ 0.200v-0.800v, idle power saving features off 1.296v

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cxmachi*
> 
> Yeah, that is the weird part since almost everything I see online basically says that at adaptive voltage mode, and at the turbo ratio, it's supposed to ignore VID and looks at the voltage you set in the UEFI. Which isn't what I'm seeing here. Thanks btw, you can also try the x264 stress test linked in the OP, I think you should be able to run 1 loop of that atleast.


With ASUS they have 3 options to use 1# fixed Vcore, 2# Adaptive uses VID and your voltage setting or AUTO stock, 3# then there is offset no VID use, it ramps off of the CPU frequency.

Serial Voltage Identification "SVID": A few generations back, Intel introduced serial voltage identification (SVID) which is a protocol the CPU uses to communicate with the voltage regulator. The power control unit inside the CPU uses SVID to communicate with the PWM controller that controls the voltage regulator. This allows the CPU to pick its optimum voltage depending on current conditions (temperature, frequency, load, etc.). You can actually use a combination of SVID and LLC to get an optimal VCore instead of manually setting it. If you start your system without making any changes, your VID (which some refer to as the stock voltage) might be 1.25v, but if you lower your CPU multiplier and restart, you will find your VID has dropped automatically. The reverse happens if you increase your clock and do not set any VCore. Intel's latest CPUs are able to pick their own voltage, and this comes into play if you want to utilize "offset" / "adaptive" voltage. The good news is that if you come from Haswell, you should look forward to a CPU that has the same or better durability.

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/guides/7481/tweaktowns-ultimate-intel-skylake-overclocking-guide/index5.html


----------



## zornyan

hey guys, new around here, just wanted to see if theres anything I can do to improve my OC

Username: Zornyan
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: Bclk.100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency:5ghz
Cache Frequency: stock
Vcore in UEFI: 1.375v .
Vcore: 1.360.
FCLK: (cant see this on hwmonitor?_
Cooling Solution: not delidded, kraken x62 with two corsair ml140 fans
Stability Test: realbench 1 hour

Ram speed: 3200mhz (need to check timings)
Motherboard: asus maximus z270 code
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: AVX offset -2



this is what my system is reporting running realbench, voltage at 1.375 in bios but seems to sit a 1.36 whilst stress testing, LLC is already at level 5 so no idea whats causing this? anything under 1.375 in bios seems to be unstable, crashing after approx. 30-45 mins realbench.

I have had one crash at the end of a 1hour realbench, but I'm sure this is to do with my voltage not sitting at the correct level? temps hover in the mid 70s most of the time so I don't think its that.

also, can anyone explain what the LLC/RING voltage that hwmonitor is reporting at 1.4v is? and why my VID is reporting lower than my vcore?

think with a few tweaks I should be able to get it more stable, anything like XTU it passes fine for hours, so If I can figure out why the voltage is dropping already in realbench that should keep me stable.


----------



## Xperimental

What's the most effective way to determine the chips overclock potential?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> What's the most effective way to determine the chips overclock potential?


Try running cinebench r15 to get an idea of how good a chip is.


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Try running cinebench r15 to get an idea of how good a chip is.


With default settings?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> With default settings?


Cpu test not open gl


----------



## liweichen6

My 7700K can't even stable at 4.9 (BIOS 1.37v, LLC2, around 1.38v on load), pretty sad.
Temp went straight to 97 before delidding, now stays around 82 so it's much better.
Gonna take a rest with 4.8.


----------



## patman-dk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *liweichen6*
> 
> My 7700K can't even stable at 4.9 (BIOS 1.37v, LLC2, around 1.38v on load), pretty sad.
> Temp went straight to 97 before delidding, now stays around 82 so it's much better.
> Gonna take a rest with 4.8.


Are u with avx offset?


----------



## KyleAPowers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Cpu test not open gl


ill try this when i get home, i think i got a very decent chip!


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KyleAPowers*
> 
> ill try this when i get home, i think i got a very decent chip!


Good luck may the silicon gods smile upon you.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *liweichen6*
> 
> My 7700K can't even stable at 4.9 (BIOS 1.37v, LLC2, around 1.38v on load), pretty sad.
> Temp went straight to 97 before delidding, now stays around 82 so it's much better.
> Gonna take a rest with 4.8.


What batch number do you have?


----------



## liweichen6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *patman-dk*
> 
> Are u with avx offset?


Was testing without avx last night. With -1 I could lower the voltage to 1.355v.
5GHz with avx -2 and 1.4v gives BSOD.


----------



## patman-dk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *liweichen6*
> 
> Was testing without avx last night. With -1 I could lower the voltage to 1.355v.
> 5GHz with avx -2 and 1.4v gives BSOD.


What about 4.9 and -1 avx


----------



## liweichen6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *patman-dk*
> 
> What about 4.9 and -1 avx


4.9, -1, 1.355v seems fine.
Leave the LLC auto and it stays around 1.363v.


----------



## liweichen6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What batch number do you have?


L704B772


----------



## patman-dk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *liweichen6*
> 
> 4.9, -1, 1.355v seems fine.
> Leave the LLC auto and it stays around 1.363v.


I only need 1.22 for 4.9 -2avx. I use LLC level 4 and level 5 for 5ghz at 1.3 vcore


----------



## MaKeN

Cache at 45? I found out that my cpu is really sensitive to cache oc ... really would require more voltage ... mb your is same ? Try to play arround with it. Mb even downgrade a bit? Just my 2 cents


----------



## DimmyK

I have weird problem trying to overclock 7700K on Asus Prime Z-270 A motherboard: I'm using adaptive mode for core/cache voltage, but no matter what I put in "Additional turbo mode CPU core voltage", e.g. 1.27, 1.25, 1.22, in HWInfo VCore is always 1.232 under prime95 load. OC tuner set to Manual, BCLK is 100, multiplier is 45 for all cores, everything else is on auto.

It's like VCore settings in BIOS aren't respected at all and mobo always defaults to same VCore, no matter what I enter. Could it be HWINfo readings? But I checked in CPUZ and it's the same.

Please help.


----------



## liweichen6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Cache at 45? I found out that my cpu is really sensitive to cache oc ... really would require more voltage ... mb your is same ? Try to play arround with it. Mb even downgrade a bit? Just my 2 cents


Hmm interesting, didn't think about that.
Will try, thx.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DimmyK*
> 
> I have weird problem trying to overclock 7700K on Asus Prime Z-270 A motherboard: I'm using adaptive mode for core/cache voltage, but no matter what I put in "Additional turbo mode CPU core voltage", e.g. 1.27, 1.25, 1.22, in HWInfo VCore is always 1.232 under prime95 load. OC tuner set to Manual, BCLK is 100, multiplier is 45 for all cores, everything else is on auto.
> 
> It's like VCore settings in BIOS aren't respected at all and mobo always defaults to same VCore, no matter what I enter. Could it be HWINfo readings? But I checked in CPUZ and it's the same.
> 
> Please help.


If you leave LLC on auto that could explain it. Set it to level 4-5, that should give the closest set voltage. On my Prime Z270-K I use level 5 for most voltages between 1.24-1.3 and it's pretty stable, only occasional Vdroop or Vboost of 0.016 V depending on load but that's acceptable.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DimmyK*
> 
> I have weird problem trying to overclock 7700K on Asus Prime Z-270 A motherboard: I'm using adaptive mode for core/cache voltage, but no matter what I put in "Additional turbo mode CPU core voltage", e.g. 1.27, 1.25, 1.22, in HWInfo VCore is always 1.232 under prime95 load. OC tuner set to Manual, BCLK is 100, multiplier is 45 for all cores, everything else is on auto.
> 
> It's like VCore settings in BIOS aren't respected at all and mobo always defaults to same VCore, no matter what I enter. Could it be HWINfo readings? But I checked in CPUZ and it's the same.
> 
> Please help.


Sometimes Vcore can get stuck when youre overclocking, a BIOS reflash might help you.

Ive also been reading of people having issues with the 0906 BIOS. If thats the one youre on you could try the previous release 0801.


----------



## Forecast

Been out of the CPU overclocking world for awhile. In fact, the last overclocking I did was an AMD K6. So, yeah, it has been about 20 years! I bought a Powerspec G419 ( from Microcenter.... I know I know) because it had the Asrock Fata1ity Z270 mobo, and that seemed to be a step above what most pre-built PCs came with. it also came with a set of 3200MHZ Ripjaws -- although they are the 16-18-18-38 variety. Amazingly enough, the stock build came with a Hyper EVO 212. Knowing next to nothing about modern OCing, I set the machine to 4.7GHZ the first day I had it using the UEFI automatic OC pre-sets.

Why am I posting here? From what I can tell from the statistics posted in this thread, I may have blindly stumbled across a fairly good 7700k. I don't yet have the batch number (anyway to find it short of removing the CPU cooler and looking at the die?), but I'm at 4.9Ghz with no AVX offset VCORE was set to 1.28 with an LLC setting of 2. I ran about 2 hours of Realbench and HWMonitor actually shows my VCORE was at 1.26. Highest temp was 81c on Core 1 whereas Core 2 never went above 70c. The other two cores were at 77c & 78c respectively. I did remove the Hyper EVO and replace the stock thermal paste with Arctic Silver 5 (which doesn't seem very loved around here) as I used the original Arctic Silver on my AMD K6. Like I said, it has been 20 years -- even though I'm in my early 30s (I started young!!!).

I know up to 10c variation is fairly normal, but I bet I could do a better job of applying the thermal paste. I did use the thermal paste remover and purifier from Arctic Silver before applying the thermal paste. I followed the thin line over the cores instructions. My idle temps are around 25c-28c with an ambient temp of 25c.

I just purchased a H100i v2 and a Fractal Design R5 case. I chose the R5 over the Corsair Obsidian 750D high-airflow version. I stupidly didn't realize that mis-matched RAM could be a problem so when I bought a set of Geil Evo Forza 3200MHZ it doesn't play nicely with the Ripjaws. Best I can do is 2900MHZ, but I managed to lower the timing down to CAS 15. Although the Z270 Fata1ity is a great board, I recently purchased an Asrock Taichi Z270. I was torn between it, the Asrock Fata1ty I7 Professional Gaming, and the MSI X Power Gaming Titanium. I need at least 8 SATA ports (with 10 being even better), but my options were quite limited. I considered getting an ASUS Maximus Formula or Gigabyte Aorus and adding a SATA RAID card, but I thought better of it.

So, here's the point of my thread pollution: I have a couple of questions before I complete the "move" to the R5 case.

1. *Should I stick with the Fata!ty K6, or roll with the new Taich? Other option would be to return the Taichi for the I7 Professional Gaming or consider something like the MSI Gaming Titanium, an ASUS board, or something altogether different?* Before I went with the Microcenter pre-build, I strongly considered an X99 build with a 6850K. But, I was worried as I had not built a computer since I was 13, so I wanted to see what the learning curve was like, and the Powerspec was a great deal for an I7-7700K, GTX 1070, Asrock Fata1ity, etc. And, I wanted dual M.2 slots as I'm planning to run two Samsung NVME drives in RAID 0. Currently have a 500GB 960 EVO along with 4 SATA SSDs in RAID 10.

2. *Considering the 4.9GHZ OC at 1.26/1.28 VCORE with temps 80c or below while looping RealBench, what are some opinions on whether or not the H100i v2 is a good choice for liquid cooling?* My goal is a stable 5.0 or 5.1GHZ OC. I have also considered purchasing a delidding tool and delidding, but I don't want to get too far ahead of myself just yet. But it seems quite simple.

3. *Should I purchase a new matched set of RAM, keep what I have at 2900MHZ with CAS 15, or get another set of the Geil Evo Forza?* The Geil's by themseilves in dual channel mode do 3200MHZ with 15-16-16-36-1T, so a can buy another set (Newegg was OOS for about 7 days), and see if they work at 3200MHZ with all 4 sticks or RMA the new ones and go in a different direction. I absolutely massacred the heatsink on one of the Geils. I literally ended up having to break it off at the top it was so mangled. I am going to replace the heatsink and I'm also adding a Corsair RAM cooler although I realize it isn't likely to do much. The RAM is passing Memtest86 just fine how I have it. If you do buy a set of Geil Evo Forzas you have to be as gentle as you would be with a newborn infant. My 4 year old could have bent the heatsink in half with one finger. They are that fragile. From research, I've determined they are Hynix sticks, so I'm not planning to try an OC much above the 3200MHZ. At CAS15 they are OK for me. If I could do it all over again I'd have just gotten a set of 3200MHZ Trident Zs @ CAS 14, but with current DDR prices I really don't want to drop $320 on them.

4. *Final question to wrap up this e-novel that I've poured my heart and soul into: the pre-built came with a EVGA 750 BQ bronze power supply. It is semi-modular. I just pulled the trigger on an EVGA 850 G3 Gold power supply.* I am running the 7700K, a GTX 1070, a Blu-Ray drive, 4 SATA SSDs, soon to be 2 Samsung NVME drives, Corsair H100i v2, 4 sticks of RAM and about 4-5 120-140mm case fans along with the two fans on the Corsair cooler. *Should I just stick with the 750, or with my OC, full memory banks, and all those drives is the 850 the correct choice? Zero plans for SLI unless a GTX 1070 was suddenly 125 dollars.
*
Any thoughts on the questions I have? I realize there is a broader forum here, but I've been reading this thread for about two weeks, so I know you all know your stuff. I wanted to avoid the: "gee durrrr get a Ryzen" crowd and ask people with experience on this platform even though it is so very new I'm sure a lot of you came over from the Z170 or X99 side and some of you have probably had more than 1 Z270 board already!

Thanks,
Forecast


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Been out of the CPU overclocking world for awhile. In fact, the last overclocking I did was an AMD K6. So, yeah, it has been about 20 years! I bought a Powerspec G419 ( from Microcenter.... I know I know) because it had the Asrock Fata1ity Z270 mobo, and that seemed to be a step above what most pre-built PCs came with. it also came with a set of 3200MHZ Ripjaws -- although they are the 16-18-18-38 variety. Amazingly enough, the stock build came with a Hyper EVO 212. Knowing next to nothing about modern OCing, I set the machine to 4.7GHZ the first day I had it using the UEFI automatic OC pre-sets.
> 
> Why am I posting here? From what I can tell from the statistics posted in this thread, I may have blindly stumbled across a fairly good 7700k. I don't yet have the batch number (anyway to find it short of removing the CPU cooler and looking at the die?), but I'm at 4.9Ghz with no AVX offset VCORE was set to 1.28 with an LLC setting of 2. I ran about 2 hours of Realbench and HWMonitor actually shows my VCORE was at 1.26. Highest temp was 81c on Core 1 whereas Core 2 never went above 70c. The other two cores were at 77c & 78c respectively. I did remove the Hyper EVO and replace the stock thermal paste with Arctic Silver 5 (which doesn't seem very loved around here) as I used the original Arctic Silver on my AMD K6. Like I said, it has been 20 years -- even though I'm in my early 30s (I started young!!!).
> 
> I know up to 10c variation is fairly normal, but I bet I could do a better job of applying the thermal paste. I did use the thermal paste remover and purifier from Arctic Silver before applying the thermal paste. I followed the thin line over the cores instructions. My idle temps are around 25c-28c with an ambient temp of 25c.
> 
> I just purchased a H100i v2 and a Fractal Design R5 case. I chose the R5 over the Corsair Obsidian 750D high-airflow version. I stupidly didn't realize that mis-matched RAM could be a problem so when I bought a set of Geil Evo Forza 3200MHZ it doesn't play nicely with the Ripjaws. Best I can do is 2900MHZ, but I managed to lower the timing down to CAS 15. Although the Z270 Fata1ity is a great board, I recently purchased an Asrock Taichi Z270. I was torn between it, the Asrock Fata1ty I7 Professional Gaming, and the MSI X Power Gaming Titanium. I need at least 8 SATA ports (with 10 being even better), but my options were quite limited. I considered getting an ASUS Maximus Formula or Gigabyte Aorus and adding a SATA RAID card, but I thought better of it.
> 
> So, here's the point of my thread pollution: I have a couple of questions before I complete the "move" to the R5 case.
> 
> 1. *Should I stick with the Fata!ty K6, or roll with the new Taich? Other option would be to return the Taichi for the I7 Professional Gaming or consider something like the MSI Gaming Titanium, an ASUS board, or something altogether different?* Before I went with the Microcenter pre-build, I strongly considered an X99 build with a 6850K. But, I was worried as I had not built a computer since I was 13, so I wanted to see what the learning curve was like, and the Powerspec was a great deal for an I7-7700K, GTX 1070, Asrock Fata1ity, etc. And, I wanted dual M.2 slots as I'm planning to run two Samsung NVME drives in RAID 0. Currently have a 500GB 960 EVO along with 4 SATA SSDs in RAID 10.
> 
> 2. *Considering the 4.9GHZ OC at 1.26/1.28 VCORE with temps 80c or below while looping RealBench, what are some opinions on whether or not the H100i v2 is a good choice for liquid cooling?* My goal is a stable 5.0 or 5.1GHZ OC. I have also considered purchasing a delidding tool and delidding, but I don't want to get too far ahead of myself just yet. But it seems quite simple.
> 
> 3. *Should I purchase a new matched set of RAM, keep what I have at 2900MHZ with CAS 15, or get another set of the Geil Evo Forza?* The Geil's by themseilves in dual channel mode do 3200MHZ with 15-16-16-36-1T, so a can buy another set (Newegg was OOS for about 7 days), and see if they work at 3200MHZ with all 4 sticks or RMA the new ones and go in a different direction. I absolutely massacred the heatsink on one of the Geils. I literally ended up having to break it off at the top it was so mangled. I am going to replace the heatsink and I'm also adding a Corsair RAM cooler although I realize it isn't likely to do much. The RAM is passing Memtest86 just fine how I have it. If you do buy a set of Geil Evo Forzas you have to be as gentle as you would be with a newborn infant. My 4 year old could have bent the heatsink in half with one finger. They are that fragile. From research, I've determined they are Hynix sticks, so I'm not planning to try an OC much above the 3200MHZ. At CAS15 they are OK for me. If I could do it all over again I'd have just gotten a set of 3200MHZ Trident Zs @ CAS 14, but with current DDR prices I really don't want to drop $320 on them.
> 
> 4. *Final question to wrap up this e-novel that I've poured my heart and soul into: the pre-built came with a EVGA 750 BQ bronze power supply. It is semi-modular. I just pulled the trigger on an EVGA 850 G3 Gold power supply.* I am running the 7700K, a GTX 1070, a Blu-Ray drive, 4 SATA SSDs, soon to be 2 Samsung NVME drives, Corsair H100i v2, 4 sticks of RAM and about 4-5 120-140mm case fans along with the two fans on the Corsair cooler. *Should I just stick with the 750, or with my OC, full memory banks, and all those drives is the 850 the correct choice? Zero plans for SLI unless a GTX 1070 was suddenly 125 dollars.
> *
> Any thoughts on the questions I have? I realize there is a broader forum here, but I've been reading this thread for about two weeks, so I know you all know your stuff. I wanted to avoid the: "gee durrrr get a Ryzen" crowd and ask people with experience on this platform even though it is so very new I'm sure a lot of you came over from the Z170 or X99 side and some of you have probably had more than 1 Z270 board already!
> 
> Thanks,
> Forecast


Before answering your questions, what are you intending to use your system for, will it be for gaming, or productivity software, or for overclocking/benching?

Knowing this, will help in assisting you as to what is the best/ recommended memory, cooling, etc that will be required for your needs.


----------



## Xperimental

My system was stable in RealBench for 8hours at 5Ghz, but my memory was set to 2133 MHz.
When I turned XMP on, it crashed after 4 hours.

What's the best approach to tune the System Agent and CPU VCCIO voltages?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> My system was stable in RealBench for 8hours at 5Ghz, but my memory was set to 2133 MHz.
> When I turned XMP on, it crashed after 4 hours.
> 
> What's the best approach to tune the System Agent and CPU VCCIO voltages?


If it is just XMP and not overclocking over the DRAM rated speeds, leave VCCIO / SA on auto...just raise DIM V a notch or 2...


----------



## Xperimental

Username: Xperimental
CPU Model: i7-7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore in UEFI: 1.325V (Adaptive)
Vcore in CPU-Z: 1.312V
FCLK: 1
Cooling Solution: AIO CoolMaster Masterliquid Pro 280, not delidded
Stability Test: RealBench 2.54 - Stress Test 8 hours, 32GB RAM

Batch Number: L704C181 Malaysia
Ram Speed: 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35 @ 1.3530V
Ram Voltage: 1.3530V
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: Auto
Motherboard: Z270 Asus Prime Z270-A (BIOS 0906)
LLC Setting: Auto
Misc Comments: no AXV offset used


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> If it is just XMP and not overclocking over the DRAM rated speeds, leave VCCIO / SA on auto...just raise DIM V a notch or 2...


DRAM voltage?

To be clear..
Realbench completed the 8hr stress test, but it crashed when it was running a infinite Benchmark.

My previous post is the 8hr stress test.


----------



## Forecast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Before answering your questions, what are you intending to use your system for, will it be for gaming, or productivity software, or for overclocking/benching?
> 
> Knowing this, will help in assisting you as to what is the best/ recommended memory, cooling, etc that will be required for your needs.


A few games here and there. I have the Tom Clancy game that came with my GTX 1070, but haven't played it much just yet.

Definitely heavy web-browsing and some productivity items like Excel pivot tables and large PPT decks.

I also do a decent amount of Handbrake conversions of movies and TV shows. Currently using this machine as a Plex server because it allows me to use higher bandwidth files even if transcoding is needed, but Plex is doing a Beta of hardware transcoding (which can use the GPU), and I'm either planning to fully convert my library using Handbrake, get hardware transcoding working, or build a dedicated Plex server. Have also looked at using Plex Cloud so that this machine won't be jammed up with Plex.

So,I'd say my uses are web browsing and productivity, Handbrake and video transcoding and watching, and some light gaming.

I do, however, very much enjoy benchmarking and OCing, but to a limit. I'm not going to use liquid nitrogen or spend hundreds on a custom loop or water block. Nothing wrong with someone doing so, and I think it is amazing, but it doesn't currently fit my time and financial budget.

1. Web browsing (sometimes as many as 50 tabs going) and productivity software like Excel and PowerPoint. No photoshop or CAD.
2. Video encoding and reencoding using Handbrake. Plex transcoding (hopefully temporary).
3. Benchmarking, tweaking, and OCing, but not to an insane level (maybe one day with the time and $$$ budget).
4. Light gaming. Haven't been much of a gamer due to time constraints. Would love to find some strategy heavy games and a FPS shooter or two to give a few hours to each week. Played a lot of original Doom. First love was games like Colonization and Civilization

Thanks for the response. Hope this helps clarify. My tech level is not quite expert (especially due to being out of the OC scene for so long), but. I've worked in IT, and I enjoy projects and challenges. Just wired my home with 22 CAT6 runs going to a Ubiquiti USG, 24 port switch, multiple APs, etc.

One thing I forgot about motherboards is I'd really prefer dual NICs like the Fatal1ty so that I can do NIC teaming. I have a 1GBPS connection at home.

Appreciate it!


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> My system was stable in RealBench for 8hours at 5Ghz, but my memory was set to 2133 MHz.
> *When I turned XMP on*, it crashed after 4 hours.
> 
> What's the best approach to tune the System Agent and CPU VCCIO voltages?


This what I quoted.....


----------



## dirtyred

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> Been out of the CPU overclocking world for awhile. In fact, the last overclocking I did was an AMD K6. So, yeah, it has been about 20 years! I bought a Powerspec G419 ( from Microcenter.... I know I know) because it had the Asrock Fata1ity Z270 mobo, and that seemed to be a step above what most pre-built PCs came with. it also came with a set of 3200MHZ Ripjaws -- although they are the 16-18-18-38 variety. Amazingly enough, the stock build came with a Hyper EVO 212. Knowing next to nothing about modern OCing, I set the machine to 4.7GHZ the first day I had it using the UEFI automatic OC pre-sets.
> 
> Why am I posting here? From what I can tell from the statistics posted in this thread, I may have blindly stumbled across a fairly good 7700k. I don't yet have the batch number (anyway to find it short of removing the CPU cooler and looking at the die?), but I'm at 4.9Ghz with no AVX offset VCORE was set to 1.28 with an LLC setting of 2. I ran about 2 hours of Realbench and HWMonitor actually shows my VCORE was at 1.26. Highest temp was 81c on Core 1 whereas Core 2 never went above 70c. The other two cores were at 77c & 78c respectively. I did remove the Hyper EVO and replace the stock thermal paste with Arctic Silver 5 (which doesn't seem very loved around here) as I used the original Arctic Silver on my AMD K6. Like I said, it has been 20 years -- even though I'm in my early 30s (I started young!!!).
> 
> I know up to 10c variation is fairly normal, but I bet I could do a better job of applying the thermal paste. I did use the thermal paste remover and purifier from Arctic Silver before applying the thermal paste. I followed the thin line over the cores instructions. My idle temps are around 25c-28c with an ambient temp of 25c.
> 
> I just purchased a H100i v2 and a Fractal Design R5 case. I chose the R5 over the Corsair Obsidian 750D high-airflow version. I stupidly didn't realize that mis-matched RAM could be a problem so when I bought a set of Geil Evo Forza 3200MHZ it doesn't play nicely with the Ripjaws. Best I can do is 2900MHZ, but I managed to lower the timing down to CAS 15. Although the Z270 Fata1ity is a great board, I recently purchased an Asrock Taichi Z270. I was torn between it, the Asrock Fata1ty I7 Professional Gaming, and the MSI X Power Gaming Titanium. I need at least 8 SATA ports (with 10 being even better), but my options were quite limited. I considered getting an ASUS Maximus Formula or Gigabyte Aorus and adding a SATA RAID card, but I thought better of it.
> 
> So, here's the point of my thread pollution: I have a couple of questions before I complete the "move" to the R5 case.
> 
> 1. *Should I stick with the Fata!ty K6, or roll with the new Taich? Other option would be to return the Taichi for the I7 Professional Gaming or consider something like the MSI Gaming Titanium, an ASUS board, or something altogether different?* Before I went with the Microcenter pre-build, I strongly considered an X99 build with a 6850K. But, I was worried as I had not built a computer since I was 13, so I wanted to see what the learning curve was like, and the Powerspec was a great deal for an I7-7700K, GTX 1070, Asrock Fata1ity, etc. And, I wanted dual M.2 slots as I'm planning to run two Samsung NVME drives in RAID 0. Currently have a 500GB 960 EVO along with 4 SATA SSDs in RAID 10.
> 
> 2. *Considering the 4.9GHZ OC at 1.26/1.28 VCORE with temps 80c or below while looping RealBench, what are some opinions on whether or not the H100i v2 is a good choice for liquid cooling?* My goal is a stable 5.0 or 5.1GHZ OC. I have also considered purchasing a delidding tool and delidding, but I don't want to get too far ahead of myself just yet. But it seems quite simple.
> 
> 3. *Should I purchase a new matched set of RAM, keep what I have at 2900MHZ with CAS 15, or get another set of the Geil Evo Forza?* The Geil's by themseilves in dual channel mode do 3200MHZ with 15-16-16-36-1T, so a can buy another set (Newegg was OOS for about 7 days), and see if they work at 3200MHZ with all 4 sticks or RMA the new ones and go in a different direction. I absolutely massacred the heatsink on one of the Geils. I literally ended up having to break it off at the top it was so mangled. I am going to replace the heatsink and I'm also adding a Corsair RAM cooler although I realize it isn't likely to do much. The RAM is passing Memtest86 just fine how I have it. If you do buy a set of Geil Evo Forzas you have to be as gentle as you would be with a newborn infant. My 4 year old could have bent the heatsink in half with one finger. They are that fragile. From research, I've determined they are Hynix sticks, so I'm not planning to try an OC much above the 3200MHZ. At CAS15 they are OK for me. If I could do it all over again I'd have just gotten a set of 3200MHZ Trident Zs @ CAS 14, but with current DDR prices I really don't want to drop $320 on them.
> 
> 4. *Final question to wrap up this e-novel that I've poured my heart and soul into: the pre-built came with a EVGA 750 BQ bronze power supply. It is semi-modular. I just pulled the trigger on an EVGA 850 G3 Gold power supply.* I am running the 7700K, a GTX 1070, a Blu-Ray drive, 4 SATA SSDs, soon to be 2 Samsung NVME drives, Corsair H100i v2, 4 sticks of RAM and about 4-5 120-140mm case fans along with the two fans on the Corsair cooler. *Should I just stick with the 750, or with my OC, full memory banks, and all those drives is the 850 the correct choice? Zero plans for SLI unless a GTX 1070 was suddenly 125 dollars.
> *
> Any thoughts on the questions I have? I realize there is a broader forum here, but I've been reading this thread for about two weeks, so I know you all know your stuff. I wanted to avoid the: "gee durrrr get a Ryzen" crowd and ask people with experience on this platform even though it is so very new I'm sure a lot of you came over from the Z170 or X99 side and some of you have probably had more than 1 Z270 board already!
> 
> Thanks,
> Forecast






2. Best way to determine core temperatures is to average the 4 cores because there could be a +/- 5 degrees variation. If you stayed below 80 degrees RB stress test, that's great. Many will agree that AIO liquid coolers are not superior to high-end air coolers, they only keep temperatures low in the first 30-45 minutes until the water temperature equalizes in the whole loop and they will also be cooling down for a long time. Water warms up and cools down much slower than copper. I'm not saying that AIO closed loop coolers are bad, they are just loud and expensive compared to air. Also, they could malfunction, that's why I went with a huge metal monstrosity.

3. If you can send back the RAM that you purchased, do it. Get another pair of the same that you have. G.Skill is one of the best manufacturers with decent prices.

4. EVGA is not a bad brand but it's not the best. jonnyGURU.com is one of the best review sites you find about power supplies. Here's the review of yours: EVGA 750BQ 750W. If you need good PSU, get SeaSonic (almost any will do as they have the reputation of making really good ones). I've got myself a Seasonic M12II-620 EVO because of good buld quality and modularity. Also 620 W is more than enough for my Kaby Lake build and mostly my system is using 50-60% of it. You probably don't need more than 600 W even with 10 HDD's. Use a PSU calculator to check what do you need and don't spend money for no reason.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> My system was stable in RealBench for 8hours at 5Ghz, but my memory was set to 2133 MHz.
> When I turned XMP on, it crashed after 4 hours.
> 
> What's the best approach to tune the System Agent and CPU VCCIO voltages?


I don't recommend XMP as it can screw up OC. And from my perspective XMP is just like auto overclocking, I don't trust it. Go manual with RAM frequency, timings and voltage. Read about System Agent and VCCIO tuning here: http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/3/


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> 
> 4. EVGA is not a bad brand but it's not the best. jonnyGURU.com is one of the best review sites you find about power supplies. Here's the review of yours: EVGA 750BQ 750W. If you need good PSU, get SeaSonic (almost any will do as they have the reputation of making really good ones). I've got myself a Seasonic M12II-620 EVO because of good buld quality and modularity. Also 620 W is more than enough for my Kaby Lake build and mostly my system is using 50-60% of it. You probably don't need more than 600 W even with 10 HDD's. Use a PSU calculator to check what do you need and don't spend money for no reason.


Ooo. youre lucky Shilka doesnt hang around in this thread









http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story6&reid=494

http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story6&reid=500

Here's a review of the Supernova G3 1000W and the G3 750W from JG. EVGA G2/P2/T2/G3 are based off the Superflower Leadex/Leadex II platform. Easily as good as Seasonic platforms and with a 10 year warranty and often cheaper. (*looks at own sig*) I'm not being defensive about my own purchase honestly







It is true though. The lower end EVGA units you might be right, like the one from the review you listed.

But yea, the point is dont look at the brand, do a bit of research about the platform underneath.

Slightly more on topic although not really, ahem. Id agree 650Watts should be way more then enough for most people with a quad core single card GPU system overvolted and overclocked for 24/7 use.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> Ooo. youre lucky Shilka doesnt hang around in this thread
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story6&reid=494
> 
> http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story6&reid=500
> 
> Here's a review of the Supernova G3 1000W and the G3 750W from JG. EVGA G2/P2/T2/G3 are based off the Superflower Leadex/Leadex II platform. Easily as good as Seasonic platforms and with a 10 year warranty and often cheaper. (*looks at own sig*) I'm not being defensive about my own purchase honestly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is true though. The lower end EVGA units you might be right, like the one from the review you listed.
> 
> But yea, the point is dont look at the brand, do a bit of research about the platform underneath.
> 
> Slightly more on topic although not really, ahem. Id agree 650Watts should be way more then enough for most people with a quad core single card GPU system overvolted and overclocked for 24/7 use.


I know EVGA does alot of rebranding but in general I'd say they aren't a great brand when it comes to power supplies. The ones you mentioned are super expensive, for the same reason why Superflower is usually damn expensive (subjective). That's why I recommended SeaSonic as it's a brand you can trust most of the times and the price is right. Had a Corsair (CX 430 or something similar, was about 15 years ago) failing on me and dragging half the system with it. Got myself a SeaSonic that still works in my old (now my parents) PC and got one in my current one as well and wasn't expensive. For $60 you won't find many others that perform on this level. Leadex PSU's are generally $35-40 more expensive so it's not really in this price range.


----------



## becks

For me as PSU XTR - XFX has been great so far...no fails since


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> 1. *Should I stick with the Fata!ty K6, or roll with the new Taich? Other option would be to return the Taichi for the I7 Professional Gaming or consider something like the MSI Gaming Titanium, an ASUS board, or something altogether different?* Before I went with the Microcenter pre-build, I strongly considered an X99 build with a 6850K. But, I was worried as I had not built a computer since I was 13, so I wanted to see what the learning curve was like, and the Powerspec was a great deal for an I7-7700K, GTX 1070, Asrock Fata1ity, etc. And, I wanted dual M.2 slots as I'm planning to run two Samsung NVME drives in RAID 0. Currently have a 500GB 960 EVO along with 4 SATA SSDs in RAID 10.
> 
> *I'm using the Z270 K6, and even the Super Carrier doesn't seem to have much more to offer. It does have a few more options in the BIOS, but overall the memory tops out the same and they aren't clocking any higher than the K6. Do know that these boards don't do well with Dual Channel above 3600 if you do decide to purchase new memory*
> 
> 2. *Considering the 4.9GHZ OC at 1.26/1.28 VCORE with temps 80c or below while looping RealBench, what are some opinions on whether or not the H100i v2 is a good choice for liquid cooling?* My goal is a stable 5.0 or 5.1GHZ OC. I have also considered purchasing a delidding tool and delidding, but I don't want to get too far ahead of myself just yet. But it seems quite simple.
> 
> *Keep in mind your talking about a ~4% difference. I'm delidded on a H115i and 5.1 @ 1.312-1.328v or 5.2 at ~1.45v. I was stable at 5 @ 1.28v before delidding. You don't seem to be so interested in pinching pennies, but I'd delid first and see how it works with your air cooler as it does look to be a fairly good chip*
> 
> 3. *Should I purchase a new matched set of RAM, keep what I have at 2900MHZ with CAS 15, or get another set of the Geil Evo Forza?* The Geil's by themseilves in dual channel mode do 3200MHZ with 15-16-16-36-1T, so a can buy another set (Newegg was OOS for about 7 days), and see if they work at 3200MHZ with all 4 sticks or RMA the new ones and go in a different direction. I absolutely massacred the heatsink on one of the Geils. I literally ended up having to break it off at the top it was so mangled. I am going to replace the heatsink and I'm also adding a Corsair RAM cooler although I realize it isn't likely to do much. The RAM is passing Memtest86 just fine how I have it. If you do buy a set of Geil Evo Forzas you have to be as gentle as you would be with a newborn infant. My 4 year old could have bent the heatsink in half with one finger. They are that fragile. From research, I've determined they are Hynix sticks, so I'm not planning to try an OC much above the 3200MHZ. At CAS15 they are OK for me. If I could do it all over again I'd have just gotten a set of 3200MHZ Trident Zs @ CAS 14, but with current DDR prices I really don't want to drop $320 on them.
> *
> Keep what you got. Not worth the cash IMO.*
> 
> 4. *Final question to wrap up this e-novel that I've poured my heart and soul into: the pre-built came with a EVGA 750 BQ bronze power supply. It is semi-modular. I just pulled the trigger on an EVGA 850 G3 Gold power supply.* I am running the 7700K, a GTX 1070, a Blu-Ray drive, 4 SATA SSDs, soon to be 2 Samsung NVME drives, Corsair H100i v2, 4 sticks of RAM and about 4-5 120-140mm case fans along with the two fans on the Corsair cooler. *Should I just stick with the 750, or with my OC, full memory banks, and all those drives is the 850 the correct choice? Zero plans for SLI unless a GTX 1070 was suddenly 125 dollars.
> *
> 
> *Keep 750 if it does the trick and it should.*
> 
> Any thoughts on the questions I have? I realize there is a broader forum here, but I've been reading this thread for about two weeks, so I know you all know your stuff. I wanted to avoid the: "gee durrrr get a Ryzen" crowd and ask people with experience on this platform even though it is so very new I'm sure a lot of you came over from the Z170 or X99 side and some of you have probably had more than 1 Z270 board already!
> 
> Thanks,
> Forecast


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> For me as PSU XTR - XFX has been great so far...no fails since


Seasonic OEM I think







I remember them being fairly cheap a few years ago and being recommended a lot.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I know EVGA does alot of rebranding but in general I'd say they aren't a great brand when it comes to power supplies. The ones you mentioned are super expensive, for the same reason why Superflower is usually damn expensive (subjective). That's why I recommended SeaSonic as it's a brand you can trust most of the times and the price is right. Had a Corsair (CX 430 or something similar, was about 15 years ago) failing on me and dragging half the system with it. Got myself a SeaSonic that still works in my old (now my parents) PC and got one in my current one as well and wasn't expensive. For $60 you won't find many others that perform on this level. Leadex PSU's are generally $35-40 more expensive so it's not really in this price range.


Corsair rebrands everything, they make nothing themselves. I've got a HX 650 V2 which is based off a Seasonic G platform, although slightly worse because it lacked a couple of extra PCI-E cables (I bought it because I wanted something blue at the time). I think mainly they use CWT now, but supposedly they design their own at the higher end and get them to make it or so theyve said. I dont follow PSU's religiously but its well known that very few of the major vendors make their own. Seasonic, FSP, and Superflower sell under their own brands while also building for others that I can recall of the top of my head at the more decent end of the spectrum.

EVGA, Antec, Bequiet, Fractal Design, Corsair etc etc are all rebranding different OEM's sometimes using several for different price points and changing up as time goes on.

Basically ignore the branding completely, you need to read the reviews or ask around in forums to find out whats actually inside.

I agree Seasonic branded PSU's are almost always very good, but often you can get something cheaper thats as good, and sometimes its also made by Seasonic under a different brand name, like the old XFX XTR series.


----------



## rodubbs

Hi there! I'm new to overclocking and I have a quick question.

I have a 7700k and a Noctua D14. I'm trying to get a stable overclock of 4.8 if possible.

I noticed in the OP that someone with the same cooler was able to get 4.8ghz with a Vcore of 1.24. Unfortunately I have BF1 crashing at 1.29 Vcore with 4.8ghz overclock. Does this mean I just got a potato chip?

My temps are low 80's in stress tests (prime 95 27.9) with 1.29, so I'm not sure I can really push it any further than that.

I have XMP enabled on the motherboard for my 3000mhz ram. My mobo has 2 options for LLC - Auto or Mode 1 (which is apparently more aggressive). I have that set to mode 1.

Any suggestions?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rodubbs*
> 
> Hi there! I'm new to overclocking and I have a quick question.
> 
> I have a 7700k and a Noctua D14. I'm trying to get a stable overclock of 4.8 if possible.
> 
> I noticed in the OP that someone with the same cooler was able to get 4.8ghz with a Vcore of 1.24. Unfortunately I have BF1 crashing at 1.29 Vcore with 4.8ghz overclock. Does this mean I just got a potato chip?
> 
> My temps are low 80's in stress tests (prime 95 27.9) with 1.29, so I'm not sure I can really push it any further than that.
> 
> I have XMP enabled on the motherboard for my 3000mhz ram. My mobo has 2 options for LLC - Auto or Mode 1 (which is apparently more aggressive). I have that set to mode 1.
> 
> Any suggestions?


I've got myself a new cooler yesterday, the Phanteks PH-TC14PE which is just like the D15 in terms of performance (but not ugly). Since yesterday I've been trying to get stable 4.8 GHz and it was failing horribly until 1.28 V using adaptive voltage with LLC 5. But I noticed it wasn't failing under 100% load. So I thought to myself maybe it's failing because while not under full load, it's not getting 1.28 V (and wasn't, because I monitored Vcore closely). So I switched from adaptive to manual constant voltage and tried again starting from 1.24 V. I had to go for 1.26 V because even with LLC 5 it drops to 1.248 V but now it seems stable. I've only tested so far for 2 hours with RealBench but it passed so it's promising and will do an 8 hours test when I have time.

Low 80's are fine but Prime95 27.9 uses AVX instructions so it generates more heat. Test with v26.6 as it doesn't support AVX and you probably won't really use it unless you do 3d rendering or something special. Prime95 any version usually generates more heat then any real life scenario would. I recommend either v26.6 or preferably RealBench (uses AVX but generates less heat).

TL;DR: Go with manual constant voltage of 1.26 - 1.28 V and use LLC 5 is you have Asus. Try to get the most stable and closest voltage to what you've set in BIOS under load. Use Prime95 v26.6 or RealBench.


----------



## Forecast

Appreciate all the feedback thus far.

1. The power supply -- I agree 750W is probably sufficient. I've heard EVGA makes some good power supplies, and this one reviewed fairly well, but it is semi-modular. As I said I seriously doubt I'd ever go SLI, but I'm also the type that won't upgrade for the next best thing. So, down the road, as price pushes GTX 1070s down -- if there is actually a need for my video performance (which I just can't see right now), it would be nice to know I'm not on the edge due to the number of drivers I'm running and my overclock. I'm torn, and I haven't decided just yet. I'm probably leaning 60/40 right now to installing the G3 and keeping the BQ if I decide to keep the second mobo. The plan would be down the road to just build a second Kaby Lake machine using the Fata1ity mobo, mis-matched RAM, and the PowerSpec case. It really isn't that bad of a case for a standard build at all.

2. I'm kicking myself a bit and wishing I'd have gone for the MSI. I really like the Fata1ity, and actually wanted the Taichi in the first place. That said, it looks like Asrock has some work to do with BIOS updates to get their memory QVL expanded a bit. MSI has a lot more on their QVL, and they seem to be a few days ahead on BIOS and driver updates. However, the Taichi included a $15 rebate for purchase and I believe an additional $10 if I review it on Newegg. So, apples to apples I'm looking at about a $100 difference between the MSI and the Taichi. Or, as stated previously, could just stick with the Fata1ity. I really want to run 32GB of RAM (I do use it), and the mis-matched pair issue leaves me in a place of either getting another set of Geil Forzas or Ripjaws for around $115-$125. Perhaps I should just do that and return the Taichi. Then I'd have a really good shot of having all 4 sticks working at the rated XMP profile and still be $50-$60 ahead which I could put towards my eventual purchase of an additional NVME drive. With RAM and SSD prices so high right now -- it may just be worthwhile to wait. Only caveat is that if you believe the rumors it could be a year or more before prices go back down, and they could actually go up MORE in the interim. Is it worth it to wait and lose a year of what I actually want to do with this system? That's the question I have to answer.

3. One point I didn't mention about the Hyper EVO vs AIO Corsair -- the Hyper EVO is blocking a RAM slot, and I have to really work to get the 4th stick under it. That means I have to have the fan edged up about 1.5 inches reducing my cooling ability. I added a very quiet fan on the other side of the EVO mounted lower to pull to make up for the gap that was created from needing space for the RAM. I've seen you can mount the EVO sideways, but I don't know how that impacts cooling. My research hasn't lead to a definitive answer. A bit frustrating. My hope was that I could achieve a stable 5.0GHZ OC as well as not have the RAM space issues.

If I had to make a decision right this second I'd say I'm going to do the case transfer, use the Taichi (2 extra SATA slots and better VRM vs the Fata1ity), and keep the Fata1ity for a build late this year or sell it. Main issue, however, is that I don't think I'd recoup very much of what I'd want to get for it because I don't have the mobo box or anything like that because this was a pre-built from Microcenter. So i'm strongly leaning toward holding on to it, and wait and see how far Kaby Lake gets pushed down by Ryzen competition. Because I want the RAM slots to be unencumbered I'm going to install the AIO water cooler. I'm just going to wait on the RAM and see if any BIOS updates down the road help out or if the Taichi for some shocking reason can actually run the 4 sticks at their default XMP. Believe me -- I tried a million different timings and settings but they are simply not stable above 2900MHZ when grouped together no matter how much voltage or how loose I make the timing. What's infuriating is that the two RipJaws by themselves or the two Geils by themselves run the 3200 XMP profile just fine and pass Memtest with zero issues. Once I throw all 4 sticks in -- even if I loosen the timings more than the loosest set (the Ripjaws are 16-18-18-38) I simply can't reach 3200.

Thanks so much to everyone that has responded so far. I'm still going to think about it this weekend before I move forward. I'm trying to finish up the 24 CAT6 runs I just ran in the house and transfer from my Netgear switches and Edgerouter to a Ubiquiti Unifi Security Gateway, Unifi 24 port switch, and a couple of Unifi AC Pro APs. That's been a long-term project that is now in its second month. With kids and everything else just not enough time! Appreciate all the feedback, and anyone else that wants to chime it in more than welcome to do so.

Forecast


----------



## rodubbs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I've got myself a new cooler yesterday, the Phanteks PH-TC14PE which is just like the D15 in terms of performance (but not ugly). Since yesterday I've been trying to get stable 4.8 GHz and it was failing horribly until 1.28 V using adaptive voltage with LLC 5. But I noticed it wasn't failing under 100% load. So I thought to myself maybe it's failing because while not under full load, it's not getting 1.28 V (and wasn't, because I monitored Vcore closely). So I switched from adaptive to manual constant voltage and tried again starting from 1.24 V. I had to go for 1.26 V because even with LLC 5 it drops to 1.248 V but now it seems stable. I've only tested so far for 2 hours with RealBench but it passed so it's promising and will do an 8 hours test when I have time.
> 
> Low 80's are fine but Prime95 27.9 uses AVX instructions so it generates more heat. Test with v26.6 as it doesn't support AVX and you probably won't really use it unless you do 3d rendering or something special. Prime95 any version usually generates more heat then any real life scenario would. I recommend either v26.6 or preferably RealBench (uses AVX but generates less heat).
> 
> TL;DR: Go with manual constant voltage of 1.26 - 1.28 V and use LLC 5 is you have Asus. Try to get the most stable and closest voltage to what you've set in BIOS under load. Use Prime95 v26.6 or RealBench.


Thanks for the response! I do use Handbrake which uses AVX, but that's about it. Unfortunately my MSI board has 2 LLC options "Auto" and "Mode 1" (Mode 1 apparently being more aggressive). Even at 1.29 (manual voltage) it was not stable at all, but seems to be 100% stable at 1.3 which is probably running too hot (BF1 is running at 80 degrees).

Quick question - I've heard of the 'Silicon Lottery' and that essentially not all chips are made equal. Does that mean that some chips are essentially able to be stable at lower voltages than others? At this point I'm under the impression that the ability to be stable at a given voltage/overclock isn't necessarily related to heat - too much heat is just a product of using more voltage you can handle?

The reason I ask is that Amazon has offered to swap my chip for another one (it's a new build). Is there the potential that I could get a higher overclock on the one they send me? I did some experimenting on it and the one I have and was unable to post at 5GHZ with a 1.42 vcore...


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rodubbs*
> 
> Thanks for the response! Unfortunately my MSI board has 2 LLC options "Auto" and "Mode 1" (Mode 1 apparently being more aggressive). Even at 1.29 (manual voltage) it was not stable at all, but seems to be 100% stable at 1.3 which is probably running too hot (BF1 is running at 80 degrees).
> 
> Quick question - I've heard of the 'Silicon Lottery' and that essentially not all chips are made equal. Does that mean that some chips are essentially able to be stable at lower voltages than others? At this point I'm under the impression that the ability to be stable at a given voltage/overclock isn't necessarily related to heat - too much heat is just a product of using more voltage you can handle?
> 
> The reason I ask is that Amazon has offered to swap my chip for another one (it's a new build). Is there the potential that I could get a higher overclock on the one they send me? I did some experimenting on it and the one I have and was unable to post at 5GHZ with a 1.42 vcore...


Yep heat is one of the factors that keeps the oc potential lower. Thats why many do delliding.
But in your case if it wont post 1.4v vcore at 5ghz , its not the heat its the chip itself...
Even if you dellid it you would get a big temps drop and maybe it will post at 5ghz at 1.4v , but it wont be stable .

My bet that you have found this chips almost maximum potential.


----------



## rodubbs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Yep heat is one of the factors that keeps the oc potential lower. Thats why many do delliding.
> But in your case if it wont post 1.4v vcore at 5ghz , its not the heat its the chip itself...
> Even if you dellid it you would get a big temps drop and maybe it will post at 5ghz at 1.4v , but it wont be stable .
> 
> My bet that you have found this chips almost maximum potential.


Yeah, I figured it was a bad one. It actually came rattling around loose in the box (which was also rattling around in its own box). Thanks Amazon.

I think I'm going to take them up on it. They offered to have a new one here tomorrow and I can mail the old one back after I swap them. Kinda feel like a dick wasting a perfectly "good" chip, but I bought a new cooler for it and was hoping for more than 4.7...


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rodubbs*
> 
> Thanks for the response! I do use Handbrake which uses AVX, but that's about it. Unfortunately my MSI board has 2 LLC options "Auto" and "Mode 1" (Mode 1 apparently being more aggressive). Even at 1.29 (manual voltage) it was not stable at all, but seems to be 100% stable at 1.3 which is probably running too hot (BF1 is running at 80 degrees).
> 
> Quick question - I've heard of the 'Silicon Lottery' and that essentially not all chips are made equal. Does that mean that some chips are essentially able to be stable at lower voltages than others? At this point I'm under the impression that the ability to be stable at a given voltage/overclock isn't necessarily related to heat - too much heat is just a product of using more voltage you can handle?
> 
> The reason I ask is that Amazon has offered to swap my chip for another one (it's a new build). Is there the potential that I could get a higher overclock on the one they send me? I did some experimenting on it and the one I have and was unable to post at 5GHZ with a 1.42 vcore...


Yes, sadly the silicon lottery is a thing and it exists everywhere: Nvidia (all chips are the same architecture but they disable some cores and sell them as lower tiers like 1070 instead of 1080), AMD. Heat is a factor in stability. BTW, what you can do try to lower the temps and getting more headroom is to lower the DRAM voltage because between 1.2 - 1.35 V the CPU's temp difference can be 10 or more degrees. I have a G.Skill 3200 RAM that needs 1.35 V for 3200 16-16-16-36-2T but if I do 3000 16-16-16-28-2T then I can use 1.2 V and gain about 0.05 V for Vcore, so I can go from 1.25 V to 1.3 V resulting about 200 MHz. You can try to use AVX offset if temps are too high and go for 5 GHz only for non-AVX instructions (most apps). AVX is much faster anyways then SSE so even with an offset of 2-3 you'll still be ahead.

Not all chips can reach 5 GHz According to Asus:

20% of samples are stable with Handbrake/AVX workloads when running at 5GHz CPU core speeds.
The AVX offset parameter can be used to clock 80% of CPU samples to 5GHz for light workloads, falling back to 4.8GHz for applications that use AVX code.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rodubbs*
> 
> Yeah, I figured it was a bad one. It actually came rattling around loose in the box (which was also rattling around in its own box). Thanks Amazon.
> 
> I think I'm going to take them up on it. They offered to have a new one here tomorrow and I can mail the old one back after I swap them. Kinda feel like a dick wasting a perfectly "good" chip, but I bought a new cooler for it and was hoping for more than 4.7...


Well, if you have the money then buy a couple (maybe from different sources), test them out and keep only the best one. Then repeat if you still have the patience.


----------



## rodubbs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Yes, sadly the silicon lottery is a thing and it exists everywhere: Nvidia (all chips are the same architecture but they disable some cores and sell them as lower tiers like 1070 instead of 1080), AMD. Heat is a factor in stability. BTW, what you can do try to lower the temps and getting more headroom is to lower the DRAM voltage because between 1.2 - 1.35 V the CPU's temp difference can be 10 or more degrees. I have a G.Skill 3200 RAM that needs 1.35 V for 3200 16-16-16-36-2T but if I do 3000 16-16-16-28-2T then I can use 1.2 V and gain about 0.05 V for Vcore, so I can go from 1.25 V to 1.3 V resulting about 200 MHz. You can try to use AVX offset if temps are too high and go for 5 GHz only for non-AVX instructions (most apps). AVX is much faster anyways then SSE so even with an offset of 2-3 you'll still be ahead.
> 
> Not all chips can reach 5 GHz According to Asus:
> 
> 20% of samples are stable with Handbrake/AVX workloads when running at 5GHz CPU core speeds.
> The AVX offset parameter can be used to clock 80% of CPU samples to 5GHz for light workloads, falling back to 4.8GHz for applications that use AVX code.
> Well, if you have the money then buy a couple (maybe from different sources), test them out and keep only the best one. Then repeat if you still have the patience.


Quick question on the AVX offset - I've been using a constant voltage and did try running handbrake with a -2 offset. I definitely noticed the clocks were 200MHz lower, but I didn't see a noticeable difference in temps. Will lowering the clock speed with the same manual voltage still lower temps?

Another thing... since my board basically doesn't offer LLC (Auto vs Mode 1) will that limit me as well? Apparently Mode 1 means more LLC (MSI is kind of cryptic about this) but I definitely saw voltage go down under heavy load.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rodubbs*
> 
> Quick question on the AVX offset - I've been using a constant voltage and did try running handbrake with a -2 offset. I definitely noticed the clocks were 200MHz lower, but I didn't see a noticeable difference in temps. Will lowering the clock speed with the same manual voltage still lower temps?
> 
> Another thing... since my board basically doesn't offer LLC (Auto vs Mode 1) will that limit me as well? Apparently Mode 1 means more LLC (MSI is kind of cryptic about this) but I definitely saw voltage go down under heavy load.


AVX instructions are very demanding. It needs more power and voltage then SSE resulting in more heat. If you use AVX offset then the CPU will need less voltage to be stable. So if you're feeding constant voltage (let's say 1.28 V) and without AVX offset it crashes, then with AVX offset you should be stable. In other words if you're stable on a set voltage running a software that doesn't use AVX instructions (all games, most apps) and you found the upper limit of voltage to stay below 80 degrees (some random spikes above 80 is acceptable) but running AVX apps you crash just use AVX offset.

Your board seems to be a limiting factor but you can work around it. If you can't control Vdroop then you will crash. To solve this you need to set a higher Vcore to have headroom for Vdroop and be stable. Asus and Gigabyte does have LLC options with different levels but all they do is compensate for Vdroop automatically. For example if I set 1.28 V and LLC 5 then my Vcore is mostly around 1.264 V under full load and sometimes 1.248 V. Lower LLC settings will allow even more Vdroop, higher ones will results in Vboost. So there's no way to always get the same Vcore that you've set. So it doesn't matter what Vcore you set, what matters is what you're getting under full load. LLC settings just allow you more control.


----------



## logo

Hey guys, thanks for the guide

Is this normal that by increasing core multiplier to x50 and cache x 40 at 1,375 vCore the performance of Ram drops by around 4 % ?
i have used intel extreme tuning utility to test possible overclock, and userbenchmark to see the Oc results.

also i wonder if someone could have take a look at my voltages because i am kinda new to Intel



Thanks


----------



## dlss

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *logo*
> 
> Is this normal that by increasing core multiplier to x50 and cache x 40 at 1,375 vCore the performance of Ram drops by around 4 % ?


Yes, lowering the cache frequency will affect RAM performance. Any reason for lowering it from the default of 42x?


----------



## logo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dlss*
> 
> Yes, lowering the cache frequency will affect RAM performance. Any reason for lowering it from the default of 42x?


Well i though cache x38 was default since my mobo set it that way

I didn't know that x42 was default
My MoBo (gigabyte ga z270x gaming k5) did set the cache multi at x38. Going too try with x42 later and post the results
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dlss*
> 
> Yes, lowering the cache frequency will affect RAM performance. Any reason for lowering it from the default of 42x?


I have though that x38 cache multi is default for i5-7600k since my MoBo set it default to x38, should i change it to x42 ?


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> Username: Xperimental
> CPU Model: i7-7700K
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4200
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.325V (Adaptive)
> Vcore in CPU-Z: 1.312V
> FCLK: 1
> Cooling Solution: AIO CoolMaster Masterliquid Pro 280, not delidded
> Stability Test: RealBench 2.54 - Stress Test 8 hours, 32GB RAM
> 
> Batch Number: L704C181 Malaysia
> Ram Speed: 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35 @ 1.3530V
> Ram Voltage: 1.3530V
> VCCIO: Auto
> VCCSA: Auto
> Motherboard: Z270 Asus Prime Z270-A (BIOS 0906)
> LLC Setting: Auto
> Misc Comments: no AXV offset used


I was able to run an 8 hour RealBench - Benchmark, by switching LLC -> 5 (used to be auto).
When running the RealBench - Benchmark for 8 hours, the temperature sometimes hit 92 degrees. After I installed my GFX and ran a new benchmark it went up within minutes..

I am looking for options to reduce the core temps while keeping the CPU at 5GHz.
Would it make a difference to use AXV off set? Or disable C status, intel Step stepping?

Any suggestions are most welcome


----------



## logo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> I was able to run an 8 hour RealBench - Benchmark, by switching LLC -> 5 (used to be auto).
> When running the RealBench - Benchmark for 8 hours, the temperature sometimes hit 92 degrees. After I installed my GFX and ran a new benchmark it went up within minutes..
> 
> I am looking for options to reduce the core temps while keeping the CPU at 5GHz.
> Would it make a difference to use AXV off set? Or disable C status, intel Step stepping?
> 
> Any suggestions are most welcome


I assume that your MoBo is from Gigabyte, you might have the same problem that i had
enter bios and go to smart fan settlings
set water pump to 30 % speed at least because setting it under 30 % doesn't make the pump spin (work) so there is no circulation of liquid
same applies to fans, set them to at least 30 %

although that i have i5-7600k running at 4.4 ghz with a core volt 1.295 i think that your voltage of 1.325 is way too low for 5ghz overclock since i needed at least
1,375 v to run intel benchmark successfully, and even at 1,375 v x5ghz my core temp never overpass 70 degrees with Akasa venom a20 liquid cooling solution


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> I was able to run an 8 hour RealBench - Benchmark, by switching LLC -> 5 (used to be auto).
> When running the RealBench - Benchmark for 8 hours, the temperature sometimes hit 92 degrees. After I installed my GFX and ran a new benchmark it went up within minutes..
> 
> I am looking for options to reduce the core temps while keeping the CPU at 5GHz.
> Would it make a difference to use AXV off set? Or disable C status, intel Step stepping?
> 
> Any suggestions are most welcome


AVX offset should help indirectly by allowing to lower the Vcore while remaining stable resulting in lower temps. RAM voltage does heavily influence CPU temps. Between 1.2 V and 1.35 V there could be 5-10 degrees. So try to go with 1.2 V and set RAM frequency and timings to be stable. Try at 1.2V at 2800 MHz with same timings, if it fails to post loosen the timings by 1. Repeat until you manage to POST then do a RAM stability test. Hyper PI with 32 M should give you a pretty good idea. If it gives any errors, your RAM is unstable so you either loosen timings, lower frequency or raise the DRAM voltage by 0.01 V.


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *logo*
> 
> I assume that your MoBo is from Gigabyte, you might have the same problem that i had
> enter bios and go to smart fan settlings
> set water pump to 30 % speed at least because setting it under 30 % doesn't make the pump spin (work) so there is no circulation of liquid
> same applies to fans, set them to at least 30 %
> 
> although that i have i5-7600k running at 4.4 ghz with a core volt 1.295 i think that your voltage of 1.325 is way too low for 5ghz overclock since i needed at least
> 1,375 v to run intel benchmark successfully, and even at 1,375 v x5ghz my core temp never overpass 70 degrees with Akasa venom a20 liquid cooling solution


I am using a different mobo: Asus z270-a Prime.
When I run the tests I set the fans to full.

Don't know about the voltages you are telling me. I followed the ROG Kaby Lake overclock guide. It was stable with RealBench: both benchmark as stress test for at least 8hours.


----------



## dlss

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *logo*
> 
> I didn't know that x42 was default
> My MoBo (gigabyte ga z270x gaming k5) did set the cache multi at x38. Going too try with x42 later and post the results
> I have though that x38 cache multi is default for i5-7600k since my MoBo set it default to x38, should i change it to x42 ?


Well, you didn't mention you have i5-7600K so I wrongly assumed you have an i7-7700K.
Yeah, 38x is the stock cache speed for that CPU.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> I was able to run an 8 hour RealBench - Benchmark, by switching LLC -> 5 (used to be auto).
> When running the RealBench - Benchmark for 8 hours, the temperature sometimes hit 92 degrees. *After I installed my GFX and ran a new benchmark it went up within minutes*..
> 
> I am looking for options to reduce the core temps while keeping the CPU at 5GHz.
> Would it make a difference to use AXV off set? Or disable C status, intel Step stepping?
> 
> Any suggestions are most welcome


The RealBench stress test also stresses the graphics card, so I think what you are seeing is the CPU cooler sucking in the heated exhaust of the GPU and raising core temps. Apart from lowering what RAM related voltages that you can, which would certainly help, you probably want to look into you case fan setup to try and keep the air going into your CPU cooler as cool as possible.


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> AVX offset should help indirectly by allowing to lower the Vcore while remaining stable resulting in lower temps. RAM voltage does heavily influence CPU temps. Between 1.2 V and 1.35 V there could be 5-10 degrees.


I am new to RAM tweaking, but would that be enough? Enough temperature drop and no throttling.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> So try to go with 1.2 V and set RAM frequency and timings to be stable. Try at 1.2V at 2800 MHz with same timings, if it fails to post loosen the timings by 1. Repeat until you manage to POST then do a RAM stability test. Hyper PI with 32 M should give you a pretty good idea. If it gives any errors, your RAM is unstable so you either loosen timings, lower frequency or raise the DRAM voltage by 0.01 V.


So I I would summary:
AVX
1) configure AVX offset 2
2) run tests

Memory :
1) Leave frequency (3000Mhz) and timings.
2) set voltage to 1.2V
3) No boot = loosen timings
(*what does this mean?*)
4) Boot = Run Hyper Pi
5) unstable: loosen timings, lower frequency (not preferred by me) or raise DRAM voltage.
*
- when tuning timing, frequency and DRAM voltage: in what order should you start tweaking?
- Increasing DRAM voltage means more heat. Does this also automatically increase the CPU SA and CPU VCCIO? And do they generate heat?*

Like I said I am new to RAM tweaking. I have a Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000Mhz kit.


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> The RealBench stress test also stresses the graphics card, so I think what you are seeing is the CPU cooler sucking in the heated exhaust of the GPU and raising core temps. Apart from lowering what RAM related voltages that you can, which would certainly help, you probably want to look into you case fan setup to try and keep the air going into your CPU cooler as cool as possible.


I have a AIO: Masterliquid Pro 280. The double fans (140mm) are placed at the front. And a 120mm fan at the back. The way I see it, the CPU gets fresh air from out side. De GFX gets air through the AIO fans.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> I am new to RAM tweaking, but would that be enough? Enough temperature drop and no throttling.


If you just go with 1.2 V for RAM and leave every other RAM settings as is, probably won't be stable. Regarding temps, any little helps if you want to stay below 80 degrees.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> So I I would summary:
> AVX
> 1) configure AVX offset 2
> 2) run tests


You missed a step:
0) Lower Vcore a bit, let's say by 0.01 V and if stable, lower it more

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> Memory :
> 1) Leave frequency (3000Mhz) and timings.
> 2) set voltage to 1.2V
> 3) No boot = loosen timings
> (*what does this mean?*)
> 4) Boot = Run Hyper Pi
> 5) unstable: loosen timings, lower frequency (not preferred by me) or raise DRAM voltage.
> *
> - when tuning timing, frequency and DRAM voltage: in what order should you start tweaking?
> - Increasing DRAM voltage means more heat. Does this also automatically increase the CPU SA and CPU VCCIO? And do they generate heat?*
> 
> Like I said I am new to RAM tweaking. I have a Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3000Mhz kit.


You wrote you have Ram Speed: 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35 @ 1.3530V. 15-17-17-35 are the timings: CAS, tRCD, tRP, tRAS. You don't have to fully understand them, what's important is lower numbers mean lower latency, faster speed but require more voltage. Bigger numbers, higher latency, lower required voltage.

So:
3) Increase timings to 16-18-18-36 or higher until it boots at least. Won't mean it's stable, but it's at the margin of stability.
5) You need to prefer it if you want to lower temps. Loosening timings has pretty much the same effect as lowering RAM frequency. Not exactly but from a beginners perspective it is, you won't be able to tell a difference and between 1 step in timings or frequency there's a really small, almost unmeasurable difference (in heavy RAM dependent games maybe 1-3 FPS, margin of error).

Here's a good study about the relationship between RAM frequency, timings and voltages required for stability: http://hw-db.com/memory/2768/g-skill-f4-3200c16d-8gvk-review/2. The same principle applies to every RAM just with different values.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> I have a AIO: Masterliquid Pro 280. The double fans (140mm) are placed at the front. And a 120mm fan at the back. The way I see it, the CPU gets fresh air from out side. De GFX gets air through the AIO fans.


Yup, sorry. The way you worded it made it sound like your temps went up after you installed a new GPU to me.


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> Yup, sorry. The way you worded it made it sound like your temps went up after you installed a new GPU to me.


Ah no worries, English isn't my native language


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> Ah no worries, English isn't my native language


Youre doing just fine.


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> If you just go with 1.2 V for RAM and leave every other RAM settings as is, probably won't be stable. Regarding temps, any little helps if you want to stay below 80 degrees.


Before I read your reply, I did go for a DRAM voltage drop only. I able to set it to 1.20V. The computer booted and HyperPi finished it's test (32M, priority: normal, processors 8) in 9m33s.
The CPU temperature was 83 degrees at maximum. It was still running at 5GHz without AVX offset.
I am gonna run some new RealBench tests, if there is a temp drop...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> You missed a step:
> 0) Lower Vcore a bit, let's say by 0.01 V and if stable, lower it more
> You wrote you have Ram Speed: 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35 @ 1.3530V. 15-17-17-35 are the timings: CAS, tRCD, tRP, tRAS. You don't have to fully understand them, what's important is lower numbers mean lower latency, faster speed but require more voltage. Bigger numbers, higher latency, lower required voltage.


Can you explain when it's the fist step and not the last one?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> So:
> 3) Increase timings to 16-18-18-36 or higher until it boots at least. Won't mean it's stable, but it's at the margin of stability.
> 5) You need to prefer it if you want to lower temps. Loosening timings has pretty much the same effect as lowering RAM frequency. Not exactly but from a beginners perspective it is, you won't be able to tell a difference and between 1 step in timings or frequency there's a really small, almost unmeasurable difference (in heavy RAM dependent games maybe 1-3 FPS, margin of error).
> 
> Here's a good study about the relationship between RAM frequency, timings and voltages required for stability: http://hw-db.com/memory/2768/g-skill-f4-3200c16d-8gvk-review/2. The same principle applies to every RAM just with different values.


Is it save to say that the RAM is stable when Hyper Pi completed the test?
I am gonna dig into that link, anyway









Thanks for helping out!


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> ...
> To be charted in the main chart, you must fulfill one of the following requirements:
> ...
> OCCT 4.4.1 1 hour


Is any NEWER version of OCCT acceptable? It appears that only 4.5 can be downloaded from OCCT's website. Also, which test mode? (small or large set) (I'm still waiting for them to send me a work-around for non-commercial use on a windows domain, but once they do, I hope to be submitting a 5Ghz @ < 1.3v result.)


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> Before I read your reply, I did go for a DRAM voltage drop only. I able to set it to 1.20V. The computer booted and HyperPi finished it's test (32M, priority: normal, processors 8) in 9m33s.
> The CPU temperature was 83 degrees at maximum. It was still running at 5GHz without AVX offset.
> I am gonna run some new RealBench tests, if there is a temp drop...
> Can you explain when it's the fist step and not the last one?
> Is it save to say that the RAM is stable when Hyper Pi completed the test?
> I am gonna dig into that link, anyway
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for helping out!


I might have forgotten to tell you not to use XMP profiles. If you did set it, do a BIOS reset and set your RAM manually. XMP is basically auto OC so I don't recommend it.
If you apply AVX offset, you can combine it with a Vcore reduction. If you lower one there's sense in lowering the other one as well.

Hyper Pi is not 100% but a fast way to detect instability. If you want to be sure, you run MemTest86 as it bypasses the OS. It takes time however so do it overnight.

Btw I found out the hard way after many RB crashes (LuxMark GPU test) that the cause was MSI Afterburner. After I disabled to autostart with Windows, I could lower my Vcore more and still pass a 30 min test. Before that it was crashing randomly between 3-30 minutes. The explanation is that it makes some API calls and that can cause instability.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> Before I read your reply, I did go for a DRAM voltage drop only. I able to set it to 1.20V. The computer booted and HyperPi finished it's test (32M, priority: normal, processors 8) in 9m33s.
> The CPU temperature was 83 degrees at maximum. It was still running at 5GHz without AVX offset.
> I am gonna run some new RealBench tests, if there is a temp drop...
> Can you explain when it's the fist step and not the last one?
> Is it save to say that the RAM is stable when Hyper Pi completed the test?
> I am gonna dig into that link, anyway
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for helping out![/quote
> 
> I might have forgotten to tell you not to use XMP profiles. If you did set it, do a BIOS reset and set your RAM manually. XMP is basically auto OC so I don't recommend it.
> If you apply AVX offset, you can combine it with a Vcore reduction. If you lower one there's sense in lowering the other one as well.
> 
> *Hyper Pi is not 100% but a fast way to detect instability. If you want to be sure, you run MemTest86 as it bypasses the OS. It takes time however so do it overnight.*
> 
> Btw I found out the hard way after many RB crashes (LuxMark GPU test) that the cause was MSI Afterburner. After I disabled to autostart with Windows, I could lower my Vcore more and still pass a 30 min test. Before that it was crashing randomly between 3-30 minutes. The explanation is that it makes some API calls and that can cause instability.
> 
> 
> 
> Not trying to be an ass by correcting you, just that Memtest86 actually isnt very good for detecting a bad RAM OC, it is very good at testing if the RAM is faulty. If you check out the Asus guide, its recommended to use HCI Memtest for OC stability. You need to run as many instances as you have threads on the CPU with 90% of your RAM divided between them.
> 
> As Ive understood it, the fact that Windows is is reserving some of the RAM doesnt matter, running HCI Memtest to 500% should mean your good to go. I have previously used 32M Hyper Pi and before that Memtest86 myself until I heard about HCI Memtest, and its worked very well for me this time around.
Click to expand...


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dlss*
> 
> Well, you didn't mention you have i5-7600K so I wrongly assumed you have an i7-7700K.
> Yeah, 38x is the stock cache speed for that CPU.


What is stock cache for i7 6700k?


----------



## TomcatV

If you guys are going to manually overclock, or in Xperimental's case underclock your ram, you should thoroughly understand the "OP" in *This Thread* ... everything you need to know is in the OP and there are very knowledgeable people to help out if you don't repeat questions that are answered in the OP









IMHO chasing a CPU's max clocks/lowest temps, by tinkering with Dram voltage, and lower clocks without thoroughly understanding ram over/under clocking is going deep down the rabbit hole until you've exhausted the time tested usual avenues of max case airflow/cooling ... upgrading your CPU cooling solution, or especially in the case of Kaby Lake a "De-Lid" ... my 2 cents, there was some dicey info going on in the preceding pages until Slink3Slyde cleared some of it up


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I might have forgotten to tell you not to use XMP profiles. If you did set it, do a BIOS reset and set your RAM manually. XMP is basically auto OC so I don't recommend it.


Argg, although you make sense it's hard to reset as the system is running under 80 degrees in RAM tests..








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> If you apply AVX offset, you can combine it with a Vcore reduction. If you lower one there's sense in lowering the other one as well.


What's the heat reduction of this setting, you recon?

BIOS settings with no AVX
Vcore 1.325V @ 5GHz
Vcore 1.300V @ 4.9GHz


----------



## Jpmboy

TIM comparo: https://play3r.net/reviews/cooling/thermal-paste-comparison-2017-what-is-the-best-thermal-paste-2017/


----------



## Xperimental

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> TIM comparo: https://play3r.net/reviews/cooling/thermal-paste-comparison-2017-what-is-the-best-thermal-paste-2017/


Already using Cool laboratory liquid ultra.


----------



## MaKeN

Guys sry for an off topic, any of you run/know how to use nzxt cam software on windows 10 tablet to show my pc temps istead of tablets temps? Nzxt cam softweare seams to detect the tablet as a pc and not as a tablet.
I got no problems with my iphone monitoring temps from pc but with win10 tablet i kinda cant find a easy way .
Thx


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> If you guys are going to manually overclock, or in Xperimental's case underclock your ram, you should thoroughly understand the "OP" in *This Thread* ... everything you need to know is in the OP and there are very knowledgeable people to help out if you don't repeat questions that are answered in the OP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMHO chasing a CPU's max clocks/lowest temps, by tinkering with Dram voltage, and lower clocks without thoroughly understanding ram over/under clocking is going deep down the rabbit hole until you've exhausted the time tested usual avenues of max case airflow/cooling ... upgrading your CPU cooling solution, or especially in the case of Kaby Lake a "De-Lid" ... my 2 cents, there was some dicey info going on in the preceding pages until Slink3Slyde cleared some of it up


It's not underclocking. Basically everything above the standard 2133 MHz is overclock. A RAM with an advertised speed means it was tested and capable of running on that speed. Deviating from that is not harmful at all but can be helpful. Upgrading cooling solutions is not cheap, delidding voids warranty and not everybody prefers it (I'm still undecided) while playing with RAM voltage is a pretty much free and won't hurt overall system performance that much or at all in certain conditions. I'm not saying I'm an expert in the topic, I did say everything from my personal experience. Sorry if it was misleading or complete bull****.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xperimental*
> 
> Argg, although you make sense it's hard to reset as the system is running under 80 degrees in RAM tests..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's the heat reduction of this setting, you recon?
> 
> BIOS settings with no AVX
> Vcore 1.325V @ 5GHz
> Vcore 1.300V @ 4.9GHz


No clue but in my case I see around 2-3 degrees between 0.016 V steps in Vcore. Don't rely on BIOS settings, what matters is the Vcore under load, that's when Vdroop (or Vboost) kicks in mostly. Probably around 4-6 degrees but that's just a wild guess. Don't take my word on it, test it with fixed fan speeds under the same (or at least similar) conditions.


----------



## Xperimental

@TomcatV Thanks for mentioning that thread, I will look into that as well. It is alot of effort for a few degrees less, but I don't mind.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> It's not underclocking. Basically everything above the standard 2133 MHz is overclock. A RAM with an advertised speed means it was tested and capable of running on that speed. Deviating from that is not harmful at all but can be helpful. Upgrading cooling solutions is not cheap, delidding voids warranty and not everybody prefers it (I'm still undecided) while playing with RAM voltage is a pretty much free and won't hurt overall system performance that much or at all in certain conditions. I'm not saying I'm an expert in the topic, I did say everything from my personal experience. Sorry if it was misleading or complete bull****.


I agree. I do not prefer delidding either; without the proper tools and experience it's risky and I don't want to void the warrenty (yet). I rather upgrade cooling solutions. Speaking of which, what cooling solution shuld replace my AIO CoolerMaster MasterLiqued Pro 280 with?
Besides the way I see it, it gives fast results without understanding OC better.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> No clue but in my case I see around 2-3 degrees between 0.016 V steps in Vcore. Don't rely on BIOS settings, what matters is the Vcore under load, that's when Vdroop (or Vboost) kicks in mostly. Probably around 4-6 degrees but that's just a wild guess. Don't take my word on it, test it with fixed fan speeds under the same (or at least similar) conditions.


I am using the same fixed fanspeeds in all the tests, they are at full 24/7. I will get back when I have done some new testing.

Cheers!


----------



## Spectryx

Hello!
New to this forum and overclocking in general, but i just got my 7600k and i've been experimenting with some OC and i have som questions i hope you guys could help me with!









I'm going to run longer stress-tests once i find the lowest Vcore to pass 15mins of testing, but what are your opinions on prime95 - should i be worried about not passing it? I can pass 30mins of x264 and Realbench, but i cant pass prime95. My goal is a stable clock for gaming and daily use with ok temps.

Current setting:
Vcore 1.35 @ 5ghz
Realbench temp: Max 75c (average 65c)
Idle temp: 26c
Cache: Auto (for now)
DRAM: Auto (for now)

Setup:
i5 7600K
Asus z270h Strix
Corsair H75i
Corsair Vengeance LPX 16gb 3000mhz


----------



## dirtyred

CPU-Z Validation: https://valid.x86.fr/mr1viy

Username: dirtyred
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 48
Core Frequency: 4800
Cache Frequency: 42
Vcore in UEFI: 1.25 (manual/static)
Vcore: 1.25 V (mostly 1.248, occasional spikes to 1.264)
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Phanteks PH-TC14PE (mostly running below 1000 RPM for low noise)
Stability Test: RealBench 2.54 8 hours

Batch Number: L640G413 Malaysia
Ram Speed: 3000 16-16-16-28-2T
Ram Voltage: 1.2 V
VCCIO:
VCCSA:
Motherboard:Z270 Asus Prime Z270-K (BIOS 0610)
LLC Setting: LLC Level 6
Misc Comments:
BCLK Spread Spectrum: Disabled
CPU SVID Support: Disabled
CPU Current Capability: 120%
CPU Power Phase Control: Extreme
SpeedStep: Disabled
Long Duration Package Power Limit: 4095
Package Power Time Window: 127
Short Duration Package Power Limit: 4095
IA AC Load Line: 0.01
IA DC Load Line: 0.01

Fractal Design Define C case with stock coolers (Dynamic X2 GP-12) as intake/outtake, 2 x Arctic F12 fans (1 intake, 1 on CPU cooler block's front, because 140 mm fans won't fit)

Fans are configured to be as silent as possible while keeping temperatures below 80 °C, only peaking above for 1-2 seconds when the fans can't spin up fast enough. From 5 meters across the room is barely audible.


----------



## budgy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Firstly I would suggest ditching the profiles as they in best case only overshoot everything....like msi 1 button 5.0 GHz one putting the CPU at 1.5v.
> Secondly go trough @Jpmboy signature overclocking guide (asus website)...
> For temps, go with Core Temp or Hwinfo...ai suite is really for automated / beginner stuff.. for anything more you ditch ai suite / key bot and other software like that...
> Also if the difference in temps keeps on going try and check your PLL voltage in Bios...A value of 1.1 - 1.2 should be fine...
> Report back once you do this and will see where to go from there. What freq is your ram at ? XMP ON ? Try putting XMP off and set freq manually.
> 
> Hope it helps..


Sorry for the delay in getting back to this... the way I do stability tests, 12hrs, and changing core v, increments as low 0.005v, makes it a very slow process. Anyways, so I ditched the auto settings and went full manual. My ram's only 2400 but I went and set that all manually. In the end, because of temperatures in HWInfo, I could still only really get 4.5GHz at 1.295v in BIOS. I re-did the cooler multiple times and unfortunately there were no real change in temps - I think my CPU's bit of an overclocking potato and it'd be too time consuming, expensive, and frustrating to push for much more - so I was going to stay there.

However, due to coil whine issues with the Asus board - I wasn't satisfied with Asus' reply asking me to test a bunch of impractical things - I've now switched back to Gigabyte and a Gaming 7 board. Straight away I've been able to get 4.6GHz with 1.26v, although it runs a little hot with temps spiking at around 85c in OCCT - the auto 4.6GHz setting was oddly unstable in OCCT and unfortunately I didn't make note of what the core v was. Testing with lower voltages, it can boot at 1.2v but is not stable - OCCT errors very quickly.

So far, at 4.6GHz, I've achieved 12hrs stable at 1.245v with max spike of 85c in OCCT and an average of 70c - I can live with this. The only problem I have at the moment is the voltage according to CPU-Z does not drop below 1.248v even at idle.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *budgy*
> 
> Sorry for the delay in getting back to this... the way I do stability tests, 12hrs, and changing core v, increments as low 0.005v, makes it a very slow process. Anyways, so I ditched the auto settings and went full manual. My ram's only 2400 but I went and set that all manually. In the end, because of temperatures in HWInfo, I could still only really get 4.5GHz at 1.295v in BIOS. I re-did the cooler multiple times and unfortunately there were no real change in temps - I think my CPU's bit of an overclocking potato and it'd be too time consuming, expensive, and frustrating to push for much more - so I was going to stay there.
> 
> However, due to coil whine issues with the Asus board - I wasn't satisfied with Asus' reply asking me to test a bunch of impractical things - I've now switched back to Gigabyte and a Gaming 7 board. Straight away I've been able to get 4.6GHz with 1.26v, although it runs a little hot with temps spiking at around 85c in OCCT - the auto 4.6GHz setting was oddly unstable in OCCT and unfortunately I didn't make note of what the core v was. Testing with lower voltages, it can boot at 1.2v but is not stable - OCCT errors very quickly.
> 
> So far, at 4.6GHz, I've achieved 12hrs stable at 1.245v with max spike of 85c in OCCT and an average of 70c - I can live with this. The only problem I have at the moment is the voltage according to CPU-Z does not drop below 1.248v even at idle.


Make sure you have sufficient airflow to supply fresh cool air for your CPU. I had issues with adaptive voltage, 1.28 V not being enough for 4.8 GHz. I switched to manual 1.25 V with an LLC level 6 (7 being the highest) giving me really stable voltage of 1.248 V (occasional spikes to 1.264 V) and now I passed RB 8 hours. Check my previous post for details. Also, MSI Afterburner was causing alot of instability so I disabled it.

I thought that my chip is potato as well but managed to stabilize it on a relatively low voltage.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *budgy*


Hi there,

If you want to reduce the stress testing time use some other test program.
As @dirtyred mentioned 8h of RB stress test is a very good validation of day to day 100% stable. (set on the stress tab the amount of ram you have and if you have problems with GPU heating or an old one you can put luxmark on pause....luxmark is a program that will open once you start the stress test and "stresses" the graphics side of the PC)
Or...you can shorten the period even greater by running Prime95 for 1 hour (same result as OCCT 10+ h or RB - 8h). Check the first page of this thread to see what version to use.
For you'r clock to go down and up (EX. 4.500 under load ...800 idle) and for the voltages to scale with the frequency of the CPU you need to enable Intel speed-shift, speed-step etc (Basically every single power saving option in bios)


----------



## theGucky

My freshly delidded i7-7700k is awesome Tempwise.
(Delidding lowered my Temps by 10-15°C on 4.5GHz and 20-30°C on 5GHz)
I use an be Quiet! Silent Loop 280 with stock 140mm Pure Wing 2 Fans.
And an ASUS MAXIMUS IX HERO.
With 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 3200MHz XMP.

Prime 95v291 torture @4.5GHz 1.25V (LLC shows only 1.228V) get it only to 55-56°C.

@5GHz @1.4V (LLC @ 1.428V)(less then that 1.4 and Prime crashes after 30min -.- ) it isnt that much higher with 65-66°C.

But the CPU booted with less then 1.35V @5GHz, still I was able to feel the unstable CPU.
And with Prime 95 AVX2 enabled my CPU shows problems if clocked 4800 or higher. (1 or more Threads show 0% usage. 3 Threads @5GHz)

I use Thermal Grizzlys Conductonaut on the DIE and Kryonaut on the IHS.

Battlefield 1 on Ultra 4k gets the CPU only to 51-52°C on 4.5GHz/1.25V.

I'm using Adaptive Mode with Auto Offset and IA AC/DC Load Line: 0.01
When I put in 1.2V it automaticly uses 1.25V.
On any other try at 1.25V+ it only increases the Offset automaticly by 0.005, but on 1.2V it offsets 0.05V....

All in all im happy with my CPU @ 4.5GHz 1.25V. It rarely gets over 50°C. And It has enough power for Ultra Gaming and surfing/movies at the same time.
Outside of Prime 95 the CPU never crashed.


----------



## budgy

I'm not at my system right now so I'm just theorizing and planning a course of action when I return home and my next step(s) is to try Prime95, both latest with AVX and older non AVX, for a couple of hours and RB for a couple of hours as well - probably overkill but I want to be sure. I did use LinX, can't remember settings, and it passed, but was quite hot. I will try IBT, Linpack, and x264 as well. Annoyingly at 1.24v I got approx 10hrs out of OCCT before it error-ed.

I need to revisit all the bios settings but I'm pretty sure all the power saving options are on, the frequency does drop to 800, HWInfo does report a VID drop though but for some reason CPU-Z isn't reporting a corresponding core voltage drop.

I've got a Phanteks P400S so airflow options are a bit limited but I'll see what I can do. I'm trying to use a positive pressure configuration to minimize dust and I'll try to make a duct for the DH-15S.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Hi there,
> 
> If you want to reduce the stress testing time use some other test program.
> As @dirtyred mentioned 8h of RB stress test is a very good validation of day to day 100% stable. (set on the stress tab the amount of ram you have and if you have problems with GPU heating or an old one you can put luxmark on pause....luxmark is a program that will open once you start the stress test and "stresses" the graphics side of the PC)
> Or...you can shorten the period even greater by running Prime95 for 1 hour (same result as OCCT 10+ h or RB - 8h). Check the first page of this thread to see what version to use.
> For you'r clock to go down and up (EX. 4.500 under load ...800 idle) and for the voltages to scale with the frequency of the CPU you need to enable Intel speed-shift, speed-step etc (Basically every single power saving option in bios)


In my case it seems that adaptive voltage and power saving features were causing instability but don't know exactly which part of it as I disabled all of them at once. Isn't much of an issue, because while idle the CPU is still power efficient, consuming around 22 W. Will test it again with some power saving features enabled one by one and see where it crashes. Prime95 is an option to stress test but puts a pretty much unrealistic high load on the CPU, above 97 W while RB is mostly below 80 W. That's a huge difference and no real life scenario will consume that much power (at least in my case), not even 3d rendering with 3ds Max (consumes even less and generates less heat then RB).


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*


Agree...but for some, time is very precious and for me personally I would run Prime 95 for 1h any-day instead of a 8h long RB run...just to come back at the PC X hours later and find an error.
It puts an exaggerated amount of workload on the CPU which is unrealistic...but after an hour you can be confident in it being 100% stable (usually....)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> In my case it seems that adaptive voltage and power saving features were causing instability but don't know exactly which part of it as I disabled all of them at once. Isn't much of an issue, because while idle the CPU is still power efficient, consuming around 22 W. Will test it again with some power saving features enabled one by one and see where it crashes. Prime95 is an option to stress test but puts a pretty much unrealistic high load on the CPU, above 97 W while RB is mostly below 80 W. That's a huge difference and no real life scenario will consume that much power (at least in my case), not even 3d rendering with 3ds Max (consumes even less and generates less heat then RB).


In most cases when you set Adaptive the calibration from fixed Vcore is different, so check what the Vcore is under stress test load and compare to fixed Vcore with the same stress test.


----------



## budgy

22W's insane compared to mine! With my first Gigabyte MB I was lucky to get 55W and my current setup is around 70W! Stress testing (no GPU testing) takes the power draw up to 150W.

I'll fill out my specs properly later... but I am running a 7600K, GA-Z270X-Gaming 7, 32GB RAM, MSI GTX 1060 X3, TBS TV Card, 2x Crucial SSDs, 3x 3.5 HDDs, Focusrite USB sound card, 4x case fans, Phanteks P400S (with LEDs) on.

I don't have the crappy MSI software installed. I found it to use something like 3% of CPU time just to change the colours of the onboard LEDs!


----------



## wingman99

What is the stock cache speed of i7 6700k?


----------



## budgy

Not sure about idle, but it's 3.8GHz at load.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> In most cases when you set Adaptive the calibration from fixed Vcore is different, so check what the Vcore is under stress test load and compare to fixed Vcore with the same stress test.


I know, but I was talking about voltage readings. Constant 1.248 V (BIOS 1.25 V) is stable while adaptive 1.28 V (BIOS 1.3 V) is unstable. I have raise the voltage to 1.31 - 1.32 V in BIOS (to get 1.296 V) to be somewhat stable (did not test it 8 hours as temperatures were too high).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *budgy*
> 
> 22W's insane compared to mine! With my first Gigabyte MB I was lucky to get 55W and my current setup is around 70W! Stress testing (no GPU testing) takes the power draw up to 150W.


Right now my CPU Package power is 23 W, IA Cores is 12 W with all power savings disabled.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I know, but I was talking about voltage readings. Constant 1.248 V (BIOS 1.25 V) is stable while adaptive 1.28 V (BIOS 1.3 V) is unstable. I have raise the voltage to 1.31 - 1.32 V in BIOS (to get 1.296 V) to be somewhat stable (did not test it 8 hours as temperatures were too high).
> Right now my CPU Package power is 23 W, IA Cores is 12 W with all power savings disabled.


Something is wrong there with your LLC..
What i Get in OS for me is V Bios + LLC but from what i see ...what you set in bios shows in OS as V Bios - LLC ?!
I have 1.365 Bios + LLC 5 = OS 1.392....


----------



## budgy

CPU package, that sits better now. Mine's around there as well. Thought you meant system power draw!


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Something is wrong there with your LLC..
> What i Get in OS for me is V Bios + LLC but from what i see ...what you set in bios shows in OS as V Bios - LLC ?!
> I have 1.365 Bios + LLC 5 = OS 1.392....


I think you're not fully understanding LLC (just a feeling, no disrespect intended). Between level 1-5 the voltage usually drops under load, level 4 giving the closest when using adaptive mode while level 5-6 when using constant voltage mode. When using adaptive, level 5-7 will result in Vboost (just like in your case which I don't prefer) while using constant voltage, only level 7 results in Vboost.

From constant voltage 1.25 V (stable for 8h RB) I switched back to adaptive only enabling SpeedStep and SVID support, and changing from LLC level 6 to 4, leaving the rest of the settings the same.

I don't think there's anything wrong with my LLC settings. I'm getting the same voltage as I'm setting. Right now in BIOS I have 1.25 V, running RB I'm getting 1.248 V (HWiNFO reading) with some occasional peaks to 1.264 V. LLC is set to level 4 and gives me almost perfect voltage stability. I did set an offset of 0.02 V (turbo at 1.23 V) just to be sure my voltage never drops below the threshold, giving a total of 1.25 V but under load less then 100% it should be still stable.

I think the voltage change wasn't always supplying enough voltage and when there was a fluctuation of load and voltage requirement, it crashed.

Right now I've been running RB for 21 minutes and still no crash which is promising. Let's see if it passes a 30 min crash because previously it did crash around 10-20 minutes.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> while adaptive 1.28 V (BIOS 1.3 V) is unstable.


I was refereeing to this line, I never agreed on setting more in Bios and having less in OS..
But I do understand now what you want to say..


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I was refereeing to this line, I never agreed on setting more in Bios and having less in OS..
> But I do understand now what you want to say..


Actually I do prefer to have less in OS then in BIOS (but as close as possible to the set value) because that way I know that my voltage will never be higher then I've set and raising temperatures that I did not expect or even worse, damaging the CPU (unlikely since it would hit only 1.328 V max but still). I prefer to have more control this way and be on the safe side. With constant and now with adaptive voltage I have 1.25 V set, under load is 1.248 V (pretty damn close) and some peaks to 1.264 V giving an average of 1.249 - 1.25 V.

Anyways, the voltage readings are never to be trusted 100% (according to Asus and because of my experience).

See:


Passed 30 minutes of RB. Maybe there wasn't anything wrong with my previous adaptive voltage attempts because only LuxMark was crashing and I suspected MSI Afterburner to be the cause. Since Afterburner is not running RB (LuxMark) is not crashing wether I use adaptive or constant voltage. Will have to do a longer test with adaptive mode as well but so far this is promising. And even if adaptive fails, I can always go back to my stable constant mode.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*


It is all about preferences, for me it works better the other way round...
Its 1.365 Bios....1.376 light loads....1.392 Avx or heavy loads and at idle the proc goes down to 800 MHz / 1.000 V ( I could play with standby V more and lower this one but I have to redo all system in next days.....new U.2 nvme SSD ....new Water cooling ....new GPU....bla bla, so its start from scratch week for me)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I know, but I was talking about voltage readings. Constant 1.248 V (BIOS 1.25 V) is stable while adaptive 1.28 V (BIOS 1.3 V) is unstable. I have raise the voltage to 1.31 - 1.32 V in BIOS (to get 1.296 V) to be somewhat stable (did not test it 8 hours as temperatures were too high).
> Right now my CPU Package power is 23 W, IA Cores is 12 W with all power savings disabled.


Are you using Adaptive Additional Turbo mode CPU core voltage so it looks like this.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Spectryx*
> 
> Hello!
> New to this forum and overclocking in general, but i just got my 7600k and i've been experimenting with some OC and i have som questions i hope you guys could help me with!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going to run longer stress-tests once i find the lowest Vcore to pass 15mins of testing, but what are your opinions on prime95 - should i be worried about not passing it? I can pass 30mins of x264 and Realbench, but i cant pass prime95. My goal is a stable clock for gaming and daily use with ok temps.
> 
> Current setting:
> Vcore 1.35 @ 5ghz
> Realbench temp: Max 75c (average 65c)
> Idle temp: 26c
> Cache: Auto (for now)
> DRAM: Auto (for now)
> 
> Setup:
> i5 7600K
> Asus z270h Strix
> Corsair H75i
> Corsair Vengeance LPX 16gb 3000mhz


Welcome to the OCN forums. Personally I wouldn't be too worried about passing prime 95 if you are using your p.c for gaming and general use. In my experience passing 8 hours of realbench or an hour or 2 of OCCT has never resulted in a blue screen.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Are you using Adaptive Additional Turbo mode CPU core voltage so it looks like this.


Yes. Turbo set to 1.23 V, offset to 0.02 V (previously seemed to help stay stable for longer, not sure if still needed), total 1.25 V. Right now I think we can close this as RB passed 50 minutes and previously it would have crashed for sure. I think the issue was either MSI Afterburner (most probably because only LuxMark was crashing while running RB and Asus forum members also suspected the same thing) or I just needed to tweak some other settings as well (which might not even be needed if Afterburner was the sole cause).

Btw press F12 for screenshot in BIOS


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Yes. Turbo set to 1.23 V, offset to 0.02 V (previously seemed to help stay stable for longer, not sure if still needed), total 1.25 V. Right now I think we can close this as RB passed 50 minutes and previously it would have crashed for sure. I think the issue was either MSI Afterburner (most probably because only LuxMark was crashing while running RB and Asus forum members also suspected the same thing) or I just needed to tweak some other settings as well (which might not even be needed if Afterburner was the sole cause).
> 
> Btw press F12 for screenshot in BIOS


I would leave offset on Auto and just set Turbo mode CPU core voltage. It will then work with the same fixed voltage settings.


----------



## altoids18

Quick question for everyone:

I'll be delidding my 7700k tomorrow. I have some Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut. Can I use the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut between the die and IHS? Or do I HAVE to use a liquid metal type TIM?

Ideally I'd like to use the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut between the die and IHS as well as between the IHS and my cooler heatsink.

All indications seem to say that what I want to do isn't a problem but just triple checking.


----------



## BrainSplatter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> All indications seem to say that what I want to do isn't a problem but just triple checking.


That's no problem. Liquid metal would just perform better. And if u are ready for delidding using liquid metal would allow you to realize the full potential. I found it not as difficult to use as I expected.


----------



## dirtyred

I did switch from constant to adaptive voltage, the rest of the settings are mostly the same as here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/2220#post_26063089

Username: dirtyred
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 48
Core Frequency: 4800
Cache Frequency: 42
Vcore in UEFI: 1.23 (Turbo) + 0.02 (Offset) = 1.25 (adaptive)
Vcore: 1.253 V (mostly 1.248, occasional spikes to 1.264)
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Phanteks PH-TC14PE (mostly running below 1000 RPM for low noise)
Stability Test: RealBench 2.54 7 hours 15 minutes (sorry, had to stop it because of work, 8 h test passed previously with constant voltage, see previous submission)

Batch Number: L640G413 Malaysia
Ram Speed: 3000 16-16-16-28-2T
Ram Voltage: 1.2 V
VCCIO:
VCCSA:
Motherboard:Z270 Asus Prime Z270-K (BIOS 0610)
LLC Setting: LLC Level 4
Misc Comments:
BCLK Spread Spectrum: Disabled
CPU Current Capability: 120%
CPU Power Phase Control: Extreme
Long Duration Package Power Limit: 4095
Package Power Time Window: 127
Short Duration Package Power Limit: 4095
IA AC Load Line: 0.01
IA DC Load Line: 0.01

Fractal Design Define C case with stock coolers (Dynamic X2 GP-12) as intake/outtake, 2 x Arctic F12 fans (1 intake, 1 on CPU cooler block's front, because 140 mm fans won't fit)

Fans are configured to be as silent (mostly below 1000 RPM) as possible while keeping temperatures below 80 °C, only peaking above for 1-2 seconds when the fans can't spin up fast enough under load spike. From 5 meters across the room is barely audible.


----------



## SultanOfWalmart

Quick and dirty run. Will be working on lowering voltage and cranking uncore.

Username: SultanOfWalmart
CPU Model: i7-7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency: 5200
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore in UEFI: 1.375V (Adaptive)
Vcore in CPU-Z: 1.405V
FCLK: 1
Cooling Solution: De-lid Conductonaut, custom water loop.
Stability Test: RealBench 2.54 - Stress Test 8 hours, 16GB RAM

Batch Number: LG641G191 Malaysia
Ram Speed: 3200Mhz 14-14-14-34 @ 1.3530V
Ram Voltage: 1.3530V
VCCIO: 1.1250
VCCSA: 1.1250
Motherboard: Z270 Asus MAXIMUS HERO IV (BIOS 0906)
LLC Setting: 4

Misc Comments: no AXV offset used


----------



## MaKeN

Good one


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *altoids18*
> 
> Quick question for everyone:
> 
> I'll be delidding my 7700k tomorrow. I have some Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut. Can I use the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut between the die and IHS? Or do I HAVE to use a liquid metal type TIM?
> 
> Ideally I'd like to use the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut between the die and IHS as well as between the IHS and my cooler heatsink.
> 
> All indications seem to say that what I want to do isn't a problem but just triple checking.


no problem doing that, it just will not be as effective as a LM.


----------



## bfe_vern

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BrainSplatter*
> 
> That's no problem. Liquid metal would just perform better. And if u are ready for delidding using liquid metal would allow you to realize the full potential. I found it not as difficult to use as I expected.


I believe from what I've read is that Liquid Metal performs better some of the other TIM's is due to the possibility of a pump-out issue occurring. If you read post 249 of this article it explains it.


----------



## sdmf74

What version(s) of Prime95 are you guys testing with now? The ones listed in the first post seem to be for other operating systems so Im not sure which one to download. I havent used prime since Z97 and I just built my Kaby lake system and getting ready to overclock it.
Any info would be appreciated


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> What version(s) of Prime95 are you guys testing with now? The ones listed in the first post seem to be for other operating systems so Im not sure which one to download. I havent used prime since Z97 and I just built my Kaby lake system and getting ready to overclock it.
> Any info would be appreciated


Use Prime95 v26.6 or older. Works just fine under Win 10. Newer versions put unrealisticly high load on the CPU because of AVX support. Older versions don't have AVX support but even then the load is higher then in a typical scenario (98 W vs 75 W under RealBench). If you want to use newer versions, append the following parameters in the local.txt file located in the same folder as the app then launch Prime95.

Code:



Code:


CpuSupportsAVX=0
CpuSupportsAVX2=0
CpuSupportsFMA3=0


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Use Prime95 v26.6 or older. Works just fine under Win 10. Newer versions put unrealisticly high load on the CPU because of AVX support. Older versions don't have AVX support but even then the load is higher then in a typical scenario (98 W vs 75 W under RealBench). If you want to use newer versions, append the following parameters in the local.txt file located in the same folder as the app then launch Prime95.
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> CpuSupportsAVX=0
> CpuSupportsAVX2=0
> CpuSupportsFMA3=0


CpuSupportsAVX=0 will disable all 3.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> CpuSupportsAVX=0 will disable all 3.


Not sure about that. You could be right. Adding only CpuSupportsAVX=0 to the local.txt might have the same result as adding all 3 of them. AVX and AVX2 are somewhat different instruction sets. The FMA3 part might be completely unnecessary because it's part of the AVX instruction set so it should be disabled.

I'm just used to integrate all parameters to avoid possible issues (mostly because of JS/PHP programming and server configurations). For example if AVX2=0 but the app still tries to use FMA3 instructions (because it wasn't disabled specifically) that will give errors. I haven't tested Prime95 that much to know that for sure and haven't read the documentation either (is there any?!) but seems like it's working fine.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Not sure about that. You could be right. Adding only CpuSupportsAVX=0 to the local.txt might have the same result as adding all 3 of them. AVX and AVX2 are somewhat different instruction sets. The FMA3 part might be completely unnecessary because it's part of the AVX instruction set so it should be disabled.
> 
> I'm just used to integrate all parameters to avoid possible issues (mostly because of JS/PHP programming and server configurations). For example if AVX2=0 but the app still tries to use FMA3 instructions (because it wasn't disabled specifically) that will give errors. I haven't tested Prime95 that much to know that for sure and haven't read the documentation either (is there any?!) but seems like it's working fine.


Prime95 has documents in the folder and revisions on the web site. All you have to do on Intel is use CpuSupportsAVX=0 and then you can see it is running Pentium 4.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Not sure about that. You could be right. Adding only CpuSupportsAVX=0 to the local.txt might have the same result as adding all 3 of them. AVX and AVX2 are somewhat different instruction sets. The FMA3 part might be completely unnecessary because it's part of the AVX instruction set so it should be disabled.
> 
> I'm just used to integrate all parameters to avoid possible issues (mostly because of JS/PHP programming and server configurations). For example if AVX2=0 but the app still tries to use FMA3 instructions (because it wasn't disabled specifically) that will give errors. I haven't tested Prime95 that much to know that for sure and haven't read the documentation either (is there any?!) but seems like it's working fine.


it's not a problem to set the local.txt file with all three disabled, but afaik, disabling the lower bit extensions will disable all up to 256 bit (so AVX will disable FMA3 and AVX2 for p95). We'll see if this holds once 512 bit extensions come out with skylake-x.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Prime95 has documents in the folder and revisions on the web site. All you have to do on Intel is use CpuSupportsAVX=0 and then you can see it is running Pentium 4.


Sadly I couldn't find any detailed information about this in local files or the website.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's not a problem to set the local.txt file with all three disabled, but afaik, disabling the lower bit extensions will disable all up to 256 bit (so AVX will disable FMA3 and AVX2 for p95). We'll see if this holds once 512 bit extensions come out with skylake-x.


Xeon Phi supports AVX-512. Anyone?


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Use Prime95 v26.6 or older. Works just fine under Win 10. Newer versions put unrealisticly high load on the CPU because of AVX support. Older versions don't have AVX support but even then the load is higher then in a typical scenario (98 W vs 75 W under RealBench). If you want to use newer versions, append the following parameters in the local.txt file located in the same folder as the app then launch Prime95.
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> CpuSupportsAVX=0
> CpuSupportsAVX2=0
> CpuSupportsFMA3=0


I was asking cause the op states a requirement to be charted is to use either v28.7 for 1 hour or v27.9 for 3 hours but when you check the links those versions are for other OS's.
Excuse my ignorance but like I said I havent overclocked & tested with prime95 since I first bought my Devils Canyon I7 cpu. Just wanted to know if the requirements on page 1 were for the same versions listed still and why there is no windows download for those versions?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> I was asking cause the op states a requirement to be charted is to use either v28.7 for 1 hour or v27.9 for 3 hours but when you check the links those versions are for other OS's.
> Excuse my ignorance but like I said I havent overclocked & tested with prime95 since I first bought my Devils Canyon I7 cpu. Just wanted to know if the requirements on page 1 were for the same versions listed still and why there is no windows download for those versions?


Win 10 is backwards compatible. Don't worry, old versions will run just fine and it's not like Prime95 is a complicated software.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> I was asking cause the op states a requirement to be charted is to use either v28.7 for 1 hour or v27.9 for 3 hours but when you check the links those versions are for other OS's.
> Excuse my ignorance but like I said I havent overclocked & tested with prime95 since I first bought my Devils Canyon I7 cpu. Just wanted to know if the requirements on page 1 were for the same versions listed still and why there is no windows download for those versions?


better off using x264 (or x265 IMO) than p95 anyway. Or.. realbench. p95 is from the Jurassic period of cpu stress testing.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Sadly I couldn't find any detailed information about this in local files or the website.
> Xeon Phi supports AVX-512. Anyone?


the instructions are in the undoc.txt file.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> better off using x264 (or x265 IMO) than p95 anyway. Or.. realbench. p95 is from the Jurassic period of cpu stress testing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the instructions are in the undoc.txt file.


Yes, I've seen that but no detailed explanations given. That's not a well written documentation by any means.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Yes, I've seen that but no detailed explanations given. That's not a well written documentation by any means.


lol - detailed explanations and documentation? Not the planet I live on.


----------



## sdmf74

Thanks guys I was unaware the freebsd and mac os versions were compatible with windows. V26.6 is 32bit im assuming that doesnt matter either

Yes I do use Realbench and just downloaded a version of X264 modified for stability testing.

......Man ANOTHER Corsair K70 keyboard just now died on me out of the blue!!!!








And somehow it was making my pc do some crazy things cause it was still plugged in (even though its completely dead, no lights no response nothin). My audio went crazy, bios wouldnt respond, then was super slow to respond, had qcode 64 etc.
All seems ok since I unplugged it wth


----------



## lolhaxz

Username: lolhaxz
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 101.1MHz
Core Multiplier: 50x
Core Frequency: 5060MHz
Cache Multiplier: 47x
Cache Frequency: 4751MHz
AVX Multiplier: 49x
AVX Frequency: 4954MHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.350v + 0.027v Offset ( 1.377v )
Vcore: 1.344v-1.360v
FCLK: 1010
Cooling Solution: 2x 360mm EK Coolstream PE, Supremecy Evo Block, EK D5 Pump, 6x Be Quiet 120mm fans
Stability Test: Prime95 28.10, 1 hour non-AVX, 1 hour AVX

1 hour with 1 x AVX thread + 8 non-AVX (2 instances)

^ AVX + Non-AVX combo finds WHEA errors very quickly and will often disprove a overclock thought to be stable due to the constant frequency and VID switching.

Batch Number: L702D112 Malaysia
Ram Speed: 3774MHz 15-15-15-28-300-2T, 65535 TREFI (32GB Kit, F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR, 37ns, 54GB/sec)
Ram Voltage: 1.45 V (fine with the __minor__ risk associated)
VCCIO: 1.128v
VCCSA: 1.248v
Motherboard:Z270 Asus Z270E (BIOS 0906)
LLC Setting: LLC Level 5
Misc Comments:
BCLK Spread Spectrum: Disabled
CPU Current Capability: 120%
CPU Power Phase Control: Extreme
IA AC Load Line: 0.01
IA DC Load Line: 0.01

Cinebench R15: ~1124 / ~222

Non-AVX Prime95 run:
http://iforce.co.nz/i/1pwzhnkx.tfq.jpg

Cinebench R15:
http://iforce.co.nz/i/2wcxrjgv.4be.jpg

AIDA64:
http://iforce.co.nz/i/bw3wecp5.b2v.png

What I find interesting is how touchy stability can be, that Non-AVX is stable at 5.05GHz drooping right down to 1.28v - the only reason I am running a higher voltage is too be able to keep the AVX 1x ratio higher, the CPU will boot into Windows and run "stable" with everything I throw at it 5.15GHz @ 1.376v, however on a Prime95 AVX+non-AVX run I will get approximately 1x WHEA Cache error per hour, but no crashes or other issues (but 1 WHEA is too many for me) - I'm old school Prime95 stable, end of story.

Reading a lot of the posts on this thread seems quite evident there is a possibly alot of people running overclocks that I suspect are far from the peak of stability, ie. like above... but in reality, I suppose it would probably be absolutely fine if I closed my eyes and put my fingers in my ears.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolhaxz*
> 
> Username: lolhaxz
> CPU Model: 7700K
> Base Clock: 101.1MHz
> Core Multiplier: 50x
> Core Frequency: 5060MHz
> Cache Multiplier: 47x
> Cache Frequency: 4751MHz
> AVX Multiplier: 49x
> AVX Frequency: 4954MHz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.350v + 0.027v Offset ( 1.377v )
> Vcore: 1.344v-1.360v
> FCLK: 1010
> Cooling Solution: 2x 360mm EK Coolstream PE, Supremecy Evo Block, EK D5 Pump, 6x Be Quiet 120mm fans
> Stability Test: Prime95 28.10, 1 hour non-AVX, 1 hour AVX
> 
> 1 hour with 1 x AVX thread + 8 non-AVX (2 instances)
> 
> ^ AVX + Non-AVX combo finds WHEA errors very quickly and will often disprove a overclock thought to be stable due to the constant frequency and VID switching.
> 
> Batch Number: L702D112 Malaysia
> Ram Speed: 3774MHz 15-15-15-28-300-2T, 65535 TREFI (32GB Kit, F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR, 36.5ns, 54.5GB/sec)
> Ram Voltage: 1.45 V (fine with the __minor__ risk associated)
> VCCIO: 1.128v
> VCCSA: 1.248v
> Motherboard:Z270 Asus Z270E (BIOS 0906)
> LLC Setting: LLC Level 5
> Misc Comments:
> BCLK Spread Spectrum: Disabled
> CPU Current Capability: 120%
> CPU Power Phase Control: Extreme
> IA AC Load Line: 0.01
> IA DC Load Line: 0.01
> 
> Cinebench R15: ~1124 / ~222
> 
> Non-AVX Prime95 run:
> http://iforce.co.nz/i/1pwzhnkx.tfq.jpg
> 
> Cinebench R15:
> http://iforce.co.nz/i/2wcxrjgv.4be.jpg
> 
> What I find interesting is how touchy stability can be, that Non-AVX is stable at 5.05GHz drooping right down to 1.28v - the only reason I am running a higher voltage is too be able to keep the AVX 1x ratio higher, the CPU will boot into Windows and run "stable" with everything I throw at it 5.15GHz @ 1.376v, however on a Prime95 AVX+non-AVX run I will get approximately 1x WHEA Cache error per hour, but no crashes or other issues (but 1 WHEA is too many for me) - I'm old school Prime95 stable, end of story.
> 
> Reading a lot of the posts on this thread seems quite evident there is a lot of people running overclocks that I suspect are far from the peak of stability, ie. like above... but in reality, I suppose it would probably be absolutely fine if I closed my eyes and put my fingers in my ears.


So according to your logic none of the overclocks in the opening post are stable? After 1 hour of OCCT i have never had a bluescreen or had windows update fail due to windows being corrupted due to unstable overclock. Stability is highly subjective.


----------



## lolhaxz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> So according to your logic none of the overclocks in the opening post are stable? After 1 hour of OCCT i have never had a bluescreen or had windows update fail due to windows being corrupted due to unstable overclock. Stability is highly subjective.


Not at all - my point was they'll do another 200MHz inside that 99% stable phase and unless your careful about the test method [using multiple tools] it can be extremely easy to get a false positive on stability.

Whilst personally I'd disagree that stability is highly subjective [really, it either is or it isn't] the reality of the situation is that if it's "stable" for your needs then that is acceptable.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> So according to your logic none of the overclocks in the opening post are stable? After 1 hour of OCCT i have never had a bluescreen or had windows update fail due to windows being corrupted due to unstable overclock. Stability is highly subjective.


Indeed subjective. According to him more than 1 hour RealBench is unnecessary:
Quote:


> if you wanna raise the powerconsumption needlessly yeah, i dont think he will need serverlevel stability. Source: /r/overclocking


Bless him









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolhaxz*
> 
> Not at all - my point was they'll do another 200MHz inside that 99% stable phase and unless your careful about the test method [using multiple tools] it can be extremely easy to get a false positive on stability.
> 
> Whilst personally I'd disagree that stability is highly subjective [really, it either is or it isn't] the reality of the situation is that if it's "stable" for your needs then that is acceptable.


According to Prime95 1 hours is not enough. Your argument is invalid. Stability *is* subjective.
Quote:


> Q) How long should I run the torture test?
> 
> A) I recommend running it for somewhere between 6 and 24 hours.
> The program has been known to fail only after several hours and in
> some cases several weeks of operation. In most cases though, it will
> fail within a few minutes on a flaky machine.
> 
> Source: https://www.mersenne.org/download/stress.txt


----------



## lolhaxz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Indeed subjective. According to him more than 1 hour RealBench is unnecessary:
> Bless him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Prime95 1 hours is not enough. Your argument is invalid. Stability *is* subjective.


Not sure who him is? but OK.

My personal opinion on a topic that you deem so strongly to be subjective, is invalid - thanks for the chuckle, as you were.

Not sure that I claimed I was finished with my stability testing?

You can put your guns away, people are allowed opinions that differ from yours, the world will still continue to turn.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolhaxz*
> 
> Not sure who him is? but OK.
> 
> My personal opinion on a topic that you deem so strongly to be subjective, is invalid - thanks for the chuckle, as you were.
> 
> Not sure that I claimed I was finished with my stability testing?
> 
> You can put your guns away, people are allowed opinions that differ from yours, the world will still continue to turn.


Exactly. Don't disregard other people's stability testing methods just because you think something superior. While I know that Prime95 is one of the hardest test for the CPU, even the developer knows that 1 hour is not enough. So don't think that your 1 hour test of Prime95 is superior to others 8 hours of RealBench.

I've given that example because it's from today and shows how subjective this topic is to others. I'm not making fun of him but it makes me smile. From personal experience RB 1 hour is not as hard as Prime95 and it's not enough. But 8 hours should give a pretty decent idea if it's stable or not. Also, RB is much more realistic because of fluctuating load which can cause Vcore to fluctuate even more and making the system hang up or crash.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Exactly. Don't disregard other people's stability testing methods just because you think something superior. While I know that Prime95 is one of the hardest test for the CPU, even the developer knows that 1 hour is not enough. So don't think that your 1 hour test of Prime95 is superior to others 8 hours of RealBench.
> 
> I've given that example because it's from today and shows how subjective this topic is to others. I'm not making fun of him but it makes me smile. From personal experience RB 1 hour is not as hard as Prime95 and it's not enough. But 8 hours should give a pretty decent idea if it's stable or not. Also, RB is much more realistic because of fluctuating load which can cause Vcore to fluctuate even more and making the system hang up or crash.


So if Im "him" where did I state 1 hour of realbench? Lol


----------



## dirtyred

I did not say that you are the guy from reddit or that you stated 1 hour of RB. Maybe I wasn't clear enough or you misunderstood me. Sorry for that, english isn't my first language. It was just an example from another source to show the subjectivity of this topic. I'm sorry if I upset you or I was disrespectful. Wasn't my intention.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I did not say that you are the guy from reddit or that you stated 1 hour of RB. Maybe I wasn't clear enough or you misunderstood me. Sorry for that, english isn't my first language. It was just an example from another source to show the subjectivity of this topic. I'm sorry if I upset you or I was disrespectful. Wasn't my intention.


No worries not upset or offended, all good. Just can't understand the mindset of prime 95 being the only reliable stability test for a modern CPU particularly given most of us here don't need server stability anyway. The fact that in his opinion effectively every CPU in the chart is not stable is somewhat missguided but hey who am I to argue after all stability is highly aubjective.


----------



## dirtyred

I prefer stability but I won't chase it insanely. Mainly I game and do 2d/3d editing (with frequent saves and autosaves). I did test my setup with RB 8h but if I do some minor tweakings I won't retest it. At least not for 8 hours, maybe 15-30 minutes. But that's fine. If it crashes while gaming or work it's not a big deal for me, I just revert the settings to the last known stable point and start over.


----------



## lolhaxz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> No worries not upset or offended, all good. Just can't understand the mindset of prime 95 being the only reliable stability test for a modern CPU particularly given most of us here don't need server stability anyway. The fact that in his opinion effectively every CPU in the chart is not stable is somewhat missguided but hey who am I to argue after all stability is highly aubjective.


Nowhere did I state that every CPU in the chart is not stable; I vaguely remember using words like "i suspect" or "seems" - again, it's my observation rather than law.... infact there's a crapton of posts with results that don't result in a chart entry.

I gave an example of how *for me* "stability" was demonstrable in all applications and synthetic benchmarks I tried in some scenarios, ie. Prime95/Realbench/Gaming, including more than 1 hour - yet behavior such as WHEA errors were present in the logs; and I'm sure you have a differing opinion... but a CPU producing WHEA errors is not stable, it may not crash today, it may not crash this week, but at some point it will **** the bed in the right way which *may* manifest as a crash.

Do others potentially suffer the same sorts of potentially difficult to detect instability at the edge? I have no idea, merely making an observation, I know better now.

Thank you for educating me on being more open minded and less dismissive, my apologies.

Quote:


> What I find interesting is *how touchy stability can be*, that Non-AVX is stable at 5.05GHz drooping right down to 1.28v - the only reason I am running a higher voltage is too be able to keep the AVX 1x ratio higher, the CPU will boot into Windows and run "stable" with everything I throw at it 5.15GHz @ 1.376v, however on a Prime95 AVX+non-AVX run I will get approximately 1x WHEA Cache error per hour, but no crashes or other issues (but 1 WHEA is too many for me) - I'm old school Prime95 stable, end of story.
> 
> Reading *a lot of the posts* on this thread *seems* quite evident there is a lot of people running overclocks that *I suspect* are far from the peak of stability, ie. like above... *but in reality, I suppose it would probably be absolutely fine* if I closed my eyes and put my fingers in my ears.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Indeed subjective. According to him more than 1 hour RealBench is unnecessary:
> Bless him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to Prime95 1 hours is not enough. *Your argument is invalid. Stability is subjective*.


Of course it is subjective... depends solely on the load. The only way to guage stability is "Stable to what set of conditions". You can always find conditions that any OC or even book-stock configuration fails. The reality is most errors are caused by poor/sloppy coding, and the apparent lack of errors more times than not is only due to well developed error traps. WHEA or more accurately Machine Check Errors may be core instability or may simply be ram erors in a non-EEC environment which is causing checksums to fail to match at the end of a procedure call. So... If the system is stable to the working loads you apply, then is is stable for it's intended use. Stability for a use-scenario that is far removed from daily use - and does not represent the cross-architecture comms of a working load - can easily fail when the use conditions are outside the scope of the stress test. This is the main problem with p95 - it is very narrowly focused on only a portion of the entire system's components.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolhaxz*
> 
> Nowhere did I state that every CPU in the chart is not stable; I vaguely remember using words like "i suspect" or "seems" - again, it's my observation rather than law.... infact there's a crapton of posts with results that don't result in a chart entry.
> 
> I gave an example of how *for me* "stability" was demonstrable in all applications and synthetic benchmarks I tried in some scenarios, ie. Prime95/Realbench/Gaming, including more than 1 hour - yet behavior such as WHEA errors were present in the logs; and I'm sure you have a differing opinion... but a CPU producing WHEA errors is not stable, it may not crash today, it may not crash this week, but at some point it will **** the bed in the right way which *may* manifest as a crash.
> 
> Do others potentially suffer the same sorts of potentially difficult to detect instability at the edge? I have no idea, merely making an observation, I know better now.
> 
> Thank you for educating me on being more open minded and less dismissive, my apologies.


No need to take it personally. We're here to discuss opinions and methods.

Even nuclear power plants fail sometimes which are (supposed) designed for 100% stability.

You trust that 1 hour of Prime95 stress test too much. As the developers state, it could fail at any time. How can you be sure that it's still stable at 1 hours and 1 second? You can't. Would you run it for 2 weeks straight to be even more sure? I don't think that the goal is to be 100% stable because that's an utopia. Something sometimes goes wrong. And then you crash. Just accept it. I prefer to actually use my computer instead of benching it constantly.


----------



## TheADLA

Hey folks,

posted earlier, got myself an upgrade. Been a while. Tried to figure out where to go with the Auto OC on the MoBo to get an Idea. Here is what I got. It did an Auto OC on 4.8.
I just changed my Thermal Paste 3 hours ago to CLU. According to their manual it takes 48 hours to burn in or work. So I dunno but temps should change. I used the Corsair Link Software to put the pump and fans to max and did a quick XTU run. Pics show my standard normal as well as the Auto Overclock. I dunno whether it is a good Overclocker or not. I have no Batch No. since I bought it as a bundle.








No idea where to go from here lol. Let's see. I have no Idea whether the MoBo puts in too much VCore etc. But it's a start. Looks like the MoBo by itself put AVX Offset -4, disables XMP etc. First pics temp is right after I disabled Auto OC. its usually around 34-ish. Any thoughts or advice?

Thanks


----------



## dirtyred

Reading the first post should give you a pretty good idea what to tweak. This is a similar but more detailed read: http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/.

Auto overclock rarely goes well. 1.3 Vcore and above seems too much for 4.8 GHz especially with AVX offset 4. For 4.8 GHz (with 0-2 AVX offset) I'd play around 1.25-1.3 Vcore and see where does it stabilize. Mine needs 1.248 - 1.264 Vcore (1.25 V average) @ 4.8 GHz (AVX offset 0). Run RAM on default 2133 MHz @ 1.2 V and default timings to exclude RAM instability while stress testing.


----------



## TheADLA

I tried what you said. Set Ram to 2133 and 1.2v. set Vcore to 1.25 but it seems it still goes to 1.3+. I saw I have different LLC modes. Thought MSI didn't have that. I chose Mode 1. Here are some pics.

















Im too old for this lol







Gotta do some studies on that link you gave me


----------



## dirtyred

If LLC overcompensates, try with even lower Vcore (1.22 maybe). If you have multiple levels of LLC settings, maybe try adjusting that as well (I heard MSI doesn't give many options). The result matters, not what you set so keep stress testing and monitoring Vcore / temps.


----------



## TheADLA

Ok. Let's rock. That is the LLC options the MSI board gives me, a lot, but no idea what it means. And so far, I was able to boot into Win 10 with those settings at 5 Ghz. Stress Test to be seen.





I have no idea where this goes lol. I do know about OC. Im 41. But it's been a while. A lot of stuff happened meanwhile lol








Im gonna play around. Looks like it might be possible to get the 5 Ghz though.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> I tried what you said. Set Ram to 2133 and 1.2v. set Vcore to 1.25 but it seems it still goes to 1.3+. I saw I have different LLC modes. Thought MSI didn't have that. I chose Mode 1. Here are some pics.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im too old for this lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gotta do some studies on that link you gave me


You can be reasonably certain of reaching 5.0GHz stable. The main issues for you will be VCore Voltage and heat.

Mode 1 is a very useful setting on an MSI MB. It's there to keep your Voltage from dropping when CPU loads increase. In practice, it raises Voltage somewhat across the entire range. So, if your VCore shows too high under load, you'll need to set a Voltage offset to drop it a bit. You just can't make that offset so much that it won't idle...

Read up. Ignore Batch #s.

Welcome to the wild world of over-clocking!


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> Ok. Let's rock. That is the LLC options the MSI board gives me, a lot, but no idea what it means. And so far, I was able to boot into Win 10 with those settings at 5 Ghz. Stress Test to be seen.
> 
> I have no idea where this goes lol. I do know about OC. Im 41. But it's been a while. A lot of stuff happened meanwhile lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im gonna play around. Looks like it might be possible to get the 5 Ghz though.


LLC levels control how much Vdroop is allowed. The higher the level/mode, the less Vdroop until a certain point, then it will go higher then the set values. Start with 1 and go up one by one until you find the closest Vcore under load to what you've set. Just a quick Google search gave me this: https://www.msi.com/blog/why-llc-is-your-friend-when-overclocking


----------



## becks

1.365 + llc 6 Adaptive 5.1 Core / 5.1 Uncore / No Avx
1.495 Manual 5.2 Core / 4.2 Uncore / No Avx

-- You do the math ...I think it is safe to call this chip a DUD


----------



## dirtyred

And how the hell do you prevent it not going up in flames at 1.495?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> Ok. Let's rock. That is the LLC options the MSI board gives me, a lot, but no idea what it means. And so far, I was able to boot into Win 10 with those settings at 5 Ghz. Stress Test to be seen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no idea where this goes lol. I do know about OC. Im 41. But it's been a while. A lot of stuff happened meanwhile lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im gonna play around. Looks like it might be possible to get the 5 Ghz though.


I use llc 2 on msi board wich increases a bit the voltage under load , level 1 raises the volts way to high for me.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I use llc 2 on msi board wich increases a bit the voltage under load , level 1 raises the volts way to high for me.


MSI [Mode 1] is not equivalent to LLC 1. [Mode 1] is somewhere between LLC2 and LLC3 found on the high-end MSI boards.

^
What I said above only applies to boards with 3 or less Mode options.

Clearly, on this board, _Mode 1 is LLC1_.


----------



## TheADLA

Ok. I am here right now, see pics. Prime 95 somewhat only goes to 4.6 Ghz for whatever reasons. I am now on LLC Mode 2 on the MoBo. Pass so far. Temps whatever. My just alpplied CLU needs to settle yet. My H110i GTX on Max. Voltage though. System stable. Any thoughts? However, I can say, looks like I am officially 5 Ghz
















Why Prime95 only goes to 4.6 Ghz. Any other things I can tweak to maybe go up a notch or so.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> Why Prime95 only goes to 4.6 Ghz. Any other things I can tweak to maybe go up a notch or so.


Because you have AVX offset of 4. 50-4=46


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And how the hell do you prevent it not going up in flames at 1.495?


Just did a "diy dye mtf dye!!" mode..and wrapped my radiators in Ice







))...could run cpu-z bench and cb 15...so no scalling past 5.1 for this chip...now lets squeez the last bit of performance out of it !!


----------



## TheADLA

Ok. which means I can disregard its results or does it still count ? Jeez... Im old lol









Here is Cinebench R15 result @5 Ghz. The 4790K results were my old one on a MSI B85 Board @4.7 Ghz


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Just did a "diy dye mtf dye!!" mode..and wrapped my radiators in Ice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ))...could run cpu-z bench and cb 15...so no scalling past 5.1 for this chip...now lets squeez the last bit of performance out of it !!


I guess the PC in your avatar is the one when the ice melts


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> Ok. which means I can disregard its results or does it still count ? Jeez... Im old lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is Cinebench R15 result @5 Ghz. The 4790K results were my old one on a MSI B85 Board @4.7 Ghz
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


It's a good start.








Where's the single Core score?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> MSI [Mode 1] is not equivalent to LLC 1. [Mode 1] is somewhere between LLC2 and LLC3 found on the high-end MSI boards.
> 
> ^
> What I said above only applies to boards with 3 or less Mode options.
> 
> Clearly, on this board, _Mode 1 is LLC1_.


In his screenshots i see 8 levels of llc ... well 9 if consider auto


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> In his screenshots i see 8 levels of llc ... well 9 if consider auto


Yes. I posted originally before I saw his screenshots of that page of the BIOS. Lesser MSI boards have fewer LLC levels.

One thing to keep in mind is that on an MSI board, LLC1 is the highest level of Load Line Calibration and _will add the most voltage_.

Other manufacturers are the reverse - the LLC1 is at or below stock levels.

Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Yes. I posted originally before I saw his screenshots of that page of the BIOS. Lesser MSI boards have fewer LLC levels.
> 
> One thing to keep in mind is that on an MSI board, LLC1 is the highest level of Load Line Calibration and _will add the most voltage_.
> 
> Other manufacturers are the reverse - the LLC1 is at or below stock levels.
> 
> Sorry for the confusion.


Yes , im not sure if it is but as i think on z270 msi boards they did implement more llc levels, i also had z170 g m7 board and just had few options on llc.
Yeah llc 1 spikes the voltages way to high. For exemple with v core 1.375 during RB there are spike to 1.450v insane








And with llc 2 it spikes to maximum of 1.41
Using adaptive setting


----------



## garyd9

Killed my 7700k today.









Was delidded and running daily at 5 GHz with a MAX vcore in HWInfo (while running linpack) of 1.296v. (I wanted to see how high I could push it before going over 1.3v actual vcore to use as a daily setup.) I noticed a bit of fluctuation in the the vcore between 1.280 and 1.296, so raised the adaptive voltage in BIOS from 1.265 to 1.270. (LLC is at 5.) Next boot, started my normal run of linpack to check max temps (which never exceed 70C since delidding) and windows crashed.

From that point forward, I couldn't get windows to boot and stay up for more than 10 minutes. Eventually, I couldn't even get windows to boot at all. It'd crash on startup. Reset CMOS, load defaults in BIOS, same thing. Turn off the Asus multi-core enhancement thing, and still crashes trying to load windows.









Popped out the chip and put in a 6700k and it boots just fine.

Purchased a new 7700k, popped it in, and everything loads fine (though this chip pulls much more voltage at stock speeds when compared to my old one.)

I'll re-delid the old 7700k to try and see if there's any noticeable damage. Perhaps some CLU managed to flow to one of the metal contacts on the substrate under the IHS.

One thing I'm concerned about is that the Asus motherboard is reporting high PCH temps according to HWInfo. For example, I'm sitting idle right now with a motherboard temp of 29C, CPU package temp of 27C, m.2 drive is 39C, and even my GPU is at 38C. However, the PCH is reporting 48C!

I never paid much attention to the PCH temps before, but it seems like this is too high, especially when idle. It also doesn't seem to be cooling down. (I'll be posting in one of the Asus m/b threads asking about this... it seems odd.)

Take care
Gary


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Killed my 7700k today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was delidded and running daily at 5 GHz with a MAX vcore in HWInfo (while running linpack) of 1.296v. (I wanted to see how high I could push it before going over 1.3v actual vcore to use as a daily setup.) I noticed a bit of fluctuation in the the vcore between 1.280 and 1.296, so raised the adaptive voltage in BIOS from 1.265 to 1.270. (LLC is at 5.) Next boot, started my normal run of linpack to check max temps (which never exceed 70C since delidding) and windows crashed.
> 
> From that point forward, I couldn't get windows to boot and stay up for more than 10 minutes. Eventually, I couldn't even get windows to boot at all. It'd crash on startup. Reset CMOS, load defaults in BIOS, same thing. Turn off the Asus multi-core enhancement thing, and still crashes trying to load windows.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Popped out the chip and put in a 6700k and it boots just fine.
> 
> Purchased a new 7700k, popped it in, and everything loads fine (though this chip pulls much more voltage at stock speeds when compared to my old one.)
> 
> I'll re-delid the old 7700k to try and see if there's any noticeable damage. Perhaps some CLU managed to flow to one of the metal contacts on the substrate under the IHS.
> 
> One thing I'm concerned about is that the Asus motherboard is reporting high PCH temps according to HWInfo. For example, I'm sitting idle right now with a motherboard temp of 29C, CPU package temp of 27C, m.2 drive is 39C, and even my GPU is at 38C. However, the PCH is reporting 48C!
> 
> I never paid much attention to the PCH temps before, but it seems like this is too high, especially when idle. It also doesn't seem to be cooling down. (I'll be posting in one of the Asus m/b threads asking about this... it seems odd.)
> 
> Take care
> Gary


It happens sometimes, I would not worry with the new i7 7700k you will probably have better luck.

How long did you have the i7 7700k that died?


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> It happens sometimes, I would not worry with the new i7 7700k you will probably have better luck.
> 
> How long did you have the i7 7700k that died?


A month? Maybe 2.

This new one sucks bad (compared to the previous one.) Completely stock speeds, etc - and I'm seeing a vcore of 1.25 with simple tasks like opening chrome. The old one maxed at 1.136v vcore when running linpack with stock settings.

Old (stock intel settings) VID of 1.17v while running linpack. New is a VID of 1.274 while just opening a window. Ugh. I'm not sure it'll be worthwhile to even delid this one. I wonder if Micro Center would exchange it for another. I just hate the 2 hour drive (each way.)


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Killed my 7700k today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was delidded and running daily at 5 GHz with a MAX vcore in HWInfo (while running linpack) of 1.296v. (I wanted to see how high I could push it before going over 1.3v actual vcore to use as a daily setup.) I noticed a bit of fluctuation in the the vcore between 1.280 and 1.296, so raised the adaptive voltage in BIOS from 1.265 to 1.270. (LLC is at 5.) Next boot, started my normal run of linpack to check max temps (which never exceed 70C since delidding) and windows crashed.
> 
> From that point forward, I couldn't get windows to boot and stay up for more than 10 minutes. Eventually, I couldn't even get windows to boot at all. It'd crash on startup. Reset CMOS, load defaults in BIOS, same thing. Turn off the Asus multi-core enhancement thing, and still crashes trying to load windows.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Popped out the chip and put in a 6700k and it boots just fine.
> 
> Purchased a new 7700k, popped it in, and everything loads fine (though this chip pulls much more voltage at stock speeds when compared to my old one.)
> 
> I'll re-delid the old 7700k to try and see if there's any noticeable damage. Perhaps some CLU managed to flow to one of the metal contacts on the substrate under the IHS.
> 
> One thing I'm concerned about is that the Asus motherboard is reporting high PCH temps according to HWInfo. For example, I'm sitting idle right now with a motherboard temp of 29C, CPU package temp of 27C, m.2 drive is 39C, and even my GPU is at 38C. However, the PCH is reporting 48C!
> 
> I never paid much attention to the PCH temps before, but it seems like this is too high, especially when idle. It also doesn't seem to be cooling down. (I'll be posting in one of the Asus m/b threads asking about this... it seems odd.)
> 
> Take care
> Gary


I wouldn't be too worried about the PCH temp mine sits around 59 degrees C most of the time and I have never had an issue, anything below around 80 degrees C for the PCH is fine.
https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/www/us/en/chipsets/100-series-chipset-datasheet-vol-1.html


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> A month? Maybe 2.
> 
> This new one sucks bad (compared to the previous one.) Completely stock speeds, etc - and I'm seeing a vcore of 1.25 with simple tasks like opening chrome. The old one maxed at 1.136v vcore when running linpack with stock settings.
> 
> Old (stock intel settings) VID of 1.17v while running linpack. New is a VID of 1.274 while just opening a window. Ugh. I'm not sure it'll be worthwhile to even delid this one. I wonder if Micro Center would exchange it for another. I just hate the 2 hour drive (each way.)


Have you tried overclocking? I would not go by stock VID.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Have you tried overclocking? I would not go by stock VID.


Not yet. With the stock voltages coming up so high, without a delid I'm hitting 80C temps (with a custom loop!) stock settings. What's confusing me is that I can't seem to LOWER the voltage with the adaptive voltage setting (without using the offset.) I feel like I'm forgetting something in regards to this, however... I'm a bit tired at the moment (it's 2am.)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Not yet. With the stock voltages coming up so high, without a delid I'm hitting 80C temps (with a custom loop!) stock settings. What's confusing me is that I can't seem to LOWER the voltage with the adaptive voltage setting (without using the offset.) I feel like I'm forgetting something in regards to this, however... I'm a bit tired at the moment (it's 2am.)


What motherboard do you have? I would just try overclocking on stock voltage.


----------



## garyd9

Okay, I seem to have forgotten how to work a motherboard. I just set the multiplier to 46x, LLC to 4 (hoping for a bit of vdroop), and adaptive voltage to 1.17. My hope was that it'd boot, but any stress test would crash due to lack of voltage.

What I really got was a 46x multiplier and my adaptive voltage setting was COMPLETELY ignored. Instead of maxing at 1.17 (or anything close to it), it was hitting a vcore of 1.312 for non-AVX stress testing.

What am I doing wrong here? I didn't expect 1.17 to actually give any stability, but I didn't expect it to be completely ignored either.

(If I set the voltage to manual, it works, but I'd really prefer having the adaptive voltage so the thing drops voltage when the clock drops.)


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What motherboard do you have?


Asus maximus ix code


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Asus maximus ix code


Don't use offset leave it on auto, just set the Adaptive voltage you want. If it were me I would just try overclocking on stock voltage.

Take a look below.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Don't use offset leave it on auto, just set the Adaptive voltage you want. If it were me I would just try overclocking on stock voltage.


No offset used. "Offset" was "Auto."

From some reading I'm doing searching (and reading) it seems that the way Asus implements adaptive won't allow the voltage go below whatever the chip VID requests (within some margin of error.) In this case, the VID was 1.316.

1.3v at 46x runs the temp up to 96C with my water cooler, so I can't test any higher at this point. (I know a delid would drop that temp significantly, but once I delid, I lose the possibility of exchanging the processor.)

BTW, I pulled the lid off my old processor and I don't see any sign of damage. The CLU application looks great, no scratches, no chips, etc. I'd like to think that I somehow screwed it up (meaning that I could learn from a mistake) but I think in this case I just got unlucky.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> No offset used. "Offset" was "Auto."
> 
> From some reading I'm doing searching (and reading) it seems that the way Asus implements adaptive won't allow the voltage go below whatever the chip VID requests (within some margin of error.) In this case, the VID was 1.316.
> 
> 1.3v at 46x runs the temp up to 96C with my water cooler, so I can't test any higher at this point. (I know a delid would drop that temp significantly, but once I delid, I lose the possibility of exchanging the processor.)
> 
> BTW, I pulled the lid off my old processor and I don't see any sign of damage. The CLU application looks great, no scratches, no chips, etc. I'd like to think that I somehow screwed it up (meaning that I could learn from a mistake) but I think in this case I just got unlucky.


Try the negative offset sign then 0.050v.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Try the negative offset sign then 0.050v.


Starts to introduce instability at low multipliers...









It seems that I either had a golden chip to start with (that I murdered), or I have a mediocre to poor one now (or both.) My first was from a Vietnam fab (L705B300), and this new one is a Malay L705B378.

I'm going to get some sleep and figure I'll be making another drive tomorrow to exchange the chip.

Take care


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> No offset used. "Offset" was "Auto."
> 
> From some reading I'm doing searching (and reading) it seems that the way Asus implements adaptive won't allow the voltage go below whatever the chip VID requests (within some margin of error.) In this case, the VID was 1.316..


I can disprove that. I have ASUS Prime Z270-K and the VID is always a bit higher then the Vcore no matter what value I put in. If I set it to 1.2 V, the VID is 1.216 V. If I set it to 1.216 V then VID goes up to 1.232 V and so on. It's always one step of 0.016 V higher. Can't figure out why.

About the PCH temperature: you're using a custom loop and maybe you're not cooling the PCH with fresh cool air. I don't know your setup but if the radiator is in the front of the case then it's pushing in hot air onto the PCH.Maybe add a fan to the bottom of the case or move the radiator to the top. Or just water cool the PCH as well?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I can disprove that. I have ASUS Prime Z270-K and the VID is always a bit higher then the Vcore no matter what value I put in. If I set it to 1.2 V, the VID is 1.216 V. If I set it to 1.216 V then VID goes up to 1.232 V and so on. It's always one step of 0.016 V higher. Can't figure out why.
> 
> About the PCH temperature: you're using a custom loop and maybe you're not cooling the PCH with fresh cool air. I don't know your setup but if the radiator is in the front of the case then it's pushing in hot air onto the PCH.Maybe add a fan to the bottom of the case or move the radiator to the top. Or just water cool the PCH as well?


Both the formula and the code mobo have a cover over the board which doesnt help with airflow over the PCH however tempertures being experienced are not an issue, in fact they are lower than mine. Mine sit at a constant 59 to 61 degrees C depending on ambient temperature.
https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/www/us/en/chipsets/100-series-chipset-datasheet-vol-1.html


----------



## sdmf74

He didnt increase PCH core voltage did he? My M9F PCH is sitting at 36°C

Anybody here have a pwm pump connected to the water pump+ header on Asus motherboard? I cant control my pump on M9F it runs 4800+ rpm for some reason


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> He didnt increase PCH core voltage did he? My M9F PCH is sitting at 36°C
> 
> Anybody here have a pwm pump connected to the water pump+ header on Asus motherboard? I cant control my pump on M9F it runs 4800+ rpm for some reason


My D5 pump is connected to the CPU pwn (Don't have a pump header on my motherboard) and I can control it by switching it from DC to PWN in bios (In DC mode it runs full power all the time)


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> He didnt increase PCH core voltage did he? My M9F PCH is sitting at 36°C
> 
> Anybody here have a pwm pump connected to the water pump+ header on Asus motherboard? I cant control my pump on M9F it runs 4800+ rpm for some reason


PCH on auto could increase resulting in higher temps. Maybe setting it manually would help.

On my Prime Z270-K I have an AIO header that I use for controlling one of my case fans. The DC mode doesn't allow me to go below 60% but in PWM mode I can input anything I want. It shouldn't matter if it's a fan or pump, the BIOS doesn't detect it. Also when calibrating fans this header gets ignored.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> My D5 pump is connected to the CPU pwn (Don't have a pump header on my motherboard) and I can control it by switching it from DC to PWN in bios (In DC mode it runs full power all the time)


correct

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> PCH on auto could increase resulting in higher temps. Maybe setting it manually would help.
> 
> On my Prime Z270-K I have an AIO header that I use for controlling one of my case fans. The DC mode doesn't allow me to go below 60% but in PWM mode I can input anything I want. It shouldn't matter if it's a fan or pump, the BIOS doesn't detect it. Also when calibrating fans this header gets ignored.


On my motherboard there are two pump headers, one is for AIO pump (but its located by the rear case fan header by rear I/o)







and the water pump+ header for a custom loop on the bottom of motherboard are married just like the cpu/cpu opt headers. The AIO pump header is the only one that shows up in fanxpert4 but has nothing connected to it.
However I have my aquacomputer D5 pwm pump conected to water pump + header and it doesnt even show. I have set all headers to auto or pwm in bios, made sure its enabled & ran qfan tuning in bios and fan tuning in fanxpert4 to no avail. As you can see in the bottom right corner of the pic though AISUITEIII knows its there and shows it running @ 4800+rpm.
Also HWmomitor recognizes it as a water pump/water pump header so nothing is wrong with the pump. I think it needs a bios update or an AISUITEIII update but I cant get Asus to confirm if they are even aware of the issue or not. Its like they forgot to code it into the bios or something.
Any Asus reps on here?


----------



## dirtyred

I had difficulties with AI Suite III. Especially with calibration. Also, it did not allow me to lower the AIO speed. But in BIOS I can configure it. Btw, there is a fan calibration xml file somewhere in C:\ProgramData\ASUS\. You can edit the part for the lowest fan speed but you have to run the editor in Admin mode and AI Suite not running. Then launch it and see if you edited the correct part. I had to try it many times to get it right. After many hours wasted I uninstalled AI Suite and went back to BIOS. I don't trust softwares controlling my fans.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> He didnt increase PCH core voltage did he? My M9F PCH is sitting at 36°C
> 
> Anybody here have a pwm pump connected to the water pump+ header on Asus motherboard? I cant control my pump on M9F it runs 4800+ rpm for some reason


To control pwm D5 pump use the water pump header on the board. Go into UEFI and look under Qfan control page water pump header control is right at the bottom of that page. Try not to use AI suite causes problems, do it through the UEFI after you have removed AI suite and see if that works. On my M8F AI suite is slow to respond and buggy as hell, since removing it and setting up fans and pump through UEFI no further issues, just takes a bit longer to set up and a lot of restarts but more reliable in the end.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I had difficulties with AI Suite III. Especially with calibration. Also, it did not allow me to lower the AIO speed. But in BIOS I can configure it. Btw, there is a fan calibration xml file somewhere in C:\ProgramData\ASUS\. You can edit the part for the lowest fan speed but you have to run the editor in Admin mode and AI Suite not running. Then launch it and see if you edited the correct part. I had to try it many times to get it right. After many hours wasted I uninstalled AI Suite and went back to BIOS. I don't trust softwares controlling my fans.


Agree 100%


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> correct
> On my motherboard there are two pump headers, one is for AIO pump (but its located by the rear case fan header by rear I/o)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and the water pump+ header for a custom loop on the bottom of motherboard are married just like the cpu/cpu opt headers. The AIO pump header is the only one that shows up in fanxpert4 but has nothing connected to it.
> However I have my aquacomputer D5 pwm pump conected to water pump + header and it doesnt even show. I have set all headers to auto or pwm in bios, made sure its enabled & ran qfan tuning in bios and fan tuning in fanxpert4 to no avail. As you can see in the bottom right corner of the pic though AISUITEIII knows its there and shows it running @ 4800+rpm.
> Also HWmomitor recognizes it as a water pump/water pump header so nothing is wrong with the pump. I think it needs a bios update or an AISUITEIII update but I cant get Asus to confirm if they are even aware of the issue or not. Its like they forgot to code it into the bios or something.
> Any Asus reps on here?


Oky...I see now...I have same problem on my motherboard (M8I with latest bios)
Case fan is not seen in Ai Suite 3 or in Bios in Fan control.....
But! I can go under monitor tab and control it there fine in all 3 modes...DC, PWN, and Manual....maybe it is the same for you.


----------



## sdmf74

Yeah while im in the bios but when I exit out into windows it just runs full speed. Im hoping there will be some updates coming soon, new motherboards usually have more frequent updates but there has been none pretty much since January & alot of the software for this motherboard needs updated


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Yeah while im in the bios but when I exit out into windows it just runs full speed. Im hoping there will be some updates coming soon, new motherboards usually have more frequent updates but there has been none pretty much since January & alot of the software for this motherboard needs updated


If you go to bios, and set it up as PWN and Manual and select what to monitor it should be working fine
I have the option on PWN - Manual to set individual Fans to monitor CPU - T Sensor - Motherboard - PCH - Etc etc.


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> He didnt increase PCH core voltage did he? My M9F PCH is sitting at 36°C
> 
> Anybody here have a pwm pump connected to the water pump+ header on Asus motherboard? I cant control my pump on M9F it runs 4800+ rpm for some reason


i have a pwm pump i can control my pumps in bois and ai suit at first i couldnt do it but the setting is in the bois


----------



## laychi

Hi guys.
I did buy a new i7 7700K CPU
Tomorrow i buy mobo and ram.

Batch number: L703D315

Have enyone same batch? How it's works?


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> He didnt increase PCH core voltage did he? My M9F PCH is sitting at 36°C
> 
> Anybody here have a pwm pump connected to the water pump+ header on Asus motherboard? I cant control my pump on M9F it runs 4800+ rpm for some reason


boot into bois press f7 for advanced mode-montitor for me its scroll down till you see qfan configuration find aio_pump/w_pump+ mine was set on auto set it to pwm mode save settings go back to bois press f6 for Qfan control make sure the aio_pump/w_pump+ is set to pwm you should know if you can control the pump save settings boot in windows ai suite should look like this now


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *laychi*
> 
> Hi guys.
> I did buy a new i7 7700K CPU
> Tomorrow i buy mobo and ram.
> 
> Batch number: L703D315
> 
> Have enyone same batch? How it's works?


i have Batch number: X653B347 mine overclocks to 5.2 @ 1.40 CLL level 5


----------



## dirtyred

Set it in BIOS. Not the Q-FAN shortcut at the top but in the Monitoring section. If you can control it from there then it's good. Booting in Windows resulting in 100% fan speed indicates that AI Suite has taken over the control. Uninstall it or just disable from running at startup. Check Services as well because there are 2 or 3 ASUS services running. You need to disable them from starting up.


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Set it in BIOS. Not the Q-FAN shortcut at the top but in the Monitoring section. If you can control it from there then it's good. Booting in Windows resulting in 100% fan speed indicates that AI Suite has taken over the control. Uninstall it or just disable from running at startup. Check Services as well because there are 2 or 3 ASUS services running. You need to disable them from starting up.


do it my way not this persons way because as he stats his way does not work you need to disable **** from start up my way you dont need to do any of it


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Starts to introduce instability at low multipliers...


I was just wondering did you try offset mode sign negative, then 0.050 in Additional turbo mode CPU core voltage, then offset voltage on Auto?

Good luck on the new processor, post back how it works.


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Set it in BIOS. Not the Q-FAN shortcut at the top but in the Monitoring section. If you can control it from there then it's good. Booting in Windows resulting in 100% fan speed indicates that AI Suite has taken over the control. Uninstall it or just disable from running at startup. Check Services as well because there are 2 or 3 ASUS services running. You need to disable them from starting up.
> 
> do it my way not this persons way because as he stats his way does not work you need to disable **** from start my way you dont need to any of it
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> boot into bois press f7 for advanced mode-montitor for me its scroll down till you see qfan configuration find aio_pump/w_pump+ mine was set on auto set it to pwm mode save settings go back to bois press f6 for Qfan control make sure the aio_pump/w_pump+ is set to pwm you should know if you can control the pump save settings boot in windows ai suite should look like this now
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ok do what i said in the bois ive been doing some testing you need to uninstall ai suite 3 and reinstall it do not press fan tuning because if you do it you cant control your pump
Click to expand...


----------



## cenix

I appreciate all the info in this thread everyone.

Looks like a lot of you guys got some nice CPU's. I'm here to report that mine is a terrible overclocker.

My chip is delidded/CLU, X62 Kraken/Gelid Extreme and still requires 1.445 vcore to get stable at 5 GHz, max temps in the mid-80's, with XMP on. I don't use Prime 95 as a stability tool, only Realbench.

I know the consensus agrees that 1.5 vcore is uncomfortable, but how many of you guys have similar vcore to get 5 GHz? What are your temps at load? I figured I bought this damn CPU to overclock and get 5 GHz, so I'm going to run it till it dies.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> ok do what i said in the bois ive been doing some testing you need to uninstall ai suite 3 and reinstall it *do not press fan tuning* because if you do it you cant control your pump


LoL, thats my point exactly, as soon as you tune the fans the control for the AIO pump (should be water pump+) goes away. There is no point in using fanxpert with fan tuning screaming at you to run it constantly. After you run it your screwed.
I have tried all the things you guys mentioned except for ditching the program all together. Fanxpert worked great on my M7F. Im sure it will on M9F too when its matured a bit.
As far as uninstalling and using bios tuning only if I was gonna go that route a better/simpler option would be to run my pump off a different (fan) header but I shouldnt have to do that. One of the main reasons I upgraded my cpu/motherboard/ram was cause this
motherboard had some cool new watercooling features..... Very expensive cool features that dont work









I wonder if we are gonna have to wait 6 months for diver updates?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cenix*
> 
> I appreciate all the info in this thread everyone.
> 
> Looks like a lot of you guys got some nice CPU's. I'm here to report that mine is a terrible overclocker.
> 
> My chip is delidded/CLU, X62 Kraken/Gelid Extreme and still requires 1.445 vcore to get stable at 5 GHz, max temps in the mid-80's, with XMP on. I don't use Prime 95 as a stability tool, only Realbench.
> 
> I know the consensus agrees that 1.5 vcore is uncomfortable, but how many of you guys have similar vcore to get 5 GHz? What are your temps at load? I figured I bought this damn CPU to overclock and get 5 GHz, so I'm going to run it till it dies.


1.44v is safe 24/7 from Asus's recommendation, you will be just fine for 3+ years.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cenix*
> 
> I appreciate all the info in this thread everyone.
> 
> Looks like a lot of you guys got some nice CPU's. I'm here to report that mine is a terrible overclocker.
> 
> My chip is delidded/CLU, X62 Kraken/Gelid Extreme and still requires 1.445 vcore to get stable at 5 GHz, max temps in the mid-80's, with XMP on. I don't use Prime 95 as a stability tool, only Realbench.
> 
> I know the consensus agrees that 1.5 vcore is uncomfortable, but how many of you guys have similar vcore to get 5 GHz? What are your temps at load? I figured I bought this damn CPU to overclock and get 5 GHz, so I'm going to run it till it dies.


From my experience, 1.5V is usually good for 5.2+ GHz on the i7-7700k, but that doesn't mean your chip won't perform, you're still well overclocked and stable.









1.445V maximum isn't going to kill your chip any time soon if your max temps under full load are mid-80s. If you've got EIST (Speedstep) running, max idle Voltage will be around 1.1V.

Experiment. Drop the XMP and lower any added memory Voltage and you might see a drop in temps and in required VCore.


----------



## cenix

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> From my experience, 1.5V is usually good for 5.2+ GHz on the i7-7700k, but that doesn't mean your chip won't perform, you're still well overclocked and stable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.445V maximum isn't going to kill your chip any time soon if your max temps under full load are mid-80s. If you've got EIST (Speedstep) running, max idle Voltage will be around 1.1V.
> 
> Experiment. Drop the XMP and lower any added memory Voltage and you might see a drop in temps and in required VCore.


Thanks for the responses.

Seems like the CPU voltage is acceptable, and yes, I think I should start manually setting the RAM voltages and drop XMP. XMP increased my temps by around 5-6 degrees C. Should I just fiddle with RAM voltage or should I be setting additional parameters with VCCIO & VCCIA?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cenix*
> 
> Thanks for the responses.
> 
> Seems like the CPU voltage is acceptable, and yes, I think I should start manually setting the RAM voltages and drop XMP. XMP increased my temps by around 5-6 degrees C. Should I just fiddle with RAM voltage or should I be setting additional parameters with VCCIO & VCCIA?


Overclocking ram be it XMP or manual increase temperatures. Up to 90c is fine, at 100c the cpu will throttle to the non turbo clock of 4.2GHz to prevent damage. That is why Intel list 4.2GHz base clock.


----------



## dirtyred

I gave a G.Skill 3200 16-16-16-36 2T 1.35 V by XMP settings. I can run it manually on 3000 MHz with 16-16-16-28 2T @ 1.2 V and VCCIO/SA voltage on auto or minimum and gain about 5-8 degrees in CPU temps. That's a good trade-off for me, not a huge performance loss.


----------



## cenix

My G.Skill RAM is the 3200 variety, and I'm not looking to overclock any further, just going to stop at those "stock" speeds. I hope playing with lowering voltages on those will give me back a little temp headroom that I lost with XMP enabled.

I just didn't want to start tweaking the RAM after all the trial and error I did with the CPU.

Appreciate the replies fellas.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Good luck on the new processor, post back how it works.


This next one is a "middle ground" between my original and the one I just returned.

For vcore while maxed on linpack (4400 on all 4 cores), I'm going as high as 1.216. That's not as good as the 1.17 I had originally, but not as bad as 2.5 I had on the second chip. However, this one is giving me much better temps than the previous one. Instead of 80+ running linpack for a while, I'm only going as high as 72 on the hottest core with this most recent chip.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> This next one is a "middle ground" between my original and the one I just returned.
> 
> For vcore while maxed on linpack (4400 on all 4 cores), I'm going as high as 1.216. That's not as good as the 1.17 I had originally, but not as bad as 2.5 I had on the second chip. However, this one is giving me much better temps than the previous one. Instead of 80+ running linpack for a while, I'm only going as high as 72 on the hottest core with this most recent chip.


That sounds a lot better. Was the processor from the same country?


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That sounds a lot better. Was the processor from the same country?


no... First and Third are from Vietnam. 2nd was a Malay... I'll run this for a week or three and then decide if I want to delid again.

The thing is... my water loop is really wasted with this Intel excuse for an IHS installation. 360mm of radiator (with intention of adding another 120mm on the back of the case... just because I can.)

PCH is still high, but I'm starting to think that this is a "Code" board issue due to the stupid plastic "armor." (Back when I was seeing mid 30's on the PCH temps, I was still on a "hero" board.)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> no... First and Third are from Vietnam. 2nd was a Malay... I'll run this for a week or three and then decide if I want to delid again.
> 
> The thing is... my water loop is really wasted with this Intel excuse for an IHS installation. 360mm of radiator (with intention of adding another 120mm on the back of the case... just because I can.)
> 
> PCH is still high, but I'm starting to think that this is a "Code" board issue due to the stupid plastic "armor." (Back when I was seeing mid 30's on the PCH temps, I was still on a "hero" board.)


Switch to Ryzen you can overclock to 3.9GHz to 4.0GHz.







I don't care about my PCH temperature, I don't think they have ever failed with use anyway.

The reason Intel does not solder the IHS to the die anymore to save on cost, also when the CPU is discarded solder is not environmentally friendly in land fills. Overclockers are less than 1/2% of Intel's profit, they don't give a crap about overclockers we are just lucky the make unlocked chips.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I can disprove that. I have ASUS Prime Z270-K and the VID is always a bit higher then the Vcore no matter what value I put in. If I set it to 1.2 V, the VID is 1.216 V. If I set it to 1.216 V then VID goes up to 1.232 V and so on. It's always one step of 0.016 V higher. Can't figure out why.


That's why I included the text "within some margin of error."
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> About the PCH temperature: you're using a custom loop and maybe you're not cooling the PCH with fresh cool air. I don't know your setup but if the radiator is in the front of the case then it's pushing in hot air onto the PCH.Maybe add a fan to the bottom of the case or move the radiator to the top. Or just water cool the PCH as well?


The radiator is a 360mm mounted in the front of the case as intake with 3 high static pressure fans. Sticking my hand in the case, I can feel that there's plenty of airflow over the PCH area.

However, I'm using an Asus "code" motherboard... and one of the "upgrades" on the code/formula motherboards is the integrated plastic heat "armor", seemingly designed to trap heat against the motherboard (and components) in order to prevent proper cooling. (That's the only function I can figure out that it has.)

You can blow 140mm fans at 5000 RPM and I'm sure all that plastic "armor" will enjoy the breeze. (Yes, it actually covers the PCH... and M.2 socket.) The PCH won't share in the cooling. This is really a brain dead design. At the very least, they could have left the PCH heatsink exposed and formed the plastic "armor" around it.

Right now, running prime95, my PCH is up to 52C. To add insult to injury, the PCH temp is driving my m.2 (samsung 960 evo) drive's temp up. Meanwhile, a temp sensor in physical contact with my radiator is showing 26C, so the air passing into the case is probably around 23-25C.

I think I might pull that piece of plastic off and retest. (The section of "armor" that comes off to access the m.2 socket will also uncover most of the PCH's heatsink.)


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> That's why I included the text "within some margin of error."
> 
> The radiator is a 360mm mounted in the front of the case as intake with 3 high static pressure fans. Sticking my hand in the case, I can feel that there's plenty of airflow over the PCH area.
> 
> However, I'm using an Asus "code" motherboard... and one of the "upgrades" on the code/formula motherboards is the integrated plastic heat "armor", seemingly designed to trap heat against the motherboard (and components) in order to prevent proper cooling. (That's the only function I can figure out that it has.)
> 
> You can blow 140mm fans at 5000 RPM and I'm sure all that plastic "armor" will enjoy the breeze. (Yes, it actually covers the PCH... and M.2 socket.) The PCH won't share in the cooling. *This is really a brain dead design*. At the very least, they could have left the PCH heatsink exposed and formed the plastic "armor" around it.
> 
> Right now, running prime95, my PCH is up to 52C. To add insult to injury, the PCH temp is driving my m.2 (samsung 960 evo) drive's temp up. Meanwhile, a temp sensor in physical contact with my radiator is showing 26C, so the air passing into the case is probably around 23-25C.
> 
> I think I might pull that piece of plastic off and retest. (The section of "armor" that comes off to access the m.2 socket will also uncover most of the PCH's heatsink.)


This "brain dead design" as you put it with the plastic armour has been around for several generations, it is not an an issue. Your PCH temperatures are also not an issue I don't understand why you are making a big deal out of nothing? As stated earlier my M8F PCH running 2 raid 0 arrays and a 960 pro m.2 next to it with a 240mm radiator on the front in a relatively restrictive Phanteks evolve case only sits at 61 degrees C under load or idle. I have run this set up for hours and hours daily for 8 months with no issues at all. According to Intel catastrophic temp limit for the PCH is 128 degrees C, both yourself and I are well below that point.


----------



## 519408

Hi, does anyone know of a guide to doing OC in gigabyte aourus gaming? I have a GA-Z270X-G7 + 7700k and I can not do OC.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ArnetteHD*
> 
> Hi, does anyone know of a guide to doing OC in gigabyte aourus gaming? I have a GA-Z270X-G7 + 7700k and I can not do OC.


Google Gigabyte Kabylake overclock guide from memory there is one specifically for Gigabyte using their terminology. Actually www.joomag.com/magazine/gigabyte-z270-overclocking-guide-gigabyte-200-series-overclocking-guide/0767815001483933769


----------



## budgy

I have a GA-Z270X-Gaming 7! But just a 7600K.

Follow that guide, it explains pretty much all you need to go to get started. Once you are more comfortable then tweak a bit more, or not. I followed the Gigabyte guide, and the built in profiles just weren't good for me. On my previous Gaming K5 they worked, but the "same" 4.6GHz did not work for the 7. So, after lots of testing I got the 7 stable at 4.6GHz by manually setting the core to 1.245v. However, something weird was going on as the core would never drop even when idle. So I reset everything, including clearing the cmos, and started from scratch. This time I only changed the multiplier from Auto to 46, set RAM settings manually instead of using XMP, and that's pretty much it - i.e. almost as stock as stock can be. So far, fingers crossed, this has been stable with all power saving options working and I've passed, multiple times, over 2hrs of Prime95 (with AVX) with core voltage not exceeding 1.28v and max temps of 84c. LinPack and IBT got hot, but still passed.

Now the other problem I have is I am getting huge problems with audio pops/crackles/stutters. My system is otherwise stable but the audio problems are so distracting it's making using the system almost unbearable, especially when I'm trying to watch a movie. Having random sounds, and more rarely, the audio sound like it's underwater is not pleasant.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ArnetteHD*
> 
> Hi, does anyone know of a guide to doing OC in gigabyte aourus gaming? I have a GA-Z270X-G7 + 7700k and I can not do OC.


What would you like to know about Gigabyte overclocking? I can help.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *budgy*
> 
> I have a GA-Z270X-Gaming 7! But just a 7600K.
> 
> Follow that guide, it explains pretty much all you need to go to get started. Once you are more comfortable then tweak a bit more, or not. I followed the Gigabyte guide, and the built in profiles just weren't good for me. On my previous Gaming K5 they worked, but the "same" 4.6GHz did not work for the 7. So, after lots of testing I got the 7 stable at 4.6GHz by manually setting the core to 1.245v. However, something weird was going on as the core would never drop even when idle. So I reset everything, including clearing the cmos, and started from scratch. This time I only changed the multiplier from Auto to 46, set RAM settings manually instead of using XMP, and that's pretty much it - i.e. almost as stock as stock can be. So far, fingers crossed, this has been stable with all power saving options working and I've passed, multiple times, over 2hrs of Prime95 (with AVX) with core voltage not exceeding 1.28v and max temps of 84c. LinPack and IBT got hot, but still passed.
> 
> Now the other problem I have is I am getting huge problems with audio pops/crackles/stutters. My system is otherwise stable but the audio problems are so distracting it's making using the system almost unbearable, especially when I'm trying to watch a movie. Having random sounds, and more rarely, the audio sound like it's underwater is not pleasant.


I had a audio pops, crackles, what fixed it for me was reflashing my Gigabyte Bios twice.


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *skingun*


Updated



> Originally Posted by *becks*


Charted. Your cache is not what you say it is.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EDK-TheONE*


Next time submit an overclock when you're ready. Submission sent to secondary chart.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*


Submitted to secondary chart. You didn't meet the 8hr requirement.



> Originally Posted by *zornyan*
> 
> hey guys, new around here, just wanted to see if theres anything I can do to improve my OC
> 
> Username: Zornyan
> CPU Model: 7700k
> Base Clock: Bclk.100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency:5ghz
> Cache Frequency: stock
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.375v .
> Vcore: 1.360.
> FCLK: (cant see this on hwmonitor?_
> Cooling Solution: not delidded, kraken x62 with two corsair ml140 fans
> Stability Test: realbench 1 hour
> 
> Ram speed: 3200mhz (need to check timings)
> Motherboard: asus maximus z270 code
> LLC Setting: 5
> Misc Comments: AVX offset -2
> 
> this is what my system is reporting running realbench, voltage at 1.375 in bios but seems to sit a 1.36 whilst stress testing, LLC is already at level 5 so no idea whats causing this? anything under 1.375 in bios seems to be unstable, crashing after approx. 30-45 mins realbench.
> 
> I have had one crash at the end of a 1hour realbench, but I'm sure this is to do with my voltage not sitting at the correct level? temps hover in the mid 70s most of the time so I don't think its that.
> 
> also, can anyone explain what the LLC/RING voltage that hwmonitor is reporting at 1.4v is? and why my VID is reporting lower than my vcore?
> 
> think with a few tweaks I should be able to get it more stable, anything like XTU it passes fine for hours, so If I can figure out why the voltage is dropping already in realbench that should keep me stable.


You're supposed to use hwmonitor.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*


Charted.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SultanOfWalmart*


Charted.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolhaxz*
> 
> What I find interesting is how touchy stability can be, that Non-AVX is stable at 5.05GHz drooping right down to 1.28v - the only reason I am running a higher voltage is too be able to keep the AVX 1x ratio higher, the CPU will boot into Windows and run "stable" with everything I throw at it 5.15GHz @ 1.376v, however on a Prime95 AVX+non-AVX run I will get approximately 1x WHEA Cache error per hour, but no crashes or other issues (but 1 WHEA is too many for me) - I'm old school Prime95 stable, end of story.
> 
> Reading a lot of the posts on this thread seems quite evident there is a possibly alot of people running overclocks that I suspect are far from the peak of stability, ie. like above... but in reality, I suppose it would probably be absolutely fine if I closed my eyes and put my fingers in my ears.


Only Prime v28.1 runs with avx/FMA3 on are accepted. Very confusing why old school Prime95 stable requires a new version of Prime95. Stop trying to insult everyone in this thread.


Sample Size45  Average OC5.05Median OC5.10Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.37


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> This "brain dead design" as you put it with the plastic armour has been around for several generations, it is not an an issue. Your PCH temperatures are also not an issue I don't understand why you are making a big deal out of nothing? As stated earlier my M8F PCH running 2 raid 0 arrays and a 960 pro m.2 next to it with a 240mm radiator on the front in a relatively restrictive Phanteks evolve case only sits at 61 degrees C under load or idle. I have run this set up for hours and hours daily for 8 months with no issues at all. According to Intel catastrophic temp limit for the PCH is 128 degrees C, both yourself and I are well below that point.


aye, and if you search the internet, people have been complaining about it for motherboard generations. Perhaps a 60C PCH isn't harmful. To be completely honest, I don't know. It can't be helpful, however. Perhaps it only shortens the lifespan a bit. Perhaps it doesn't have any impact whatsoever on the PCH. Conventional wisdom is that having electronics at higher temperatures 24/7 isn't good. Being tucked under that 'armor', the PCH takes a LONG time to cool down on a running system.

It also certainly doesn't make my m.2 drive happy. Taking off the plastic "armor" dropped temps on the m.2 by 20C and on the PCH by 5-10. (Removing the m.2 cover only partially exposes the PCH heatsink.)

When we, as enthusiasts, spend obscene amounts of money to cool our systems down, however, it seems odd that Asus would make design decisions that raise the temps. Would you deliberately raise the temperature of your PCIe m.2 drive or PCH by 20 or 30 degrees Celsius? A nearly identical system/configuration built on the maximus ix "hero" board has a PCH of 31C after an hour of running linpack. (I can attach a screenshot if you'd like. It's also posted MANY pages back when I was talking about trying to use VIDs to gauge a chip's overclockability.)

Again, I'm not an authority on PCH temps. I doubt many of us here on this forum are. I think most people agree, however, that lower temps (until you get below ambient and have condensation concerns) are better than higher temps.

When I have two boards, one has a PCH temp of 31 at load and the other has a PCH >50 at load, I start to wonder why...

I'll admit "brain dead" might be a bit overstated. Obviously, Asus is a business looking to make money, and the design decision helps with that. So, from their point of view, it's probably a great thing. Just like Intel's decisions in regards to IHS thermal interfaces.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Switch to Ryzen you can overclock to 3.9GHz to 4.0GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care about my PCH temperature, I don't think they have ever failed with use anyway.
> 
> The reason Intel does not solder the IHS to the die anymore to save on cost, also when the CPU is discarded solder is not environmentally friendly in land fills. Overclockers are less than 1/2% of Intel's profit, they don't give a crap about overclockers we are just lucky the make unlocked chips.


The really scary thing is that I'm considering the ryzen thing. I'm getting burned out playing the silicon lottery, and this third 7700k, while better than the second, really isn't good. On a warm day, I'll be going over 80C with a full blown custom water loop at stock speeds/voltages. Yes, I can exchange it again, and that's a consideration. However, I shouldn't have to. If I had some basic "stock intel OEM" air cooler, 80+ at load might be acceptable. With this loop, it's not. It leaves zero room to even attempt an overclock.

Oh, and I think this chip might also have weak cores. I let Asus do it's "all core enhancement" thing (so it turbos to 4.5 on all cores) with as much voltage as it wanted, and prime95 28.10 fails on 2 cores as soon as it starts the self-test.









Do I try for 7700k #4, or just get a different platform (knowing that I'll be lucky to get 4 GHz, that the platform is yet unproven, that drivers are in flux, firmware is in flux, but at least AMD spends the money to solder the IHS)? That's a question I'm going to need to answer...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> aye, and if you search the internet, people have been complaining about it for motherboard generations. Perhaps a 60C PCH isn't harmful. To be completely honest, I don't know. It can't be helpful, however. Perhaps it only shortens the lifespan a bit. Perhaps it doesn't have any impact whatsoever on the PCH. Conventional wisdom is that having electronics at higher temperatures 24/7 isn't good. Being tucked under that 'armor', the PCH takes a LONG time to cool down on a running system.
> 
> It also certainly doesn't make my m.2 drive happy. Taking off the plastic "armor" dropped temps on the m.2 by 20C and on the PCH by 5-10. (Removing the m.2 cover only partially exposes the PCH heatsink.)
> 
> When we, as enthusiasts, spend obscene amounts of money to cool our systems down, however, it seems odd that Asus would make design decisions that raise the temps. Would you deliberately raise the temperature of your PCIe m.2 drive or PCH by 20 or 30 degrees Celsius? A nearly identical system/configuration built on the *maximus ix "hero" board has a PCH of 31C after an hour of running linpack.* (I can attach a screenshot if you'd like. It's also posted MANY pages back when I was talking about trying to use VIDs to gauge a chip's overclockability.)
> 
> Again, I'm not an authority on PCH temps. I doubt many of us here on this forum are. I think most people agree, however, that lower temps (until you get below ambient and have condensation concerns) are better than higher temps.
> 
> When I have two boards, one has a PCH temp of 31 at load and the other has a PCH >50 at load, I start to wonder why...
> 
> I'll admit "brain dead" might be a bit overstated. *Obviously, Asus is a business looking to make money, and the design decision helps with that.* So, from their point of view, it's probably a great thing. Just like Intel's decisions in regards to IHS thermal interfaces.
> The really scary thing is that I'm considering the ryzen thing. *I'm getting burned out playing the silicon lottery, and this third 7700k*, while better than the second, really isn't good. On a warm day, I'll be going over 80C with a full blown custom water loop at stock speeds/voltages. Yes, I can exchange it again, and that's a consideration. However, I shouldn't have to. If I had some basic "stock intel OEM" air cooler, 80+ at load might be acceptable. With this loop, it's not. It leaves zero room to even attempt an overclock.
> 
> Oh, and I think this chip might also have weak cores. I let Asus do it's "all core enhancement" thing (so it turbos to 4.5 on all cores) with as much voltage as it wanted, and prime95 28.10 fails on 2 cores as soon as it starts the self-test.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do I try for 7700k #4, or just get a different platform (knowing that I'll be lucky to get 4 GHz, that the platform is yet unproven, that drivers are in flux, firmware is in flux, but at least AMD spends the money to solder the IHS)? That's a question I'm going to need to answer...


1. How does 1 hour of linpack affect PCH temps? VRM temps maybe
2. If the PCH temps on every generation of Asus Formula board was an issue (and they are in the business of making money as you say) then why keep the armour on there? If it was an issue and was a cause of a lot of RMA's (that cost them money) why haven't they changed it? Perhaps Asus knows more than most of us and don't deem it to be a problem. If you feel its a problem then buy a Hero board, simple.
3. Getting burned from playing the silicon lottery? Simple buy one from Silicon Lottery and get them to delid it...problem solved


----------



## briank

Hey @Darkwizzie, I submitted my overclock back on page 207. Is it ok to add to the chart?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> aye, and if you search the internet, people have been complaining about it for motherboard generations. Perhaps a 60C PCH isn't harmful. To be completely honest, I don't know. It can't be helpful, however. Perhaps it only shortens the lifespan a bit. Perhaps it doesn't have any impact whatsoever on the PCH. Conventional wisdom is that having electronics at higher temperatures 24/7 isn't good. Being tucked under that 'armor', the PCH takes a LONG time to cool down on a running system.
> 
> It also certainly doesn't make my m.2 drive happy. Taking off the plastic "armor" dropped temps on the m.2 by 20C and on the PCH by 5-10. (Removing the m.2 cover only partially exposes the PCH heatsink.)
> 
> When we, as enthusiasts, spend obscene amounts of money to cool our systems down, however, it seems odd that Asus would make design decisions that raise the temps. Would you deliberately raise the temperature of your PCIe m.2 drive or PCH by 20 or 30 degrees Celsius? A nearly identical system/configuration built on the maximus ix "hero" board has a PCH of 31C after an hour of running linpack. (I can attach a screenshot if you'd like. It's also posted MANY pages back when I was talking about trying to use VIDs to gauge a chip's overclockability.)
> 
> Again, I'm not an authority on PCH temps. I doubt many of us here on this forum are. I think most people agree, however, that lower temps (until you get below ambient and have condensation concerns) are better than higher temps.
> 
> When I have two boards, one has a PCH temp of 31 at load and the other has a PCH >50 at load, I start to wonder why...
> 
> I'll admit "brain dead" might be a bit overstated. Obviously, Asus is a business looking to make money, and the design decision helps with that. So, from their point of view, it's probably a great thing. Just like Intel's decisions in regards to IHS thermal interfaces.
> The really scary thing is that I'm considering the ryzen thing. I'm getting burned out playing the silicon lottery, and this third 7700k, while better than the second, really isn't good. On a warm day, I'll be going over 80C with a full blown custom water loop at stock speeds/voltages. Yes, I can exchange it again, and that's a consideration. However, I shouldn't have to. If I had some basic "stock intel OEM" air cooler, 80+ at load might be acceptable. With this loop, it's not. It leaves zero room to even attempt an overclock.
> 
> Oh, and I think this chip might also have weak cores. I let Asus do it's "all core enhancement" thing (so it turbos to 4.5 on all cores) with as much voltage as it wanted, and prime95 28.10 fails on 2 cores as soon as it starts the self-test.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do I try for 7700k #4, or just get a different platform (knowing that I'll be lucky to get 4 GHz, that the platform is yet unproven, that drivers are in flux, firmware is in flux, but at least AMD spends the money to solder the IHS)? That's a question I'm going to need to answer...


I would sell the Rig and go with Ryzen or https://siliconlottery.com/collections/lga-1151

I would not worry about the PCH it is good to 125c with a 3 year warranty.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Updated
> Charted. Your cache is not what you say it is.


Yes...for some reason, its set to 51 in bios, and some programs see it as 49....XTU sees it as 5.1 on settings tab (right hand side ) and as 49 on the button utilisation chart...same with CPU-z or Hwinfo...so not really sure how to correct that.









If anyone can give me some tip on how to correct it I can re-run the stability test...


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I would not worry about the PCH it is good to 125c with a 3 year warranty.


HWiNFO reports 118 °C on the motherboard (I guess it's the PCH). I wouldn't worry too much about it.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> HWiNFO reports 118 °C on the motherboard (I guess it's the PCH). I wouldn't worry too much about it.


What in the name of ***** are you guys doing ?! I'm running consistently higher CPU / RAM volts than you...crammed on a m-itx board...playing at the very limit of the platform and my Mobo / PCH never goes over 56 Celsius...


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> What in the name of ***** are you guys doing ?! I'm running consistently higher CPU / RAM volts than you...crammed on a m-itx board...playing at the very limit of the platform and my Mobo / PCH never goes over 56 Celsius...


Nothing. Even stock the PCH (if it's the Motherboard in HWiNFO) is hot. I have 2 fans for intake and 1 for outtake with positive pressure.



The side and front is taken off to have better ventilation because I was doing ROG OC Showdown submissions with pretty high Vcore.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> What in the name of ***** are you guys doing ?! I'm running consistently higher CPU / RAM volts than you...crammed on a m-itx board...playing at the very limit of the platform and my Mobo / PCH never goes over 56 Celsius...


Sometimes values read incorrectly in software.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *briank*
> 
> Hey @Darkwizzie, I submitted my overclock back on page 207. Is it ok to add to the chart?


Charted.


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Set it in BIOS. Not the Q-FAN shortcut at the top but in the Monitoring section. If you can control it from there then it's good. Booting in Windows resulting in 100% fan speed indicates that AI Suite has taken over the control. Uninstall it or just disable from running at startup. Check Services as well because there are 2 or 3 ASUS services running. You need to disable them from starting up.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Sometimes values read incorrectly in software.
> Charted.


so what do i need to do to have my 5.2ghz on the chart ive had the cpu for 2 weeks now @ 5.2ghz https://valid.x86.fr/zw6wqu


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Nothing. Even stock the PCH (if it's the Motherboard in HWiNFO) is hot. I have 2 fans for intake and 1 for outtake with positive pressure.
> 
> 
> 
> The side and front is taken off to have better ventilation because I was doing ROG OC Showdown submissions with pretty high Vcore.


I have a 21-24 Ambient...and no fans blowing on Motherboard as I have liquid cooling now, so ....I doubt you have 50+ degrees air temp in your case + you have some airflow over the Motherboard from the CPU fan and intake fan...
Check your "Auto" voltages....lower Standby to 1 V, PCH to 1.025 V...Pll Bandwidth to 0.920, check some other values...see if PLL OC is on Auto, move it to LVL 0 -2

Rune a bench at 1.456 CPU and 1.575 Ram and Mobo / PCH still not went over 56
Either that or my temp readings are way way wrong ...will try and check with an external sensor


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I have a 21-24 Ambient...and no fans blowing on Motherboard as I have liquid cooling now, so ....I doubt you have 50+ degrees air temp in your case + you have some airflow over the Motherboard from the CPU fan and intake fan...
> Check your "Auto" voltages....lower Standby to 1 V, PCH to 1.025 V...Pll Bandwidth to 0.920, check some other values...see if PLL OC is on Auto, move it to LVL 0 -2
> 
> Rune a bench at 1.456 CPU and 1.575 Ram and Mobo / PCH still not went over 56
> Either that or my temp readings are way way wrong ...will try and check with an external sensor


i run a gpu bench and a cpu bench at the same time my pch got to 45c 23c Ambient


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I have a 21-24 Ambient...and no fans blowing on Motherboard as I have liquid cooling now, so ....I doubt you have 50+ degrees air temp in your case + you have some airflow over the Motherboard from the CPU fan and intake fan...
> Check your "Auto" voltages....lower Standby to 1 V, PCH to 1.025 V...Pll Bandwidth to 0.920, check some other values...see if PLL OC is on Auto, move it to LVL 0 -2
> 
> Rune a bench at 1.456 CPU and 1.575 Ram and Mobo / PCH still not went over 56
> Either that or my temp readings are way way wrong ...will try and check with an external sensor


Standby voltage was set by me to 0.8 V. Don't have PLL OC, only Internal PLL voltage in the Tweakers Paradise section.

Adjusted Internal PLL voltage from Auto to 0.930 V and PCH voltage from Auto to 1 V. Didn't touch those previously as I have no clue what they do and what are the correct/stable/optimal voltages. Still, with the minimum voltages my Motherboard sensor reports 118 °C.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Standby voltage was set by me to 0.8 V. Don't have PLL OC, only Internal PLL voltage in the Tweakers Paradise section.
> 
> Adjusted Internal PLL voltage from Auto to 0.930 V and PCH voltage from Auto to 1 V. Didn't touch those previously as I have no clue what they do and what are the correct/stable/optimal voltages. Still, with the minimum voltages my Motherboard sensor reports 118 °C.


Reports the same in different software ?! maybe you have something like I am experiencing (cache not showing right amount in different software)


----------



## dirtyred

EDIT:









There are 2 Motherboard sensors. I was looking at the first one. The second matches the readings from BIOS.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are 2 Motherboard sensors. I was looking at the first one. The second matches the readings from BIOS.


haha..Your sorted than









EDIT: Btw...when you did run 5.1 cache was at 49 ?


----------



## dirtyred

On 51 multi and 101 BCLK my system was pretty unstable, barely maded through XTU, sometimes crashing with same settings. If I recall correctly cache was around 46 or 47. I did went up to 1.39 Vcore on air while barely below 100 °C but couldn't really get it stable or give more than 1644 points (mostly 1620) in XTU and that was with 50 multi and 101 BCLK: http://hwbot.org/submission/3540866_dirtyred_xtu_core_i7_7700k_1644_marks


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> On 51 multi and 101 BCLK my system was pretty unstable, barely maded through XTU, sometimes crashing with same settings. If I recall correctly cache was around 46 or 47. I did went up to 1.39 Vcore on air while barely below 100 °C but couldn't really get it stable or give more than 1644 points (mostly 1620) in XTU and that was with 50 multi and 101 BCLK: http://hwbot.org/submission/3540866_dirtyred_xtu_core_i7_7700k_1644_marks


undervolting the phase lock loop _may_ result in skewed (or flat out wrong) readings from any of the on-board DTS'. THat said, HWi is known from report values from sensors that do not exist.


----------



## becks

@jpmboy any ideea why my cache automatically sets itself 0.300 lower than whatever the core is at ?! even if i set CPU at 5.1 and Uncore at 5.1 it reads 4.9 in OS....
Only one reading it as 5.1 is XTU on the Bios settings tab...


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> undervolting the phase lock loop _may_ result in skewed (or flat out wrong) readings from any of the on-board DTS'. THat said, HWi is known from report values from sensors that do not exist.


I don't know if I can undervolt PLL because the standard and minimum values are both 0.9 V.



I read everywhere about 80 °C (der8auer said 85 °C) safe core temperatures for 7700K. But how harmful is going over it for couple of minutes? Like reaching 98-100 °C couple of times in XTU?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I don't know if I can undervolt PLL because the standard and minimum values are both 0.9 V.
> 
> 
> 
> I read everywhere about 80 °C (der8auer said 85 °C) safe core temperatures for 7700K. But how harmful is going over it for couple of minutes? Like reaching 98-100 °C couple of times in XTU?


Going over 80 or 85 degrees C momentarily isn't going to cause any damage or long term issues even if you reach 100 degrees C it will just throttle no harm done


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> @jpmboy any ideea why my cache automatically sets itself 0.300 lower than whatever the core is at ?! even if i set CPU at 5.1 and Uncore at 5.1 it reads 4.9 in OS....
> Only one reading it as 5.1 is XTU on the Bios settings tab...


what MB? (fillout rig builder and add it to your sig block







)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I don't know if I can undervolt PLL because the standard and minimum values are both 0.9 V.
> 
> I read everywhere about 80 °C (der8auer said 85 °C) safe core temperatures for 7700K. But how harmful is going over it for couple of minutes? Like reaching 98-100 °C couple of times in XTU?


it's fine for short periods. Keep an eye on "Package Temp". It may be 10+C higher than the cores... you want to keep this under 100C (you might even be able to smell when it goes higher







)

Regarding "undervolting"... if the Auto rules would set PLL to 1.1V dropping it to 0.9V would be considered low. But sure, there is a bios minimum on many boards.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


Maximus VIII Impact


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Maximus VIII Impact


what IA AC and IA DC load line settings are you using?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what IA AC and IA DC load line settings are you using?


0.01 for both with adaptive + LLC 6
Or
0.01 + manual for bench runs..

If I set cache to 225.5 / min auto / 51 I get OS reading of 4.9
If I set cache to 225.5 / min auto / 50 I get OS reading of 4.9

Reinstalled OS...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> 0.01 for both with adaptive + LLC 6
> Or
> 0.01 + manual for bench runs..
> 
> If I set cache to 225.5 / min auto / 51 I get OS reading of 4.9
> If I set cache to 225.5 / min auto / 50 I get OS reading of 4.9
> 
> Reinstalled OS...


uh... what are you using to read the cache frequency? Disable INtel speed shift, check the cache clock on the cpuZ memory tab.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> uh... what are you using to read the cache frequency? Disable INtel speed shift, check the cache clock on the cpuZ memory tab.


HWinfo...Cpu-z...XTU... all report 4.9 (Only XTU sees cache at 5.1 on bios settings tab where you can adjust the multiplier and V)

Will try Speed Shift off when I get to PC later... Thank you


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> HWinfo...Cpu-z...XTU... all report 4.9 (Only XTU sees cache at 5.1 on bios settings tab where you can adjust the multiplier and V)
> 
> Will try Speed Shift off when I get to PC later... Thank you


sorry bro - that's just a weird reporting glitch I'd bet.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> sorry bro - that's just a weird reporting glitch I'd bet.


Reinstalled BIOS like 12 times already








Will try an old X85 trick and install a lower tier BIOS first run a default bios post check than install latest BIOS


----------



## rt123

I think that's an Asus & other mobo vendor limitation placed on Kaby. I don't think I've ever been able to do 1:1 Cache on ambient on Kaby. IIRC.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> HWinfo...Cpu-z...XTU... all report 4.9 (Only XTU sees cache at 5.1 on bios settings tab where you can adjust the multiplier and V)
> 
> Will try Speed Shift off when I get to PC later... Thank you


I don't really trust XTU especially for voltages. It reports 0 V for core and cache.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> I think that's an Asus & other mobo vendor limitation placed on Kaby. I don't think I've ever been able to do 1:1 Cache on ambient on Kaby. IIRC.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I don't really trust XTU especially for voltages. It reports 0 V for core and cache.


Btw...what are the "changes" that happen when you switch the pin to LN2 Mode ?....
Worth doing it for certain "unlocks" ?


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I don't really trust XTU especially for voltages. It reports 0 V for core and cache.


funny you dont trust much do you it reads mine fine


----------



## dirtyred

Before I reinstalled my OS it was reading it but now with a fresh install it doesn't.


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Before I reinstalled my OS it was reading it but now with a fresh install it doesn't.


im on a fresh install as well ive only had my ASUS ROG Maximus IX Formula Motherboard mobo for 2 weeks maybe try redownloading the new ver


----------



## dirtyred

Could anyone explain to me what exactly is Internal PLL voltage, what it does and how does it affect OC?
PCH voltage by default is set to AUTO. When do I have to increase it and by how much?


----------



## caenlen

Not sure where else to ask this.

I have a Kaby Lake CPU, in BIOS I have the option to enable Intel Trusted Execution and also another thing called Software Guard Extension, should I enable these two items? They were disabled by default.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what MB? (fillout rig builder and add it to your sig block
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> it's fine for short periods. Keep an eye on "Package Temp". It may be 10+C higher than the cores... you want to keep this under 100C (you might even be able to smell when it goes higher
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> Regarding "undervolting"... if the Auto rules would set PLL to 1.1V dropping it to 0.9V would be considered low. But sure, there is a bios minimum on many boards.


At 100c the CPU will throttle down to 4.2GHz on a i7 7700k to prevent damage. Intel advertises 4.2Ghz base clock up to turbo boost of 4.5GHz when temperature, voltage, boost bins, requirements are met. When folks overclock past maximum turbo boost with Intel the turbo boost is still active except for boost bins is overridden. Intel have a 3 year warranty to backup the operation of the thermal throttling.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> uh... what are you using to read the cache frequency? Disable INtel speed shift, check the cache clock on the cpuZ memory tab.


I use Intel speed shift with all powersaving features when overclocking, why should speed shift be disabled?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> At 100c the CPU will throttle down to 4.2GHz on a i7 7700k to prevent damage. Intel advertises 4.2Ghz base clock up to turbo boost of 4.5GHz when temperature, voltage, boost bins, requirements are met. When folks overclock past maximum turbo boost with Intel the turbo boost is still active except for boost bins is overridden. Intel have a 3 year warranty to backup the operation of the thermal throttling.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I use Intel speed shift with all powersaving features when overclocking, why should speed shift be disabled?


I don't think you went trough the whole conversation...
No offence intended wingman99..

He was replying to me in regards to my question about my Cache overclocking (Uncore)


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Could anyone explain to me what exactly is Internal PLL voltage, what it does and how does it affect OC?
> PCH voltage by default is set to AUTO. When do I have to increase it and by how much?


PLL has been debated greatly like 45-50 pages back ( been debated for 30 pages or so







) )

PCH helps with high cache / mem overclock (at times even with really high cpu oc )
But as z170 and z270 don't have a proper north and south bridge anymore with this chipset PCH plays small basic roles... like :

PCH initialisation before and after microcode loading
Post memory initialisation
PCH runtime services / device initialisation ...


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I use Intel speed shift with all powersaving features when overclocking, why should speed shift be disabled?


Speed Shift was really designed for notebooks. It's a way to allow the CPU to take back some of the P-state control from Windows 10 for quicker response times between power states. It allows the CPU to determine what clock speeds are best for whatever tasks you're doing. _This means that the CPU itself sometimes decides to go slower than you've told it to_. It's a power-savings oriented down-clock mechanism and it's down-clocking you behind your back!









On the upside, your computer may generally feel more responsive. Mine does.

And it can actually help machines with not-so-stellar overclock settings perform better in benchmarks because the CPU can throttle back on performance when it's having trouble. However, a good benching setup will out-perform it.

And here you've sitting there thinking you've been running @ 5.2 GHz that whole time...









That's my understanding, anyway.









If you're not benching, leave it on. It's quick and smooth.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Speed Shift was really designed for notebooks. It's a way to allow the CPU to take back some of the P-state control from Windows 10 for quicker response times between power states. It allows the CPU to determine what clock speeds are best for whatever tasks you're doing. _This means that the CPU itself sometimes decides to go slower than you've told it to_. It's a power-savings oriented down-clock mechanism and it's down-clocking you behind your back!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the upside, your computer may generally feel more responsive. Mine does.
> 
> And it can actually help machines with not-so-stellar overclock settings perform better in benchmarks because the CPU can throttle back on performance when it's having trouble. However, a good benching setup will out-perform it.
> 
> And here you've sitting there thinking you've been running @ 5.2 GHz that whole time...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's my understanding, anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you're not benching, leave it on. It's quick and smooth.


I like speed shift also, it ramps up faster because it is processor hardware driven compared to speed step that is OS driven.

I save 14 watts with all my powersavings features on at idle. That is enough to power two 8 watt LED bulbs in my room.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> At 100c the CPU will throttle down to 4.2GHz on a i7 7700k to prevent damage. Intel advertises 4.2Ghz base clock up to turbo boost of 4.5GHz when temperature, voltage, boost bins, requirements are met. When folks overclock past maximum turbo boost with Intel the turbo boost is still active except for boost bins is overridden. Intel have a 3 year warranty to backup the operation of the thermal throttling.


I don't see your posts unless someone else quotes it. that said, the throttle temperature, Tcase, Tjuct and ProcHot traps are there for when conditions are out of user control. Also, the thermal limit you refer to REQUIRES other operating conditions are met at that temperature for robustness testing to be applicable, so bouncing off the thermal safety - occasionally - may be fine IF the voltage and clocks are stock. NONE of the specifications and durability aors (acceptable operating range) are intended to be used in isolation from the others. Once overclocked beyond the stock specs, they do not apply. I mean, lol, even look at the storage temps... we're running these things at temperatures lower than intel recommends for storage.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I don't see your posts unless someone else quotes it. that said, the throttle temperature, Tcase, Tjuct and ProcHot traps are there for when conditions are out of user control. Also, the thermal limit you refer to REQUIRES other operating conditions are met at that temperature for robustness testing to be applicable, so bouncing off the thermal safety - occasionally - may be fine IF the voltage and clocks are stock. NONE of the specifications and durability aors (acceptable operating range) are intended to be used in isolation from the others. Once overclocked beyond the stock specs, they do not apply. I mean, lol, even look at the storage temps... we're running these things at temperatures lower than intel recommends for storage.


Intel would not advertise the temperature throttling base clock speed of 4.2GHz if it was not suppose to be used for the duration of the 3 year warranty at stock settings. TCC Activation is at 100c So I could run the Processor at 99c 24/7 for 3 years and not void the warranty.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel would not advertise the temperature throttling base clock speed of 4.2GHz if it was not suppose to be used for the duration of the 3 year warranty at stock settings. TCC Activation is at 100c So I could run the Processor at 99c 24/7 for 3 years and not void the warranty.


It's not about the warranty... 80% of people o this very thread of the forum have they'r cpu's delidded...
Its about... will it last ? or will you come on day to watch your favourite channel on Y-tube and find your PC is not powering on anymore ?!

Even if you still have the warranty... do you like the hassle ?!
Except bench testing I always keep the CPU under 86 Celsius...at all cost...

N.B. Ram has lifetime warranty now, with most companies... do you see anyone running theirs at 1.6v 24/7 just because its warranty covered ?
Its a balance between it can be done and ... I want peace and quietness and no more hassle.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> PLL has been debated greatly like 45-50 pages back ( been debated for 30 pages or so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) )


It's hard to find anything in this topic if you're not reading it every day. So I googled it, got a few answers from this forum as well but it's not really clear. I've read the Intel documentation as well where it states that the typical PLL voltage is 1 V +/- 5 %. No explanation on what it does influence other then frequencies just some speculations that it might influence sensor readings. I'd like to know how does it influence OC stability or does it influence anything else.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel would not advertise the temperature throttling base clock speed of 4.2GHz if it was not suppose to be used for the duration of the 3 year warranty at stock settings. TCC Activation is at 100c So I could run the Processor at 99c 24/7 for 3 years and not void the warranty.


So you're saying it's fine to run the CPU on 99 °C 24/7 and be fine? Then I don't understand why the maximum recommended temperature by many people is 80 °C. Where does that 80 °C come from? Why 80 °C and not 75 °C or 85 °C?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> It's hard to find anything in this topic if you're not reading it every day. So I googled it, got a few answers from this forum as well but it's not really clear. I've read the Intel documentation as well where it states that the typical PLL voltage is 1 V +/- 5 %. No explanation on what it does influence other then frequencies just some speculations that it might influence sensor readings. I'd like to know how does it influence OC stability or does it influence anything else.
> So you're saying it's fine to run the CPU on 99 °C 24/7 and be fine? Then I don't understand why the maximum recommended temperature by many people is 80 °C. Where does that 80 °C come from? Why 80 °C and not 75 °C or 85 °C?


Unfortunately nowadays I don't allocate the time to test these kinds of things with PLL. It just takes too much time and tech changes all the time.

Intel could replace chips that ran at 99C, but even if they made it so any CPU that goes above 80C have warrenty voided they wouldn't know who did hit 80C and who passed 80C. I can imagine somebody who doesn't know what they're doing with a 7700k running Prime95 for days on a cooler equivalent to stock cooler and hit very high temps. Voiding warranty over that seems to be dangerous territory PR wise.

Just in general as you know CPUs don't break that often. Degradation okay, outright broken not so much.

As far as why 80C or not 75 or 85C, I believe it's mostly arbitrary. But really, what are people doing that hits 80C on normal loads?


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Btw...what are the "changes" that happen when you switch the pin to LN2 Mode ?....
> Worth doing it for certain "unlocks" ?


Only voltages raised to a level you don't want on ambient. Not worth it at all.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> As far as why 80C or not 75 or 85C, I believe it's mostly arbitrary. But really, what are people doing that hits 80C on normal loads?


Overclocking


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Overclocking


I dunno, even on 4670k not delidded I was doing fine. I guess... higher voltages in 6700k and HT might push it over.

If I was pushing it that much I'd delid now anyways, especially with delidding easier than ever before.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Overclocking


overclocking with insufficient cooling capacity, Right now I have a 7700K running at 5.2 at 100% load with no AVX offset on Boinc for the past 6 days (and many more to go till the Pentathlon ends







). Max core temp recorded is 55C, max package is 63C. Yes, delidded and water cooled. If I see 80+c I know my cooling has failed, the OC/voltage is too high
That's the thing - right? If you know/understand the cooling capacity of what ever you are using, you set your personal limit for operating temperatures. With the NH-D14 on that same rig, 80C is fine since I know that is the steady-state load condition for that cooler. There is no absolute max temp for 24/7 use withouot considering the SS heat dissipation capacity of the cooling solution.









As darkwizzie says... it all depends.


----------



## wholeeo

Might do the Boinc thing. Sounds like a fun stability test.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> It's not about the warranty... 80% of people o this very thread of the forum have they'r cpu's delidded...
> Its about... will it last ? or will you come on day to watch your favourite channel on Y-tube and find your PC is not powering on anymore ?!
> 
> Even if you still have the warranty... do you like the hassle ?!
> Except bench testing I always keep the CPU under 86 Celsius...at all cost...
> 
> N.B. Ram has lifetime warranty now, with most companies... do you see anyone running theirs at 1.6v 24/7 just because its warranty covered ?
> Its a balance between it can be done and ... I want peace and quietness and no more hassle.


It's not about the warranty, I'm just showing Intel makes the CPU durable at high temp of 99c for a strait 24/7 3 year operation. 90% of the people that build PC's don't belong to a forum. Intel makes using all there processors in the world dummy proof, they have to otherwise they would have warranty's coming out there ears. My stock HP i5 2 core laptop runs 87c at 24c ambient, what would it do at 38c ambient outside the home. To tell you the truth I have not seen a PC die do to heat in 22 years in the forums, so what does it take to damage a processor or any silicon chip due to heat, well it would take running it out of specification.

Your reference to voltage is outside the specification and would cause a failure sooner. Just because we are in the forums does not mean we know what is going on in the silicon chips with heat, that is what the specification are for, then Intel has are backs covered also with PROCHOT.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> overclocking with insufficient cooling capacity, Right now I have a 7700K running at 5.2 at 100% load with no AVX offset on Boinc for the past 6 days (and many more to go till the Pentathlon ends
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). Max core temp recorded is 55C, max package is 63C. Yes, delidded and water cooled. If I see 80+c I know my cooling has failed, the OC/voltage is too high
> That's the thing - right? If you know/understand the cooling capacity of what ever you are using, you set your personal limit for operating temperatures. With the NH-D14 on that same rig, 80C is fine since I know that is the steady-state load condition for that cooler. There is no absolute max temp for 24/7 use withouot considering the SS heat dissipation capacity of the cooling solution.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As darkwizzie says... it all depends.


Obviously mine isn't delidded. I plan to sell and upgrade it anyways when Coffe Lake comes out.

I usually prefer to run the PC as silent as possible. I run the CPU at 4.8 GHz @ 1.25 V. My fans will ramp up only above 70 °C to around 60% and only at 80 °C will reach 100%. Below 70 °C they are running at the minimum they can, mostly 4-500 RPM. If I would run the fans at 100% then I can go up to 1.32 V and 5 GHz and stay below 80 °C. The only time they pass 80 °C is while stress testing with RealBench or Prime95.


----------



## garyd9

I'm a bit confused about something in regards to siliconlottery.com, and I hope that people here can clear it up for me. On their product page for their 7700k 5.2GHz bin, they state that the chip passed 1 hour of RealBench with a 52x multipler and 1.44v voltage using a Corsair H105 AiO with 22C ambient. They also say that the chip has NOT been delidded. (It's an additional service that can be purchased.)

They do NOT mention (unless I missed it) the max core temperature they allow for passing their testing.

Full stress test load at 1.44 volts with a 52x multipler WITHOUT delidding and using a AiO? That seems a bit hard to believe unless the chip is thermal throttling like mad the entire time.

Does anyone know what SL allows as a max core temperature for their binning? Is it possible that they don't limit it and ignore thermal throttling? Does a chip "pass" their testing as long as it doesn't crash?

Edit:

I just realized that there's a SL vendor section of the forum.. and I should probably have posted there. If a moderator can please delete this post, I'd appreciate it as I'll be reposting over there.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> It's not about the warranty, I'm just showing Intel makes the CPU durable at high temp of 99c for a strait 24/7 3 year operation. 90% of the people that build PC's don't belong to a forum. Intel makes using all there processors in the world dummy proof, they have to otherwise they would have warranty's coming out there ears. My stock HP i5 2 core laptop runs 87c at 24c ambient, what would it do at 38c ambient outside the home. To tell you the truth I have not seen a PC die do to heat in 22 years in the forums, so what does it take to damage a processor or any silicon chip due to heat, well it would take running it out of specification.
> 
> Your reference to voltage is outside the specification and would cause a failure sooner. Just because we are in the forums does not mean we know what is going on in the silicon chips with heat, that is what the specification are for, then Intel has are backs covered also with PROCHOT.


I understand now what you trying to say and I agree...
Withing the "default" values (Temp/Load/V etc) they guarantee it for 3 years at that temp...
Not for what we do, even at lower temps...


----------



## slightly mad

*Username*: slightly mad
*CPU Model:* i7 7700k
*Base Clock:* 100
*Core Multiplier:* 50
*Core Frequency:* 5.0
*Cache Frequency:* 4.5
*Vcore in UEFI:* 1.310v ataptive voltage
*Vcore:* 1.344v
*FCLK:* 1000
*Cooling Solution:* Delidded (Phobya LM), NH-D15
*Stability Test:* x264 16 Threads, 8 hours
*Batch Number:* Malay L643G222
*Ram Speed:* 3466 19-21-21 2T (stock with XMP is 2400 at 15-15-15-36)
*Ram Voltage:* 1.2v
*VCCIO:* 1.1000v
*VCCSA:* 1.1250v
*Motherboard:* Z270, Asus IX Code
*LLC Setting:* 5
*Misc Comments:* No AVX offset was used. Had to raise CPU PLL OC to 1.1v for stability.

Stable with x264 and Prime95 blend or custom with 1344. OCCT 4.5 gives errors, stable only with 1.392v
I hope u can add my result to the main list. I've forgot to setup x264 to infinite loops, so its stopped after 50.
In 4 minutes I've started another one with 30 loops. Its 9 hours+ of stress testing. There was no BSODS or crashes (screenshot with HWiINFO uptime).




x264-log_OCN.rtf 4k .rtf file


x264-log_OCN2.rtf 3k .rtf file


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slightly mad*
> 
> *Username*: slightly mad
> *CPU Model:* i7 7700k
> *Base Clock:* 100
> *Core Multiplier:* 50
> *Core Frequency:* 5.0
> *Cache Frequency:* 4.5
> *Vcore in UEFI:* 1.310v ataptive voltage
> *Vcore:* 1.344v
> *FCLK:* 1000
> *Cooling Solution:* Delidded (Phobya LM), NH-D15
> *Stability Test:* x264 16 Threads, 8 hours
> *Batch Number:* Malay L643G222
> *Ram Speed:* 3466 19-21-21 2T (stock with XMP is 2400 at 15-15-15-36)
> *Ram Voltage:* 1.2v
> *VCCIO:* 1.1000v
> *VCCSA:* 1.1250v
> *Motherboard:* Z270, Asus IX Code
> *LLC Setting:* 5
> *Misc Comments:* No AVX offset was used. Had to raise CPU PLL OC to 1.1v for stability.
> 
> Stable with x264 and Prime95 blend or custom with 1344. OCCT 4.5 gives errors, stable only with 1.392v
> I hope u can add my result to the main list. I've forgot to setup x264 to infinite loops, so its stopped after 50.
> In 4 minutes I've started another one with 30 loops. Its 9 hours+ of stress testing. There was no BSODS or crashes (screenshot with HWiINFO uptime).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> x264-log_OCN.rtf 4k .rtf file
> 
> 
> x264-log_OCN2.rtf 3k .rtf file


Looks good to me.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Might do the Boinc thing. Sounds like a fun stability test.


it's very cpu focused and we need as many threads as you have! Sprint event is just starting.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1627900/8th-boinc-pentathlon-may-5th-19th-2017/840_20#post_26085183
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Obviously mine isn't delidded. I plan to sell and upgrade it anyways when Coffe Lake comes out.
> 
> I usually prefer to run the PC as silent as possible. I run the CPU at 4.8 GHz @ 1.25 V. My fans will ramp up only above 70 °C to around 60% and only at 80 °C will reach 100%. Below 70 °C they are running at the minimum they can, mostly 4-500 RPM. If I would run the fans at 100% then I can go up to 1.32 V and 5 GHz and stay below 80 °C. The only time they pass 80 °C is while stress testing with RealBench or Prime95.


yeah - I agree i like them silent also.. but with 64 threads and 7 gpu cores running flat out right now, it can't be silent in here.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> I'm a bit confused about something in regards to siliconlottery.com, and I hope that people here can clear it up for me. On their product page for their 7700k 5.2GHz bin, they state that the chip passed 1 hour of RealBench with a 52x multipler and 1.44v voltage using a Corsair H105 AiO with 22C ambient. They also say that the chip has NOT been delidded. (It's an additional service that can be purchased.)
> They do NOT mention (unless I missed it) the max core temperature they allow for passing their testing.
> Full stress test load at 1.44 volts with a 52x multipler WITHOUT delidding and using a AiO? That seems a bit hard to believe unless the chip is thermal throttling like mad the entire time.
> Des anyone know what SL allows as a max core temperature for their binning? Is it possible that they don't limit it and ignore thermal throttling? Does a chip "pass" their testing as long as it doesn't crash?
> Edit:
> I just realized that there's a SL vendor section of the forum.. and I should probably have posted there. If a moderator can please delete this post, I'd appreciate it as I'll be reposting over there.


SL is very responsive to questions - just ask them. (he's an overclocker just like the rest of us)


----------



## Forecast

Got an additional 7700K. Batch L707B650, but it says it was made in Vietnam? I thought L batches were made in Malaysia? Seems to be about the latest batch number I can find anywhere online. Anyone seen anything past 701/702?

I just thought Vietnam batches started with X???


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> Got an additional 7700K. Batch L707B650, but it says it was made in Vietnam? I thought L batches were made in Malaysia? Seems to be about the latest batch number I can find anywhere online. Anyone seen anything past 701/702?
> 
> I just thought Vietnam batches started with X???


They can start will L as well, I made the same mistake thinking Vietnam was only an X prefix


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> I'm a bit confused about something in regards to siliconlottery.com, and I hope that people here can clear it up for me. On their product page for their 7700k 5.2GHz bin, they state that the chip passed 1 hour of RealBench with a 52x multipler and 1.44v voltage using a Corsair H105 AiO with 22C ambient. They also say that the chip has NOT been delidded. (It's an additional service that can be purchased.)
> 
> They do NOT mention (unless I missed it) the max core temperature they allow for passing their testing.
> 
> Full stress test load at 1.44 volts with a 52x multipler WITHOUT delidding and using a AiO? That seems a bit hard to believe unless the chip is thermal throttling like mad the entire time.
> 
> Does anyone know what SL allows as a max core temperature for their binning? Is it possible that they don't limit it and ignore thermal throttling? Does a chip "pass" their testing as long as it doesn't crash?
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I just realized that there's a SL vendor section of the forum.. and I should probably have posted there. If a moderator can please delete this post, I'd appreciate it as I'll be reposting over there.


Hello

Not all 7700k overheat at + 1.30v.. My first 7700k that need 1.36v for 5Ghz hit 90c easily while Cinebench while my current one hit 80c max under stress test (RB) at same clock/voltage... both not delided and under H105..
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> Got an additional 7700K. Batch L707B650, but it says it was made in Vietnam? I thought L batches were made in Malaysia? Seems to be about the latest batch number I can find anywhere online. Anyone seen anything past 701/702?
> 
> I just thought Vietnam batches started with X???


The batch mean nothing at all, don't waste time searching for OC result for same batch... I had 2 cpu with same batch and one was potato while the other one was good..









and yes, Vietnam now is X or L for the 7700k...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> Got an additional 7700K. Batch L707B650, but it says it was made in Vietnam? I thought L batches were made in Malaysia? Seems to be about the latest batch number I can find anywhere online. Anyone seen anything past 701/702?
> 
> I just thought Vietnam batches started with X???


I have a Vietnam L706B501, nothing to write home about. It's running 5.0 stable, but at 1.35 in bios (I think that's right, it's BOINCing at the moment showing 1.36 cpu core, 1.355 cpu vid in Aida64).


----------



## BoredErica

Realbench v4.5.0 is out.

http://www.ocbase.com/


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Realbench v4.5.0 is out.
> 
> http://www.ocbase.com/


I tried it out a few weeks ago. Much tougher to pass then previous version.


----------



## Coldplayer

So i just did a basic OC 5ghz @ 1.36v (plan on lowering it) and ram is just XMP. Apart from that i haven't touched anything. Should i bother Oc'ing cpu cache?

http://imgur.com/a/xgf0U

What voltages of these should i adjust or should i leave them manual?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Coldplayer*
> 
> So i just did a basic OC 5ghz @ 1.36v (plan on lowering it) and ram is just XMP. Apart from that i haven't touched anything. Should i bother Oc'ing cpu cache?
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/xgf0U
> 
> What voltages of these should i adjust or should i leave them manual?


Overclocking the cache will gain you a little bit of performance on benchmarks not so much in real world applications, nonetheless its still free performance. Cache voltage is tied to core voltage so increase cache to whatever you can whilst maintaining core stability. Your SA and IO voltages seem a bit high for Auto perhaps lower them both to around 1.2V to 1.25V then test for stability using OCCT or Realbench


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Realbench v4.5.0 is out.
> 
> http://www.ocbase.com/


RealBench V2.54, is it new?


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> RealBench V2.54, is it new?


It's new to me. I've been running 2.4 since March. This one says 2.54 in the Header bar.


----------



## Gurkburk

5.3Ghz. Noctua NH 15D(?) cooler.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> 
> 
> 5.3Ghz. Noctua NH 15D(?) cooler.


I wouldn't recommend that clockspeed or voltage with that cooler setup. It appears that you were only running the AIDA64 stress test with "CPU" only checked. That particular test requires about the same amount of voltage as it does to simply load Windows. Running "CPU, FPU, and Cache" tests together will put a better load on the CPU, but is still very easy in my opinion compared to something like RealBench. Maybe try to see if it can even run Cinebench R15 before proceeding?


----------



## Gurkburk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I wouldn't recommend that clockspeed or voltage with that cooler setup. It appears that you were only running the AIDA64 stress test with "CPU" only checked. That particular test requires about the same amount of voltage as it does to simply load Windows. Running "CPU, FPU, and Cache" tests together will put a better load on the CPU, but is still very easy in my opinion compared to something like RealBench. Maybe try to see if it can even run Cinebench R15 before proceeding?


I'll run Realbench soon.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> 
> 
> 5.3Ghz. Noctua NH 15D(?) cooler.


Yeah... any significant load and that's a thermal throttle head banger. You can get very good OCs on a delidded CPU using the NH-D14 or D15.


----------



## Gurkburk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Yeah... any significant load and that's a thermal throttle head banger. You can get very good OCs on a delidded CPU using the NH-D14 or D15.


This is delidded, with CLU. I ran Realbench with 1.4V @ 5.2Ghz, just bumped it up to 5.3 and 1.44v to test it out, ran fine in Aida as you saw there. But ill run Realbench soon.

Edit: Yah Realbench shut it down







Back to 5.2 stable then! ^^

1.4v @ 5.2Ghz is what i'm running stable on the noctua cooler.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> 
> 
> 5.3Ghz. Noctua NH 15D(?) cooler.


Not impossible if the benchmark is not demanding. It all goes down to CPU wattage.

http://hwbot.org/submission/3548023_

I can run 5.3 GHz and be around 75-85 °C in SuperPI as it's a single threaded benchmark but only 5.2 GHz in GPUPI which is more demanding. I wouldn't use this 24/7 and definetly would not call it stable. Good for 5-10 minutes only.

Good luck running RealBench for 8 hours on that clock speed and voltage. Most probably will thermal throttle of shut down in seconds.


----------



## Gurkburk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Not impossible if the benchmark is not demanding. It all goes down to CPU wattage.
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3548023_
> 
> I can run 5.3 GHz and be around 75-85 °C in SuperPI as it's a single threaded benchmark but only 5.2 GHz in GPUPI which is more demanding. I wouldn't use this 24/7 and definetly would not call it stable. Good for 5-10 minutes only.
> 
> Good luck running RealBench for 8 hours on that clock speed and voltage. Most probably will thermal throttle of shut down in seconds.


Check my second post after, i dropped the volt & clock to 5.2 again.

Edit: Is 8hour stresstesting still a thing?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> Edit: Is 8hour stresstesting still a thing?


I'll just share that 8 hours is not easy @ 5.2. I had several settings that failed after 2-6 hours, but found what worked for 8 hours eventually. Now, I run 5.1 because 2% clock speed isn't worth more than 100mv extra and the summer months are here and my ambient is higher. I could careless if this chip fails after 3 years so I'm not opposed to running higher volts, but even after 8 hours of realbench; I experienced a few lockups. My motherboard only supports manual or offset voltage and although offset works much better...the range is too much to keep it stable for all work loads at 5.2. I could pass 8 hours realbench one night and the next day freeze while only browsing the web. I gamed for a week straight and then had one crash.. one crash too many for my tastes. My vcore would peak 1.47 and go down to as low was 1.328 in realbench so this may be a quirk that can be avoided with the adaptive voltage option that some boards have. Even jpmboy who uses exceptional cooling and has a one of the best chips doesn't do daily above 5.2. Mine did 5.2 and I don't consider. If you can you can truly do 5.2 then you got one of the best


----------



## dirtyred

8 hours if you want to get into the statistics table. Also recommended just to be sure that it's stable enough. I had crashes after 2 or 4 hours. You could run Prime95 for 1-2 hours instead but it's not as realistic load as RealBench.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I could pass 8 hours realbench one night and the next day freeze while only browsing the web. I gamed for a week straight and then had one crash.. one crash too many for my tastes. My vcore would peak 1.47 and go down to as low was 1.328 in realbench so this may be a quirk that can be avoided with the adaptive voltage option that some boards have.


If it's stable in RealBench but crashes during light workloads then the voltages are not calculated correctly or switched fast enough. You can mitigate the issue with a bit of offset voltage when using adaptive. I run mine on 4800 GHz @ 1.25 V adaptive with 1.22 V turbo and 0.03 V offset. If not enough you can go with 0.05 V offset and 1.2 V turbo. Finding a good LLC setting that is not giving too much voltage when the load changes on the CPU is crucial for stability and especially for the longetivity of the CPU and motherboard.


----------



## Rhoms

*Username:* Rhoms
*CPU Model:* i7 7700K
*Base Clock:* 100 MHz
*Core Multiplier:* 50x
*Core Frequency:* 5,000 MHz
*Cache Frequency:* 4,700 MHz
*Vcore in UEFI:* 1.36v
*Vcore:* 1.374v
*FCLK:* 1000 MHz
*Cooling Solution:* delidded and relidded with a Rockit88, Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut between die and IHS and between IHS and Corsair H115i, 4x Corsair ML140s in push/pull set to quiet mode in Q-Fan
*Stability Test:* RealBench 2.54, 8 hours, with up to 16GB RAM

*Batch Number:* Malaysia L704C203
*Ram Speed:* 3200 15-16-16-36-2T Corsair Vengeance LPX (XMP 3200 16-18-18-36-2T)
*Ram Voltage:* 1.35v
*VCCIO:*
*VCCSA:*
*Motherboard:* Z270 Asus Maximus IX Hero
*LLC Setting:* Level 5
*Misc Comments:* I could only hit 49x at 1.35v with 92+ temperatures in Realbench prior to the delid.

I feel like this experience was akin to getting an elephant to fly. I can't get it stable at 51x without Vcore hitting approaching a max of 1.5v. At that point, I gave up trying. Delidding let me get an extra 1000 MHz at roughly the same Vcore with a temperature decrease of 27+ degrees. Delidding has been amazing for temps and running the rig quietly. I wish I would have saved a pic of what the temps were prior to delidding and using liquid metal. At 50x with 1.36v, I can't get it stable in P95 28.7 or 27.9. I tried upping the Vcore to 1.41 before giving up. If I want to run such intensive applications, I'll need to add an AVX offset.

This was my first time delidding and using liquid metal. If you are using it for the first time, once you're ready to begin application, my recommendation would be to gently push down the plunger over a piece of paper rather than over top of your CPU. I watched enough Youtube videos on using liquid metal to see people squirt it all over the place. The same thing happened to me. However, after the initial depress, I was able to control the amount with quite a bit of precision.

Big thanks to everyone in this thread. Through the guide and all the discussion, I certainly learned a lot. If I could use additional guidance, it would be with RAM overclocking. I had 16-16-16-30-2T timings stable in HCIMemtest for over 1000% coverage only to see icons disappear and then crash after a restart. I have a pic of completing 1000% coverage in HCIMemtest at these timings with zero errors. After that experience, I gave up trying to mess with tRAS. I figured it wasn't worth it.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I'll just share that 8 hours is not easy @ 5.2. I had several settings that failed after 2-6 hours, but found what worked for 8 hours eventually. Now, I run 5.1 because 2% clock speed isn't worth more than 100mv extra and the summer months are here and my ambient is higher. I could careless if this chip fails after 3 years so I'm not opposed to running higher volts, but even after 8 hours of realbench; I experienced a few lockups. My motherboard only supports manual or offset voltage and although offset works much better...the range is too much to keep it stable for all work loads at 5.2. I could pass 8 hours realbench one night and the next day freeze while only browsing the web. I gamed for a week straight and then had one crash.. one crash too many for my tastes. My vcore would peak 1.47 and go down to as low was 1.328 in realbench so this may be a quirk that can be avoided with the adaptive voltage option that some boards have. Even jpmboy who uses exceptional cooling and has a one of the best chips doesn't do daily above 5.2. Mine did 5.2 and I don't consider. If you can you can truly do 5.2 then you got one of the best


Interesting but surprising that after 8 hours of Realbench you had a crash and a few lock ups, after running OCCT for an hour as per chart requirements I have not had any crashes @ 5.2Ghz which is what I still run 24/7 and have been since January release, I personally didn't realise OCCT is that much harder to pass than Realbench.


----------



## ssdaytona

Username: ssdaytona
CPU Model: i7 7700K
Base Clock: 100 MHz
Core Multiplier: 50x
Core Frequency: 5,000 MHz
Cache Frequency: 48x
Vcore in UEFI: 1.31v
Vcore: 1.328v
FCLK: 1000 MHz
Cooling Solution: Noctua U14S
Stability Test: x264

Batch Number: Malaysia L640F775
Ram Speed: 3000 15-17-17-35-2T Corsair Vengeance LPX (XMP 3000)
Ram Voltage: 1.35v
VCCIO:
VCCSA:
Motherboard: Z270i Asus Strix
LLC Setting: Level 5
Misc Comments: Fresh out of the box, new to oc'ing, did a manual Vcore change (auto was 1.40), cache to 48, LLC to 5. Left everything else as is. Max temp 87c

2nd chip though. First one sux. Guys, is this a keeper? or should I try my luck for the 3rd one? They say 3 is lucky.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssdaytona*
> 
> Username: ssdaytona
> CPU Model: i7 7700K
> Base Clock: 100 MHz
> Core Multiplier: 50x
> Core Frequency: 5,000 MHz
> Cache Frequency: 48x
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.31v
> Vcore: 1.328v
> FCLK: 1000 MHz
> Cooling Solution: Noctua U14S
> Stability Test: x264
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L640F775
> Ram Speed: 3000 15-17-17-35-2T Corsair Vengeance LPX (XMP 3000)
> Ram Voltage: 1.35v
> VCCIO:
> VCCSA:
> Motherboard: Z270i Asus Strix
> LLC Setting: Level 5
> Misc Comments: Fresh out of the box, new to oc'ing, did a manual Vcore change (auto was 1.40), cache to 48, LLC to 5. Left everything else as is. Max temp 87c
> 
> 2nd chip though. First one sux. Guys, is this a keeper? or should I try my luck for the 3rd one? They say 3 is lucky.


Looks pretty good how long did you run X264 for? Historically most of the good CPU's have been produced at the beginning and at the end of their production cycle at least according to silicon lottery, given yours was manufactured 40th week of last year its an early one, if it were me its a keeper


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rhoms*
> 
> *Username:* Rhoms
> *Vcore in UEFI:* 1.36v
> *Vcore:* 1.374v
> 
> *LLC Setting:* Level 5
> *Misc Comments:* I could only hit 49x at 1.35v with 92+ temperatures in Realbench prior to the delid.
> 
> I feel like this experience was akin to getting an elephant to fly. I can't get it stable at 51x without Vcore hitting approaching a max of 1.5v. At that point, I gave up trying. Delidding let me get an extra 1000 MHz at roughly the same Vcore with a temperature decrease of 27+ degrees. Delidding has been amazing for temps and running the rig quietly. I wish I would have saved a pic of what the temps were prior to delidding and using liquid metal. At 50x with 1.36v, I can't get it stable in P95 28.7 or 27.9. I tried upping the Vcore to 1.41 before giving up. If I want to run such intensive applications, I'll need to add an AVX offset.
> 
> Big thanks to everyone in this thread. Through the guide and all the discussion, I certainly learned a lot. If I could use additional guidance, it would be with RAM overclocking. I had 16-16-16-30-2T timings stable in HCIMemtest for over 1000% coverage only to see icons disappear and then crash after a restart. I have a pic of completing 1000% coverage in HCIMemtest at these timings with zero errors. After that experience, I gave up trying to mess with tRAS. I figured it wasn't worth it.


Watch out for your Vcore as it seems that your LLC setting might be a bit too aggressive. What you don't see in the monitoring tools in realtime is how much voltage does spike when it changes. It might shoot over 1.4 V easily. Would try just a bit more Vcore with LLC 4 instead of 5.

That's a really nice temperature gain. If I wouldn't be a chicken I'd do it as well.

If your RAM is not stable with tighter timings try adding just a bit more RAM voltage (low as 0.01), VCCIO and SA voltage.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Interesting but surprising that after 8 hours of Realbench you had a crash and a few lock ups, after running OCCT for an hour as per chart requirements I have not had any crashes @ 5.2Ghz which is what I still run 24/7 and have been since January release, I personally didn't realise OCCT is that much harder to pass than Realbench.


I suspect crashes happen mostly when CPU load changes and the VRM's don't switch voltage fast enough to the required amount. It could also be that the voltage tables are not perfect so while it's stable under heavy load and idle, during low/medium load the voltage might not be calibrated. The voltage requirement from idle to full load is not linear especially when using high multipliers. A voltage offset might just solve that issue as it applies it all the time.


----------



## ssdaytona

I ran x264 for 2 hrs that I downloaded from a link on the first post. Tried Prime95 2.81 and it would crash immediately unless I added an AVX offset. Seems kind of pointless, no (AVX offset).

I was hoping for a better chip, maybe 5.0GHz at like vcore 1.25, but I suspect that is rare. I guess it's good enough.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Looks pretty good how long did you run X264 for? Historically most of the good CPU's have been produced at the beginning and at the end of their production cycle at least according to silicon lottery, given yours was manufactured 40th week of last year its an early one, if it were me its a keeper


----------



## OutlawII

Prime 95 is pretty much pointless its old school thinking. Just run x264 for 8 hours and call it a day


----------



## Gurkburk

Anyone got a link to the X264 stress test? Seem to be able to find a release from 2015..


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssdaytona*
> 
> I ran x264 for 2 hrs that I downloaded from a link on the first post. Tried Prime95 2.81 and it would crash immediately unless I added an AVX offset. Seems kind of pointless, no (AVX offset).
> 
> I was hoping for a better chip, maybe 5.0GHz at like vcore 1.25, but I suspect that is rare. I guess it's good enough.


Prime95 puts around 110 W constant load on your CPU package. That's the most unrealistic situation out there. RealBench never does that, it's really realistic as it generates a fluctuating load just like most apps out there. It might reach 105-110 W for only 1 second then drop to 95-100 W. You could raise the power limit for the CPU in BIOS but you will need a really good cooling otherwise it will thermal/power throttle or just simply shut down.

I don't think there is any chip out there that could do 5 GHz on 1.25 V. Good chips reach that on 1.32 V. On 1.25 V (1.248 V under load) mine reaches 4.8 GHz with no AVX offset and stable for 8 hours in RealBench.


----------



## TheADLA

Hi. I found kinda of a sweet spot. Voltage seems to be ok. 1.380 Vcore for 5 Ghz with my MSI Board LLC Mode 5 which keeps it exactly at a 0.001v margin of my entered voltage during testing. AVX Offset at -2
Temps are at 86 max during XTU, Cinebench. Prime was lower since AVX Offset. I could try use the memory tweaking since it is at XMP 3000 1.360v (Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4 3000) in order to keep the temps down. I have no idea but it seems mine is a not a too bad chip though. I have no Idea about the batch since it was bought bundled with the MB.








Any other ideas? I have no Idea whether this is ok or not

Thanks


----------



## dirtyred

Seems good but dropping memory voltage will improve CPU temps at the cost of a bit slower RAM frequency. Might work on 2800 MHZ at 1.2 V. My G.SKILL needs 1.35 for 3200 16-16-16-28 2T but I can run it on 1.2 V 3000 16-16-16-28 2T and CPU temps drop about 10 C.


----------



## TheADLA

I guess tweaking the RAM maybe a little bit lower wouldn't affect everything that much though







I mean performance wise


----------



## dirtyred

Drop voltage to 1.2 V on RAM, go with the highest frequency it can boot. You might be able to tighten primary timings too. Going from 3200 to 3000 MHz should be unnoticable in most cases. Only some RAM heavy benchmarks might show some difference. But with tighter timings there might be none or could be even faster.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

I'm pretty sure that lowering Vdimm won't affect your CPU temps. SA and Vccio are another story.

Haven't tested Lowering the RAM voltage myself but as the RAM itself is not on the chip and the voltage is fed through the mobo to it I don't see why it would affect CPU core or package significatly


----------



## TheADLA

Ok. Usually it is 1.2v @2400. I might check how high I can go with those settings. I have a Corsair H110i GTX AIO with Corsiar Link. It also seems that the CLU Paste started to work because Stress temps compared to last time dropped 4 degrees.







I used IC Diamond 7 before. With CLU temps are way better so far









Im gonna do serious benching after my update is complete which includes going completely SSD and kicking out the regular HD as well as changing to GTX [email protected] 1080p 144Hz. Once this is done, Im gonna do Gaming Benchmarks as I usually do. My 7700K OC is saved as a profile in the BIOS for now.









So I submit my statistics as followed:

MoBo: MSI Z270 GAMING PRO
CPU: I7 7700K @ 5.00 GHZ
CPU Voltage: 1.375v (1.380 on load / 1.379 max Vdroop LLC Mode 5)
Voltage Mode: Adaptive
CPU Ratio Mode: Dynamic Mode
Offset: 0
LLC: Mode 5
AVX Offset: -2
RAM: DDR4 3000 @ XMP 1.36v
XTU: Passed
Prime95 28.5.10: Passed hours Temps ok since AVX Offset -2 @ 4.8 Ghz
Cinebench R15 passed, CPU Score 1079 (don't know if that is a good score see pics posted before)

Everything else on Auto

please refer to my previous post (with images)

If you have any other suggestions I would be glad to hear them























Appreciate you guys


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> I'm pretty sure that lowering Vdimm won't affect your CPU temps. SA and Vccio are another story.
> 
> Haven't tested Lowering the RAM voltage myself but as the RAM itself is not on the chip and the voltage is fed through the mobo to it I don't see why it would affect CPU core or package significatly


Actually you're right but with lower RAM voltage you can lower SA and VCCIO voltages or if left on auto they will do that for you. Many people especially new to OC will have it on auto.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> MoBo: MSI Z270 GAMING PRO
> CPU: I7 7700K @ 5.00 GHZ
> CPU Voltage: 1.375v (1.380 on load / 1.379 max Vdroop LLC Mode 5)


That's pretty high Vcore for only 5 GHz. You're sure you need it especially with AVX offset?


----------



## TheADLA

well once I lowered it by 0.05v, XTU failed as well as Cinebench with an error message. Below it, Win 10 at stress test would be:  error with your PC, restart. maybe I can still tweak it a little here and there. But I am still way below 1.4v







Any suggestion would be welcome. I am already on LLC 5 (MSI Mode 1 is highest and 8 is lowest which was a no go )







Maybe its the silicon lottery. I can try to use those settings to go up to 5.1 as well as lowering my RAM and see if I can lower the Vcore to have 5 Ghz. I try that tomorrow. That today was a today test. Ran XTU, Prime, CB R15 with HWInfo in the background to see whats up.









Heres a pic with CB R15 at lower voltage where it was 1.370 and 1.374v max with a crash



But I dont know what happened. maybe its the memory as well or this AVX Offset. because I had XTU running before at 1.365v








I have no Idea... But with this pic I had AVX Offset at -4 and LLC at 2 and in the other pic at Auto which by the way bumped my Vcore to 1.4v







, but my CB R15 score was lower (1073 compaed to 1079 now)







So I went lower already.




Crazy science


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Actually you're right but with lower RAM voltage you can lower SA and VCCIO voltages or if left on auto they will do that for you. Many people especially new to OC will have it on auto.
> That's pretty high Vcore for only 5 GHz. You're sure you need it especially with AVX offset?


If you lower frequency and possibly raise timings as well you can lower all three, true









I'd be interested to see some testing of how much RAM speed and timings effects performance across different applications Vs a small bump in CPU frequency. Im sure we are talking small differences, but it would be good to know.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Actually you're right but with lower RAM voltage you can lower SA and VCCIO voltages or if left on auto they will do that for you. Many people especially new to OC will have it on auto.
> That's pretty high Vcore for only 5 GHz. You're sure you need it especially with AVX offset?


My Vccio and Vccsa on Auto with XMP 3200 speed memory. Vccio Stock Intel 0.960v auto 1.165v
Vccsa (System Agent) stock Intel 1.060v auto 1.248v


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> But I dont know what happened. maybe its the memory as well or this AVX Offset. because I had XTU running before at 1.365v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no Idea... But with this pic I had AVX Offset at -4 and LLC at 2 and in the other pic at Auto which by the way bumped my Vcore to 1.4v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , but my CB R15 score was lower (1073 compaed to 1079 now)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I went lower already.


If you're using adaptive mode then it could be that you're stable on full voltage as it reaches the ones you've set in BIOS but CB is not that demanding so it might not require the set voltage. So instead the VRM's are feeding the CPU with whatever they think they should but it could be not enough. Especially when using AVX offset.

Adaptive voltage and a bit of Offset voltage might help you. Add 0.05 V Offset and substract that from the Adaptive voltage so the total will be the same as before. Helped me out immensely, that's why I can run 4.8 GHz at 1.248 V, before that I needed 1.264 V.

1073 vs 1079 is only a margin of error. Discard it, it's the same score.

Don't use LLC on Auto, it's pretty dumb. Either gives too much or too little. Don't use too aggressive LLC either, stay in the middle. If you use too high LLC, when voltage switching happens it might overshoot the 1.4 V for a brief moment and could damage your CPU / VRM. You can't see that with software monitoring.

This is a Prime95 measurement by ASUS:


5GHz CPU frequency, Prime 95 load current=~131W

You see those spikes? Same thing happens to voltage. Could be worse. I woudln't risk it so I'd stay at medium LLC (4 max).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> If you lower frequency and possibly raise timings as well you can lower all three, true
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd be interested to see some testing of how much RAM speed and timings effects performance across different applications Vs a small bump in CPU frequency. Im sure we are talking small differences, but it would be good to know.


I did test with Corona Benchmark (3d render) and RAM speed is a huge factor. Can range between 3:30 down to 3:15 minutes (15 seconds difference) between 2133 MHz and 3200 MHz. GPUPI was not influenced measurably by any RAM tweaking (even RTL/IO timings), it's more down to margin of error. SuperPI can show alot of difference however. Sadly I did not record each run with each settings, it's just what I remember.


----------



## valkeriefire

Wow, these puppies OC so easily. I just built my 7700k with a Z170 Asrock Fatality ITX this morning. I'm running 5.0ghz @ 1.328v by running 0.05v (50mv) offset voltage. I tried +0.025v (25mv) but it failed. I'm using a Corsair H75 for cooling. I'm currently without a case, just desk benching my hardware until I can settle on a Silverstone ML08 or NCase M1.

Temps are in the mid-high 80's under the x264 test. I now they'd be a bit higher if I had a case.

Photos...


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!










Now onto delidding. That should compensate a bit for the case and give me some headroom for safety.

EDIT: Just completed my delid a few hours later. 13-15C drop in temps thanks to the delid.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> If it's stable in RealBench but crashes during light workloads then the voltages are not calculated correctly or switched fast enough. You can mitigate the issue with a bit of offset voltage when using adaptive. I run mine on 4800 GHz @ 1.25 V adaptive with 1.22 V turbo and 0.03 V offset. If not enough you can go with 0.05 V offset and 1.2 V turbo. Finding a good LLC setting that is not giving too much voltage when the load changes on the CPU is crucial for stability and especially for the longetivity of the CPU and motherboard.


There is no adaptive voltage option on asrock boards, or at least mine.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Interesting but surprising that after 8 hours of Realbench you had a crash and a few lock ups, after running OCCT for an hour as per chart requirements I have not had any crashes @ 5.2Ghz which is what I still run 24/7 and have been since January release, I personally didn't realise OCCT is that much harder to pass than Realbench.


It's a crash that's always just a freeze of the screen; no bsod. Same thing if in a browser or gaming. I had it happened today at 5.1 because it was above 31C in my apartment







I don't deserve any sympathy from those down under







Although it generally won't be this warm in here, I'm going to back down to the same clocks I used pre-delid. 5ghz @ 1.28v. My AIO just can't keep up with your loop.This is the hottest day we've had here in middle of northern america in like 6-7 months. These chips are extremely sensitive to temperature. I wasn't even getting above 75C at 5.1 when the hard lock would occur.

I'm not sure if this is normal behavior for the architecture or if it's related to leakage and my motherboard not allowing me to exceed stock current limits. For those who do not understand what I mean by leakage; it's when transistors require current more when temperature is increased.

I always found OCCT harder to pass.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> There is no adaptive voltage option on asrock boards, or at least mine.


Offset on ASRock is the same as Adaptive on ASUS.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Offset on ASRock is the same as Adaptive on ASUS.


I don't believe that's true, but I've never owned an Asus board of any generation. I believe adaptive applies an offset to turbo mode while offset applies to all loads. When I set say +270 my idle voltage is very high at ~1.45v and it will peak for a second at 1.47 and dip as low as 1.328 under realbench. Is that how adaptive works? I have one and only one setting to change and often have seen people talk about IA etc regarding adaptive...


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I don't believe that's true, but I've never owned an Asus board of any generation. I believe adaptive applies an offset to turbo mode while offset applies to all loads. When I set say +270 my idle voltage is very high at ~1.45v and it will peak for a second at 1.47 and dip as low as 1.328 under realbench. Is that how adaptive works? I have one and only one setting to change and often have seen people talk about IA etc regarding adaptive...


ASUS has two options offset and Adapitve. Adaptive applies to turbo on Asus using VID for reference scale. Adaptive offset on ASUS applies voltage to all multipliers using VID for reference scale. On Gigabyte there is Dynamic DVID So +0.160 is 1.332v. So the CPU VID works off of load, multiplier, temperature on all motherboards since sandy bridge.

Example DVID, Auto LLC, Prime95 v28.10 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.320v, Web browsing Max 1.344v idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off 1.320v.

Post a screenshot of your ASRock core voltage settings.


----------



## Gurkburk

Asus z270F does NOT have an adaptive option. Only manual and offset. Offset is not the same as Adaptive.

I'm wondering if the motherboard downvolts when the cpu downclocks even though its on manual...


----------



## TheADLA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> If you're using adaptive mode then it could be that you're stable on full voltage as it reaches the ones you've set in BIOS but CB is not that demanding so it might not require the set voltage. So instead the VRM's are feeding the CPU with whatever they think they should but it could be not enough. Especially when using AVX offset.
> 
> Adaptive voltage and a bit of Offset voltage might help you. Add 0.05 V Offset and substract that from the Adaptive voltage so the total will be the same as before. Helped me out immensely, that's why I can run 4.8 GHz at 1.248 V, before that I needed 1.264 V.
> 
> 1073 vs 1079 is only a margin of error. Discard it, it's the same score.
> 
> Don't use LLC on Auto, it's pretty dumb. Either gives too much or too little. Don't use too aggressive LLC either, stay in the middle. If you use too high LLC, when voltage switching happens it might overshoot the 1.4 V for a brief moment and could damage your CPU / VRM. You can't see that with software monitoring.
> 
> This is a Prime95 measurement by ASUS:
> 
> 
> 5GHz CPU frequency, Prime 95 load current=~131W
> 
> You see those spikes? Same thing happens to voltage. Could be worse. I woudln't risk it so I'd stay at medium LLC (4 max).
> I did test with Corona Benchmark (3d render) and RAM speed is a huge factor. Can range between 3:30 down to 3:15 minutes (15 seconds difference) between 2133 MHz and 3200 MHz. GPUPI was not influenced measurably by any RAM tweaking (even RTL/IO timings), it's more down to margin of error. SuperPI can show alot of difference however. Sadly I did not record each run with each settings, it's just what I remember.


Cool, will try it. My LLC was set to Mode 5. The MSI Board offers me 8 Modes and as far as I read hear, Mode 1 being the highest max LLC and 8 the lowest. I am on 5. Will try that with the offset. Anything else? I also might try to lower the RAM voltage to 1.3 and see if that helps or not. They are currently running at Stock XMP Settings as the are specified. 3000 1.36v (Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4-3000)


----------



## Rhoms

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> Watch out for your Vcore as it seems that your LLC setting might be a bit too aggressive. What you don't see in the monitoring tools in realtime is how much voltage does spike when it changes. It might shoot over 1.4 V easily. Would try just a bit more Vcore with LLC 4 instead of 5.
> 
> That's a really nice temperature gain. If I wouldn't be a chicken I'd do it as well.
> 
> If your RAM is not stable with tighter timings try adding just a bit more RAM voltage (low as 0.01), VCCIO and SA voltage.


Done! I was able to pass at LLC4. I thought I had tried this already. Cutting down to LLC4 saved me 2C and kept my max Vcore from 1.392 to 1.376. Thank you for the thought.
Updated stats:


Apologies for the dual screen screenshot. I thought it was best to leave it rather than edit.

*Username:* Rhoms
*CPU Model:* i7 7700K
*Base Clock:* 100 MHz
*Core Multiplier:* 50x
*Core Frequency:* 5,000 MHz
*Cache Frequency:* 4,700 MHz
*Vcore in UEFI:* 1.36v
*Vcore:* 1.376v Max
*FCLK:* 1000 MHz
*Cooling Solution:* delidded and relidded with a Rockit88, Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut between die and IHS and between IHS and Corsair H115i, 4x Corsair ML140s in push/pull set to quiet mode in Q-Fan
*Stability Test:* RealBench 2.54, 8 hours, with up to 16GB RAM

*Batch Number:* Malaysia L704C203
*Ram Speed:* 3200 15-16-16-36-2T Corsair Vengeance LPX (XMP 3200 16-18-18-36-2T)
*Ram Voltage:* 1.35v
*VCCIO:
VCCSA:*
*Motherboard:* Z270 Asus Maximus IX Hero
*LLC Setting:* Level 4
*Misc Comments:* I could only hit 49x at 1.35v with 92+ temperatures in Realbench prior to the delid.


----------



## TheADLA

Hi. Before I start to do the stress testing, I picked up this config for my next test. Any thoughts?








I set CPU Voltage to 1.3 with an 0.05 + Offset as well as chosing LLC Mode 6 and reduce the RAM Voltage to 1.3













Worth a try or not ?. Windows 10 booted. No problem. But before I start just wanted to check your opinion















what the heck. Let's go for it







Be back with update


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rhoms*
> 
> Done! I was able to pass at LLC4. I thought I had tried this already. Cutting down to LLC4 saved me 2C and kept my max Vcore from 1.392 to 1.376. Thank you for the thought.


You're welcome! Glad I could help!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> Hi. Before I start to do the stress testing, I picked up this config for my next test. Any thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I set CPU Voltage to 1.3 with an 0.05 + Offset as well as chosing LLC Mode 6 and reduce the RAM Voltage to 1.3


That's a really big difference in Vcore between set and measured! You're sure LLC 6 is less aggressive than 4? On ASUS the higher the number the more Vboost it gives. Not sure about MSI.

I would bet that 1.3 Vcore won't be enough for 5 GHz. Probably 1.32-1.35 V will be the ideal region to stress test but if you're actually getting 1.352 V during load with 1.3 V set in BIOS you should be fine. Only that huge difference worries me a bit. If your LLC is so aggressive the voltage could spike up to 1.4-1.45 V for short period of time (few ms, less then sensor refresh time which is probably around 250 ms) and be undetected by sensors.


----------



## TheADLA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> You're welcome! Glad I could help!
> That's a really big difference in Vcore between set and measured! You're sure LLC 6 is less aggressive than 4? On ASUS the higher the number the more Vboost it gives. Not sure about MSI.
> 
> I would bet that 1.3 Vcore won't be enough for 5 GHz. Probably 1.32-1.35 V will be the ideal region to stress test but if you're actually getting 1.352 V during load with 1.3 V set in BIOS you should be fine. Only that huge difference worries me a bit. If your LLC is so aggressive the voltage could spike up to 1.4-1.45 V for short period of time (few ms, less then sensor refresh time which is probably around 250 ms) and be undetected by sensors.


Here's the point. I passed XTU and Prime but Cinebench imediately crashed. Yuk. MSI is backwards. Mode 1 is the most aggresive and 8 being the lowest. Check the pics. I put the Offset at 0.05 so actually my Vcore including Offset and LLC was 1.36






What should i do? I think there is a tiny notch to this. Could it have been reducing my RAM voltage to 1.3 instead of 1.36 that caused the Cinebench crash?


----------



## TheADLA

Thats what happened with CB, the Voltage stayed below 1.36



Im sure it is a tiny thing to adjust though Tiny bump up LLC (not preffered) or tiny bump up on the VCore


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Post a screenshot of your ASRock core voltage settings.


https://youtu.be/7_SG8BJri6E?t=128 Someone made a video. Shortly after 2 mins you can see the options.


----------



## Gurkburk

Is anyone here using the Noctua NH D15 cooler? I'm curious as to how people did when mounting it.

Other coolers, you place and press on to the thermal paste, then screw on. This one you seem to get a slight contact(?) when pressing it down? Then screw it in place and press it down a bit more.

I feel like this way of screwing it together, you're vurnerable to air bubbles, or the paste being messed up and being spread weirdly?

Any idea? I just seem to have 2 cores being slightly hotter than the other, which makes me think this cooler is infested with airbubbles & super hard to get 100% correct?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> Here's the point. I passed XTU and Prime but Cinebench imediately crashed. Yuk. MSI is backwards. Mode 1 is the most aggresive and 8 being the lowest. Check the pics. I put the Offset at 0.05 so actually my Vcore including Offset and LLC was 1.36
> 
> What should i do? I think there is a tiny notch to this. Could it have been reducing my RAM voltage to 1.3 instead of 1.36 that caused the Cinebench crash?


Yes. To eliminate RAM instability reset it to default 2133 MHz @ 1.2 V with loose timings then do a CB run. HCI memtest can identify RAM instability. Run as many instances as cores (8) and divide the amount of RAM you have between them. Not all RAM, only about 90% so the system won't start to swap. On 16 GB that's around 14 GB / 8 = 1.75 GB, so 1700 MB just to be on the safe side. Let it run for 500%.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> Is anyone here using the Noctua NH D15 cooler? I'm curious as to how people did when mounting it.
> 
> Other coolers, you place and press on to the thermal paste, then screw on. This one you seem to get a slight contact(?) when pressing it down? Then screw it in place and press it down a bit more.
> 
> I feel like this way of screwing it together, you're vurnerable to air bubbles, or the paste being messed up and being spread weirdly?
> 
> Any idea? I just seem to have 2 cores being slightly hotter than the other, which makes me think this cooler is infested with airbubbles & super hard to get 100% correct?


It's roughly 1 Kg so it should provide enough pressure. Put a dot of TIM in the middle, that way it will be spread from the inside towards the outside pushing air out too.


----------



## Gurkburk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Yes. To eliminate RAM instability reset it to default 2133 MHz @ 1.2 V with loose timings then do a CB run. HCI memtest can identify RAM instability. Run as many instances as cores (8) and divide the amount of RAM you have between them. Not all RAM, only about 90% so the system won't start to swap. On 16 GB that's around 14 GB / 8 = 1.75 GB, so 1700 MB just to be on the safe side. Let it run for 500%.
> It's roughly 1 Kg so it should provide enough pressure. Put a dot of TIM in the middle, that way it will be spread from the inside towards the outside pushing air out too.


Well, not sure if you know how the mounting works with the cooler. Do you have it? The entire thing isnt adding full pressure before you screw it on.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> Well, not sure if you know how the mounting works with the cooler. Do you have it? The entire thing isnt adding full pressure before you screw it on.


I have a Phanteks PH-TC14PE which is pretty similar to the D15 (only less ugly







). Mounting process is the same. You mount the backplate, put the mounting bars on the 4 spacers and screw them together. Then you mount the block with 2 screws that go on the bars. Noctua recommends a 4-5 mm dot in the middle in their manual.

Believe me 1 kg should provide enough pressure but you can push it down by hand a bit before you screw it down. After you push it down the TIM will spread evenly and provide vacuum (that's why it's a bit hard to get the block off the CPU) so you know it's sealed.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> Asus z270F does NOT have an adaptive option. Only manual and offset. Offset is not the same as Adaptive.
> 
> I'm wondering if the motherboard downvolts when the cpu downclocks even though its on manual...


You will have to use offset for the motherboard to use the processor VID to downvolt when the CPU down clocks.

I have not seen that Bios, could you show a screenshot of core voltage settings.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> https://youtu.be/7_SG8BJri6E?t=128 Someone made a video. Shortly after 2 mins you can see the options.


After looking at the options you would have to use offset mode for processor VID controlled V core voltage.


----------



## Gurkburk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You will have to use offset for the motherboard to use the processor VID to downvolt when the CPU down clocks.


Any guide to this? I've had the adaptive option on my previous asus motherboard for the 4770k

Edit: According to https://dlsvr04.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1151/STRIX_Z270F_GAMING/E12350_Z270F_GAMING_BIOS_EM_WEB.pdf

I should have adaptive, what the hell? Ive got the latest BIOS.

Edit2: I found it. Enabled CPU Svid~ something.

Edit3: Reapplied the thermal paste & i seemed to have an airbubble or something, even though the paste looked fine when lifting the cooler. Temps arent up to 10*C different anymore when jumping around.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> Any guide to this? I've had the adaptive option on my previous asus motherboard for the 4770k
> 
> Edit: According to https://dlsvr04.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1151/STRIX_Z270F_GAMING/E12350_Z270F_GAMING_BIOS_EM_WEB.pdf
> 
> I should have adaptive, what the hell? Ive got the latest BIOS.
> 
> Edit2: I found it. Enabled CPU Svid~ something.
> 
> Edit3: Reapplied the thermal paste & i seemed to have an airbubble or something, even though the paste looked fine when lifting the cooler. Temps arent up to 10*C different anymore when jumping around.


No just leave Svid on auto.

I looked at the manual you linked to me and you have Adaptive. It is on page 32.

It should look like this.


----------



## wingman99

Don't worry about temperature variation on the DTS that is normal.


----------



## Gurkburk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> No just leave Svid on auto.
> 
> I looked at the manual you linked to me and you have Adaptive. It is on page 32.
> 
> It should look like this.


Been rebooting several times now, fixing the voltage to Adaptive mode, cba to reboot again today^^ I'll take a look if there is Auto. I think mine was disabled and only had enabled/disabled. I'll check tomorrow.


----------



## gammagoat

Got a dud.

Will not post at 5.0 or 4.9 regardless of vcore.

Cant get 4.8 stable.

4.7 however is rock solid OCCT for a 8 hour run, adaptive voltage with no AVX offset. Core temps in IBT popped up to 90c for awhile but ambient temps were about 64f. Dont really feel like delidding this chip to just run a 300mhz OC.

Think I'm going to send this one back, and hope the big "A" sends me a better sample. Unless, I am missing something? Maybe I'll cheat and order one from SL, kind of takes the fun out of it though.









I even broke down and tried Asus ai tuner. got 4.8 at 1.44 vcore but it wasn't stable, OCCT kicked it to the curb in about 20 seconds.

Username: Gammagoat
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100.
Core Multiplier: 47
Core Frequency: 4700
Cache Frequency: 4400
Vcore in UEFI: 1.310
Vcore: 1.376
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: NH-D15S
Stability Test: OCCT 4.4.2

Batch Number: L709B707
Ram Speed: 3200 14-14-14-34
Ram Voltage:1.35
VCCIO:
VCCSA:
Motherboard: Z170 Maximus Ranger VIII
LLC Setting: 5


----------



## sdmf74

Its insane how much thermal headroom you gain by turning hyperthreading off. I was having trouble reaching 5.1ghz stable in realbench so I turned of HT and my max core temp went from 86°c to 72°c!


----------



## Primithras

Just got my new 7700k this week and have been overclocking for the past few hours. To my surprise, I haven't lost the sillicon lottery for once and seem to have an okay chip. I have an Asus Z270G board which as it turns out comes with a lot of useless Asus features that you don't really need.

So after playing with a lot of options and watching what they do in regards to voltage, temperature and stability, I finally seem to have found the sweet spot. Which is disabling all the useless Asus features, like EPU power saving or extreme power duty control and so on, leaving the rest on auto and cranking up LLC to level 4.

I am running/testing a 50x overclock at the moment with a bios vcore of 1.34v and temperatures ranging between 80-90° in a looped x264 benchmark. Prime seems to be running stable however it turns my cpu into a volcano so I usually only leave it on for 5 minutes. Then again, I have a non delidded CPU and a Scythe Mugen 5 PCGH (good air cooler but not the best).

However I still have a few (noob) questions, apologies if they have been asked before:


My voltage is set to 1.34v adaptive with 0 offset but according to HWinfo & HWMonitor my core voltage under load is 1.38v, how & why?

I played around with the C states (enabling them all) however my CPU barely seems to downclock. I also made the 0-100% adjustment in my Windows power profile but still no change, any ideas?

Are there any other options I can try for improved stability? I already put LLC to level 4 which was a good improvement but does raising the VCCIO / SA voltage help for instance?
I'm a bit rusty as my last overclock was on a Haswell, uncore, ring voltage and all that stuff which has now seemingly become obsolete.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Primithras*
> 
> 
> My voltage is set to 1.34v adaptive with 0 offset but according to HWinfo & HWMonitor my core voltage under load is 1.38v, how & why?


The reason is because of the load line calibration setting. If you run on Auto it should be close, however you will need to up the adaptive voltage to match the stable running load Vcore of 1.38v


----------



## Primithras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The reason is because of the load line calibration setting. If you run on Auto it should be close, however you will need to up the adaptive voltage to match the stable running load Vcore of 1.38v


I tested this with multiple LLC modes (also auto) and regardless of the setting, there always seems to be a magic 0.04 increment on my voltage. Decreasing or increasing LLC doesn't seem to change anything in regards to the actual voltage itself, it just prevents vdrops as far as I can tell. I also tried setting an offset to see what that would do but that just adds to it, an offset of 0.01 for instance will just make the voltage increment to 0.05.

I can probably work around it by setting a negative offset and turning up the adaptive voltage but I was just wondering what is causing this. My OCD is triggering over this...


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Primithras*
> 
> I tested this with multiple LLC modes (also auto) and regardless of the setting, there always seems to be a magic 0.04 increment on my voltage. Decreasing or increasing LLC doesn't seem to change anything in regards to the actual voltage itself, it just prevents vdrops as far as I can tell. I also tried setting an offset to see what that would do but that just adds to it, an offset of 0.01 for instance will just make the voltage increment to 0.05.
> 
> I can probably work around it by setting a negative offset and turning up the adaptive voltage but I was just wondering what is causing this. My OCD is triggering over this...


If you are using Adaptive voltage - offset will lower the base turbo and non turbo Vcore, could lead to cold boot problems. Leave offset on auto and just lower the Adaptive additional turbo mode CPU core voltage 0.04.

The problem is the calibration is off and that can be expected the are many different CPU VIDs or also software for them to program and hardware approximation and tolerances.

I only pay attention to what I see in windows for Vcore only, I use Dynamic DVID myself with all power saving features on.









When it comes down to it folks set the Vcore to whatever is stable, it does not mater what Bios or Windows shows, Vcore is within tolerance and used for reference to the steps in voltage.


----------



## nrpeyton

Evening,

Just upgraded to the following: _(coming from AMD FX-8350)_

-i7 7700k
-ASUS ROG IX APEX
-3600Mhz C16 Trident Z
-1080Ti Founders Edition

She's been running over 12hrs now and I've barely touched the BIOS at all

It's time to see what this chip is worth!

_I'm on a full custom loop. (EK Supremacy EVO with a medium 360mm rad for CPU only)_

How are you guys testing for stability? (I mainly game and tinker about with benches etc and o/c'ing and download TV programmes/films) and do the odd MS Word document.

I want something *reliable* but also *nothing* thats going to literally abuse the chip.
I was using prime95 on my old FX -- but I didn't really care if I degraded it. But for my new i7 i want to look after her ;-)


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Evening,
> 
> Just upgraded to the following: _(coming from AMD FX-8350)_
> 
> -i7 7700k
> -ASUS ROG IX APEX
> -3600Mhz C16 Trident Z
> -1080Ti Founders Edition
> 
> She's been running over 12hrs now and I've barely touched the BIOS at all
> 
> It's time to see what this chip is worth!
> 
> _I'm on a full custom loop. (EK Supremacy EVO with a medium 360mm rad for CPU only)_
> 
> How are you guys testing for stability? (I mainly game and tinker about with benches etc and o/c'ing and download TV programmes/films) and do the odd MS Word document.
> 
> I want something *reliable* but also *nothing* thats going to literally abuse the chip.
> I was using prime95 on my old FX -- but I didn't really care if I degraded it. But for my new i7 i want to look after her ;-)


As per opening post I would suggest using Realbench or OCCT for stability testing, Prime 95 not really suitable with modern CPU's. Run Realbench for 8 hours or OCCT for an hour or 2







latest version of OCCT is much harder to pass than Realbench.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> As per opening post I would suggest using Realbench or OCCT for stability testing, Prime 95 not really suitable with modern CPU's. Run Realbench for 8 hours or OCCT for an hour or 2


Excellent, I'll research the opening page then (p1).

Edit:
I use OCCT for testing stability of GPU memory overclocks _(it's the best there is for it)_, so looks like this may be my new go-to for CPU too, which is even better ;-)

Thanks again.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Excellent, I'll research the opening page then (p1).
> 
> Edit:
> I use OCCT for testing stability of GPU memory overclocks (it's the best there is for it), so looks like this may be my new go-to for CPU too which is even better ;-)
> 
> Thanks again.


To get a rough idea and a quick dirty overclock try using cinebench r15 first to get a "feel" for what your particular CPU can do


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> To get a rough idea and a quick dirty overclock try using cinebench r15 first to get a "feel" for what your particular CPU can do


That's great idea.

Downloading now


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> That's great idea.
> 
> Downloading now


No prob let us all know how you go


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> No prob let us all know how you go


Be my pleasure.

Back soon ;-)

You guys bothering with *VRM cooling* on the bigger *ASUS* Z270 *ROG boards?
*
I.E. pointing a fan at the VRM heatsink? On my old AMD FX platform this was a must*

_*clear instructions to do so on Asrock website for my old ASROCK 990FX Extreme9 board
I can't seem to find any similar instructions for my new ROG IX APEX_


----------



## Primithras

Just throwing another small question out there, is it possible Prime95 will give the 'worker stopped' error due to temperature throttling? Or does that error always means the overclock is unstable?

I just ran a 6 hour x264v2 loop test and a 4 hour Realbench test which both remained stable between 80-90°. However I noticed Prime95 gave me that error on one of my cores about 10 minutes in. And I noticed 1 core did hit 100° and most likely throttled (7700K).


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Primithras*
> 
> Just throwing another small question out there, is it possible Prime95 will give the 'worker stopped' error due to temperature throttling? Or does that error always means the overclock is unstable?
> 
> I just ran a 6 hour x264v2 loop test and a 4 hour Realbench test which both remained stable between 80-90°. However I noticed Prime95 gave me that error on one of my cores about 10 minutes in. And I noticed 1 core did hit 100° and most likely throttled (7700K).


Always means unstable, P95 doesn't detect temperature throttling. The fact the core was so hot could definitely contribute to it's instability.


----------



## becks

@Primithras If you played with Cache (Uncore) that's a big factor for one of the cores to fail sporadically in the first 10-15 min of the test.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> I'm pretty sure that lowering Vdimm won't affect your CPU temps. SA and Vccio are another story.
> 
> Haven't tested Lowering the RAM voltage myself but as the RAM itself is not on the chip and the voltage is fed through the mobo to it I don't see why it would affect CPU core or package significatly


I did test it just to be sure.

*RAM voltage DOES influence CPU core temperatures heavily*. Between 1.2 V and 1.35 V RAM voltage there's a 10-12 °C difference in core temperatures. Tested with all fans on 100%, core clock fixed 4.5 GHz, VCCIO and SA voltage fixed to 1.05 V, RAM on 3000 MHz 16-16-16-28-2T timings. The only variable was the RAM voltage.

The software to test it was Prime95. Did run each 3 presets and the custom on 4096 FFT just to be sure.

Did tried different RAM frequency with different timings and RAM, VCCIO, SA voltages to stabilize it. My conclusion is that if you can run your RAM on 1.2 V and low VCCIO/SA voltage on let's say 3000 MHz 16-16-16-28-1T instead of 3200 MHZ 16-16-16-28-1T on 1.35 V, then you should choose the lower speed because the performance gain/loss is minimal. Tested with SuperPI 1M and XTU resulting only marginal difference (repeated tests gave a slightly different results). and down to margin of error.

My opinion is if you can run RAM on 1.2 V with minimal loss of frequency, timings and performance, you should do that. Put that 10-12 °C gain into Vcore and try 1-2 higher multiplier. The CPU overclock gain will be bigger than the RAM performance loss.

I have a G.SKILL F4-3200C16D-16GVK 16 GB 3200 MHz 16-16-16-36-2T kit. XMP profile bumps the voltage to 1.35 V but just by jumping from 3200 down to 3000 with improved timings I can get down to 16-16-16-28-1T on 1.2 V stable. By tuning RTL/IO timings in as well in some cases it's even faster than the XMP profile.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I did test it just to be sure.
> 
> *RAM voltage DOES influence CPU core temperatures heavily*. Between 1.2 V and 1.35 V RAM voltage there's a 10-12 °C difference in core temperatures. Tested with all fans on 100%, core clock fixed 4.5 GHz, VCCIO and SA voltage fixed to 1.05 V, RAM on 3000 MHz 16-16-16-28-2T timings. The only variable was the RAM voltage.
> 
> The software to test it was Prime95. Did run each 3 presets and the custom on 4096 FFT just to be sure.
> 
> Did tried different RAM frequency with different timings and RAM, VCCIO, SA voltages to stabilize it. My conclusion is that if you can run your RAM on 1.2 V and low VCCIO/SA voltage on let's say 3000 MHz 16-16-16-28-1T instead of 3200 MHZ 16-16-16-28-1T on 1.35 V, then you should choose the lower speed because the performance gain/loss is minimal. Tested with SuperPI 1M and XTU resulting only marginal difference (repeated tests gave a slightly different results). and down to margin of error.
> 
> My opinion is if you can run RAM on 1.2 V with minimal loss of frequency, timings and performance, you should do that. Put that 10-12 °C gain into Vcore and try 1-2 higher multiplier. The CPU overclock gain will be bigger than the RAM performance loss.
> 
> I have a G.SKILL F4-3200C16D-16GVK 16 GB 3200 MHz 16-16-16-36-2T kit. XMP profile bumps the voltage to 1.35 V but just by jumping from 3200 down to 3000 with improved timings I can get down to 16-16-16-28-1T on 1.2 V stable. By tuning RTL/IO timings in as well in some cases it's even faster than the XMP profile.


Interesting, I did a bit of testing earlier myself, I had originally thought XMP was causing an 8-10C rise in temps but when I took the side door off the case and measured the temperatures from the CPU cooler intake directly to eliminate as many variables as possible I found that there was about 5C difference in my case between bone stock and my overclocked settings. Took this from what I posted earlier in the thread. I have the same RAM kit as you I think








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> Had some time this morning to run a few tests, I took the side door off the case and used a thermometer over the CPU cooler intake to measure temps. Dont know if this is useful to anyone but I'll share it anyway just in case. Temps taken from Realtemp which reports the same as HWINFO but is easier to see on the desktop. Voltages from CPUz for the same reason. I waited for the CPU to settle to completely idle before I began each test after booting. Fans set to run full speed at all times.
> 
> At the optimized defaults DRAM V 1.184, VCCSA 1.080, VCCIO 0.936
> 
> Deltas of 35 35 35 35 across all cores.
> 
> Loading XMP 3200 16 18 18 38 2T. DRAM 1.328 VCCSA 1.232, VCCIO 1.120 Everything else at Auto
> 
> delta T is 39.8, 39.8, 40.8, 40.8.
> 
> Disabling XMP RAM at 2133 15 15 15 36 2T in manual mode setting VCCSA VCCIO and DRAM voltage to the same as XMP above all else Auto
> 
> Delta T. 37.4, 40.4, 41.4, 40.4.
> 
> Manually setting RAM to known stable 500% HCI Memtest timings and voltages of 3333 15 17 17 36 1T DRAM 1.392, VCCSA 1.216, VCCIO 1.128
> 
> Delta T 38.5, 39.5, 41.5, 39.5.
> 
> So it seems to me all things being as equal as I can practically make them here, enabling XMP only raises core temps 3-5 C and in fact in my case it does seem to be mostly down to VCCSA going up.
> 
> Vcore across all tests stayed at 1.136 with occasional dips to 1.120.


Now I didnt isolate the DRAM voltage and I dont have time to do more tests for a while, and also I only used Realbench for 5 minutes here so that might also affect things. But IMO I still think its a bit of a toss up whether you go for 2% more CPU clockspeed or 5% more RAM at the end of the day. I'm pretty busy this week so maybe I'll have a fresh look at the DRAM voltage specifically if I get time at the weekend.


----------



## Primithras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Always means unstable, P95 doesn't detect temperature throttling. The fact the core was so hot could definitely contribute to it's instability.


Thanks for confirming, I'm hoping this is the problem because I'm seeing some other weird behaviour.

I ran the x264 and realbench benchmarks with 50x multiplier at 1.36v and it ran stable for hours with temps between 80-90°. Then I ran P95 with the same settings and I got the worker stopped error and 100° temp (and also made my original post).

Because I assumed that maybe my overclock was unstable after all, I decided to nudge up the voltage to 1.38v. I reran a realbench benchmark with temps now sitting between 85-95° and it also crashed after half an hour.

I have a theory that whenever my temp monitor hits the 95° mark, that it might also hit the 100° mark and throttle very briefly without the monitor tool noticing. Doing some more tests on this, secretly hoping I can keep the 50x multiplier but otherwise I'll have to go for 49x. Unless anyone has any golden tips on settings besides vcore and LLC I can tweak for more stability?


----------



## Gurkburk

Im thinking about putting CLU on the IHS, between the cooler & IHS.. But i think that kinda messed with my H80i as well as with the IHS on my 4770k.

Thoughts regarding this? I've got a Noctua D15 now, which is aluminium(?), would it work or completely ruin it?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> Im thinking about putting CLU on the IHS, between the cooler & IHS.. But i think that kinda messed with my H80i as well as with the IHS on my 4770k.
> 
> Thoughts regarding this? I've got a Noctua D15 now, which is aluminium(?), would it work or completely ruin it?


Check CLU manual...I know for sure that TGK clearly states not to be used on aluminium...
Other than that...don't spill it on the motherboard or you will spend the next 4 h of your life in agony trying to find every single and last bit of it and wipe it...
And just try... for me personally after trying it... It wasn't worth the trouble..I can pretty much get the same result using a quality TIM like Gelid Extreme (Liquid metal just slightly better....LM is best used underneath the IHS that's where you see its true potential)


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> Im thinking about putting CLU on the IHS, between the cooler & IHS.. But i think that kinda messed with my H80i as well as with the IHS on my 4770k.
> 
> Thoughts regarding this? I've got a Noctua D15 now, which is aluminium(?), would it work or completely ruin it?


I wouldn't. The temperatures might drop by 2-3 °C but that's not enough to justify the risks. You put a bit too much and will get into the socket. You don't want that. Instead buy a better cooler like Noctua NH-D15 or Phanteks PH-TC14PE.

Check Thermal Paste Air Cooling Results


----------



## Gurkburk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Check CLU manual...I know for sure that TGK clearly states not to be used on aluminium...
> Other than that...don't spill it on the motherboard or you will spend the next 4 h of your life in agony trying to find every single and last bit of it and wipe it...
> And just try... for me personally after trying it... It wasn't worth the trouble..I can pretty much get the same result using a quality TIM like Gelid Extreme (Liquid metal just slightly better....LM is best used underneath the IHS that's where you see its true potential)


I cant find any info if it's really Aluminium.. But considering the weight, it might not be anything else than normal steel?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I wouldn't. The temperatures might drop by 2-3 °C but that's not enough to justify the risks. You put a bit too much and will get into the socket. You don't want that. Instead buy a better cooler like Noctua NH-D15 or Phanteks PH-TC14PE.
> 
> Check Thermal Paste Air Cooling Results


I've got the Noctua dh15, just shortened the name


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> I cant find any info if it's really Aluminium.. But considering the weight, it might not be anything else than normal steel?


Could be copper platted with nickel....
Double check the manual and if you don't have one..or if its a "thin" one...try and check the manufacturer website...At work at the moment so unfortunately I can't do that for you now..


----------



## ducegt

I put CLU on my video card and it was about 5 to 10C cooler at idle, but resulted in exact same load temps as gelid.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> I cant find any info if it's really Aluminium.. But considering the weight, it might not be anything else than normal steel?
> I've got the Noctua dh15, just shortened the name


Sorry, my might got shot on H80i for some reason. I think I need a sleep.

Maybe ask Noctua directly in email. I'm pretty sure they will help you out but I still wouldn't put anything conducting on the CPU.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> Interesting, I did a bit of testing earlier myself, I had originally thought XMP was causing an 8-10C rise in temps but when I took the side door off the case and measured the temperatures from the CPU cooler intake directly to eliminate as many variables as possible I found that there was about 5C difference in my case between bone stock and my overclocked settings. Took this from what I posted earlier in the thread. I have the same RAM kit as you I think
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I didnt isolate the DRAM voltage and I dont have time to do more tests for a while, and also I only used Realbench for 5 minutes here so that might also affect things. But IMO I still think its a bit of a toss up whether you go for 2% more CPU clockspeed or 5% more RAM at the end of the day. I'm pretty busy this week so maybe I'll have a fresh look at the DRAM voltage specifically if I get time at the weekend.


What was the temperature with Just XMP and Vccio and Vccsa on Auto?


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What was the temperature with Just XMP and Vccio and Vccsa on Auto?


Quote:


> Loading XMP 3200 16 18 18 38 2T. DRAM 1.328 VCCSA 1.232, VCCIO 1.120 Everything else at Auto
> 
> delta T is 39.8, 39.8, 40.8, 40.8.


My wording was poor sorry, the voltages there are what XMP goes to automatically with this kit/mobo.


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My Vccio and Vccsa on Auto with XMP 3200 speed memory. Vccio Stock Intel 0.960v auto 1.165v
> Vccsa (System Agent) stock Intel 1.060v auto 1.248v


Similar results here. Decided to stick with 3200 instead of 3600 due to the large increase in IO and SA needed to boot my system vs 3200. At 3200 I have IO at .98 and SA at 1.0 in bios. Might try going lower.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slink3Slyde*
> 
> My wording was poor sorry, the voltages there are what XMP goes to automatically with this kit/mobo.


Thanks for clearing that up, for only 5c I'm leaving the memory stock XMP settings.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Similar results here. Decided to stick with 3200 instead of 3600 due to the large increase in IO and SA needed to boot my system vs 3200. At 3200 I have IO at .98 and SA at 1.0 in bios. Might try going lower.


I decided to keep my Vccio and Vccsa on XMP Auto for 3200 speed memory, I don't want to do anymore memory stability testing.


----------



## dirtyred

If you raise the ram voltage and even if you leave PCH, VCCIO and SA voltage on something fixed and low, the temperatures of the CPU increase. I wonder if raising voltage on RAM does increase something else that's been forgotten on auto and that's causing the temperature raise. Or it could be that in some way the ram voltage goes through the memory controller and that's the cause. I cannot come up with any other explanation without looking into some weird technical documents that might not even exist publicly.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> If you raise the ram voltage and even if you leave PCH, VCCIO and SA voltage on something fixed and low, the temperatures of the CPU increase. I wonder if raising voltage on RAM does increase something else that's been forgotten on auto and that's causing the temperature raise. Or it could be that in some way the ram voltage goes through the memory controller and that's the cause. I cannot come up with any other explanation without looking into some weird technical documents that might not even exist publicly.


In old article for memory, when the memory voltage is increased the voltage goes up on the memory bus connected to the memory controller.


----------



## CH4OAddict

L639G500

This cpu will do 5.3 at less than 1.4v. Very good cpu.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> L639G500
> 
> This cpu will do 5.3 at less than 1.4v. Very good cpu.


Ok Im confused your screen shot shows just over 5 Ghz but you claim 5.3Ghz under 1.4V, relevance?


----------



## CH4OAddict

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Ok Im confused your screen shot shows just over 5 Ghz but you claim 5.3Ghz under 1.4V, relevance?


Just a screenshot for 5ghz @4450mhz ram


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> Just a screenshot for 5ghz @4450mhz ram


I still don't see the relevance of stating 5.3Ghz at less than 1.4V when screenshot doesn't show that lol
Perhaps you should have said 5ghz @4450mhz ram?


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Evening,
> 
> Just upgraded to the following: _(coming from AMD FX-8350)_
> 
> -i7 7700k
> -ASUS ROG IX APEX
> -3600Mhz C16 Trident Z
> -1080Ti Founders Edition
> 
> She's been running over 12hrs now and I've barely touched the BIOS at all
> 
> It's time to see what this chip is worth!
> 
> _I'm on a full custom loop. (EK Supremacy EVO with a medium 360mm rad for CPU only)_
> 
> How are you guys testing for stability? (I mainly game and tinker about with benches etc and o/c'ing and download TV programmes/films) and do the odd MS Word document.
> 
> I want something *reliable* but also *nothing* thats going to literally abuse the chip.
> I was using prime95 on my old FX -- but I didn't really care if I degraded it. But for my new i7 i want to look after her ;-)


You could cap the CPU's max wattage in the BIOS if you're uncomfortable with the current overdraw at higher voltages.
I've capped the sustained max wattage at 135W, 145W burst (<127 seconds). They go in line with the Intel document on skylake shared on one of buildzoid's podcast of <100A sustained for long term reliability of 91-95W CPUs (iirc). Asus Raja recommends less than 2x TDP on the edgesute guide iirc.

Alternatively, CPUSupportsAVX=0 can be added to local.txt.

I personally use prime95 (AVX=0) for brief momemnts (minutes) for the following:
1. Worst case sanity check with small FFT maximum temperature.
2. Identifying if there are ACPI.sys
(all power management enabled) DPC latency creeps that may be associated with 24/7 long use Watchdog timeout/WHEA Uncorrectable error BSODs briefly with large FFT's power draw.

Granular testing comes only after. in increments of 5-10mV with X264/Realbench style testing while ACPI.sys is still monitored.


----------



## CH4OAddict

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I still don't see the relevance of stating 5.3Ghz at less than 1.4V when screenshot doesn't show that lol
> Perhaps you should have said 5ghz @4450mhz ram?


It was a statement to the capability of the cpu. My screenshot was just what I'm working on at the time. The relevance is that my L639G500 is a pretty good cpu.


----------



## budgy

I would agree, there was no caption to suggest otherwise so it's easy to read/think the screenshot is "proof" of 5.3GHz.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> This is delidded, with CLU. I ran Realbench with 1.4V @ 5.2Ghz, just bumped it up to 5.3 and 1.44v to test it out, ran fine in Aida as you saw there. But ill run Realbench soon.
> Edit: Yah Realbench shut it down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Back to 5.2 stable then! ^^
> 1.4v @ 5.2Ghz is what i'm running stable on the noctua cooler.


can't complain about a 5.2GHz 8 thread processor with this excellent IPC.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> Im thinking about putting CLU on the IHS, between the cooler & IHS.. But i think that kinda messed with my H80i as well as with the IHS on my 4770k.
> 
> Thoughts regarding this? I've got a Noctua D15 now, which is aluminium(?), would it work or completely ruin it?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> Similar results here. Decided to stick with 3200 instead of 3600 due to the large increase in IO and SA needed to boot my system vs 3200. At 3200 I have IO at .98 and SA at 1.0 in bios. Might try going lower.


The base plate is nickel plate (at least it is on my NHD14) so you could use CLU... but it's not gonna transform the cooling all that much. Can you redo the delid LM application or is this a silicon lottery delid? I would redo the delid and PAINT clu (or clp which I tend to use for die-to-IHS) on both the die and underside of the lid. you can see that LM takes some coaxing to truly adhere (fill gaps) in the IHS. IMO simply putting LM on the die is insufficient. in other words when you place the lid back on the die, the CLP-toCLP bondline junction forms nicely when both are painted, CLU to a clean IHS underside does not.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> It was a statement to the capability of the cpu. My screenshot was just what I'm working on at the time. The relevance is that my L639G500 is a pretty good cpu.


Just show us a R15 @ 5.3 or something. Shouldn't be hard. Looks to be a good chip.


----------



## Slink3Slyde

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> If you raise the ram voltage and even if you leave PCH, VCCIO and SA voltage on something fixed and low, the temperatures of the CPU increase. I wonder if raising voltage on RAM does increase something else that's been forgotten on auto and that's causing the temperature raise. Or it could be that in some way the ram voltage goes through the memory controller and that's the cause. I cannot come up with any other explanation without looking into some weird technical documents that might not even exist publicly.


I'll explain my thinking here. When I initially tested I found that I was getting temperatures of +10c at stock from just enabling XMP. The reason I tested with my side door off my case and with a thermometer over the cooler intake is that temperatures can be affected by so many things, even if you have a good case fan setup with fans at 100%. That's why I tested again with the side door off and with a thermometer right over the cooler intake and measured delta temperatures and not those displayed in Realtemp.

As an example of how randomly airflow can affect things, in my flat if I open up a window in the kitchen and the balcony doors the ambient temperature stays around the same according to the thermometer on my desk, but my CPU and GPU temperatures can drop considerably.

In my case my initial thought that XMP was giving me much higher temps then I expected was probably mostly down to residual heat from my previous testing being in my case and components and altering the temperature of the cooler intake even if ambients in the room remained the same and I let the system idle right back down in between. I'm not trying to rubbish your testing, it may still be that its working differently in our different situations for some reason, but I'm thinking that something similar may have happened to you.


----------



## ducegt

CB15 draws as much power at 5.4 with 1.5v as realbench will do at 5 with 1.3v IME... When 1.5v was with the help of outdoor winter air. CB15 is fun, but it's a far cry from proof of stability IMO


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> CB15 draws as much power at 5.4 with 1.5v as realbench will do at 5 with 1.3v IME... When 1.5v was with the help of outdoor winter air. CB15 is fun, but it's a far cry from proof of stability IMO


I would avoid 1.5 Vcore as the maximum by Intel's spec is 1.52 V. Using that voltage the voltage spikes could be well above the maximum limit. At 5.4 GHz I can also imagine power usage of 150 W and that would result in 100 Amps. That would damage the CPU in long term or could even kill it if the spike is high enough.

Read page 114-116: http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.pdf


----------



## CH4OAddict

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Just show us a R15 @ 5.3 or something. Shouldn't be hard. Looks to be a good chip.


1.365v set in bios


----------



## rt123

Nice..


----------



## CH4OAddict

1201cb with 5300mhz


----------



## rt123

If you don't mind me asking, are you in the USA??


----------



## CH4OAddict

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> If you don't mind me asking, are you in the USA??


I am. Why?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> 1201cb with 5300mhz


Very nice chip look forward to seeing 8 hour Realbench run


----------



## nrpeyton

Do these temps look right for a Full Custom EK Loop (no de-lid)?

V.core *during* Realbench is reporting at 1.280v, only overclocked by 100mhz (to 4600)

Core Temps: 68c-71c
Socket Temp: 60c

I'm new to intel. Just upgraded from old AMD FX and I'd only see temps like that at 1.488 v.core and an 800 MHZ O/C.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Do these temps look right for a Full Custom EK Loop (no de-lid)?
> 
> V.core *during* Realbench is reporting at 1.288v, only overclocked by 100mhz (to 4600)
> 
> Core Temps: 68c-71c
> Socket Temp: 60c
> 
> I'm new to intel. Just upgraded from old AMD FX and I'd only see temps like that at 1.488 v.core and an 800 MHZ O/C.


Depending on what you mean by full custom EK loop for that Vcore without a delid temps look about right assuming an ambient of around 22 degrees C.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Depending on what you mean by full custom EK loop for that Vcore without a delid temps look about right assuming an ambient of around 22 degrees C.


-Triple radiator (three 1800 RPM vardars in push)
-EK supremacy EVO
-D5 (their best unless you go twin-motor in series).
-CPU only just now. (nothing else in loop)

Yeah, ambient is about that.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Do these temps look right for a Full Custom EK Loop (no de-lid)?
> 
> V.core *during* Realbench is reporting at 1.280v, only overclocked by 100mhz (to 4600)
> 
> Core Temps: 68c-71c
> Socket Temp: 60c
> 
> I'm new to intel. Just upgraded from old AMD FX and I'd only see temps like that at 1.488 v.core and an 800 MHZ O/C.


I'd say that 1.28 Vcore is a bit high for 4.6 GHz unless it's a complete potato chip. Mine is completely stable on 4.8 GHz @ 1.248 Vcore (occasional peaks to 1.264 V). Push that multiplier up to 48-49 for that Vcore. But you could go up to 1.32 Vcore probably and stay below 80-85 °C (wouldn't let the average core temps get above that).


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I'd say that 1.28 Vcore is a bit high for 4.6 GHz unless it's a complete potato chip. Mine is completely stable on 4.8 GHz @ 1.248 Vcore (occasional peaks to 1.264 V). Push that multiplier up to 48-49 for that Vcore. But you could go up to 1.32 Vcore probably and stay below 80-85 °C (wouldn't let the average core temps get above that).


I left voltage at stock.

Thanks.

I'm new to intel.

This is the first time I've touched the BIOS on my new ROG IX APEX.

It's overwhelming. I've got 4x the options I've ever seen before.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> -Triple radiator (three 1800 RPM vardars in push)
> -EK supremacy EVO
> -D5 (their best unless you go twin-motor in series).
> -CPU only just now. (nothing else in loop)
> 
> Yeah, ambient is about that.


With a case that has reasonable airflow I would say temps are about right for that sort of Vcore. Highly recommend a delid.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> With a case that has reasonable airflow I would say temps are about right for that sort of Vcore. Highly recommend a delid.


Lol that's unbelievable.

Well... maybe the wrong word.

But
OMG

Full custom loop lol. And my chips practically running at stock.

And I'm hitting 70c core & 60c socket. realbench (at stock voltages)

What would I be hitting on air?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Lol that's unbelievable.
> 
> Well... maybe the wrong word.
> 
> But
> OMG
> 
> Full custom loop lol. And my chips practically running at stock.
> 
> And I'm hitting 70c core & 60c socket. realbench (at stock voltages)
> 
> What would I be hitting on air?


Lol it is a known fact these things run very hot due to the poor thermal paste and the gap between heat spreader and die. A delid will gain around 20 degrees C lower temps under load sometimes more depending on the chip, hence why I suggested delid. Even with my custom loop @1.4V running OCCT for an hour with a 27 degree C ambient after delid my hottest core still hit 80 degrees C.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Lol it is a known fact these things run very hot due to the poor thermal paste and the gap between heat spreader and die. A delid will gain around 20 degrees C lower temps under load sometimes more depending on the chip, hence why I suggested delid. Even with my custom loop @1.4V running OCCT for an hour with a 27 degree C ambient after delid my hottest core still hit 80 degrees C.


here on custom loop 1.4v and occt stress test gives me almost same temps.
What temps your liquid gets in that loop?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> here on custom loop 1.4v and occt stress test gives me almost same temps.
> What temps your liquid gets in that loop?


Can't tell you because I don't have a sensor for the liquid temp. What does your loop comprise of?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> I left voltage at stock.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I'm new to intel.
> 
> This is the first time I've touched the BIOS on my new ROG IX APEX.
> 
> It's overwhelming. I've got 4x the options I've ever seen before.


Not that overwhelming. You play with multiplier, Vcore and LLC levels (but once found a good LLC, you can stick to it pretty much).

Never leave voltage on stock when you OC. It will be way over the required one. Read first post or ASUS's guide: http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/.


Set multi to 48 @ 1.25 Vcore adaptive voltage
Set LLC level to 4-5 (wouldn't go higher because it's unpredictable and way too aggressive) that results the closest Vcore under load to what you've set in BIOS
Set IA AC and DC Load Line to 0.01
Set memory to stock 2133 MHz @ 1.2 V (to exclude memory instability from the equasion)
Do a quick stress test (15 min RealBench enough) to see temperatures
If stable, raise multi by 1
If you crash and have temperature headroom (below 80-85 °C average) raise Vcore and retest
Once you reached 80-85 °C average core temps, stop at the Vcore and play with multiplier to find the highest stable on that Vcore
When you're done do an 8 hours RealBench stress test to be sure it's stable.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Lol that's unbelievable.
> 
> ...
> 
> What would I be hitting on air?


About the same. Intel got cheap on the thermal interface between the die and the IHS, so its the real limiting factor. Your water loop won't provide a serious advantage without deliding.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Can't tell you because I don't have a sensor for the liquid temp. What does your loop comprise of?




One 280mm rad + 120mm rad. D5 pwm pump. I run the pump on 1800rpm and fans on 5~7 volts as i love silent pc's

The loop is not complete yet still wayting for vego gpu to come out ....

Max water temp i saw was 39c


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> 
> 
> One 280mm rad + 120mm rad. D5 pwm pump. I run the pump on 1800rpm and fans on 5~7 volts as i love silent pc's
> 
> The loop is not complete yet still wayting for vego gpu to come out ....
> 
> Max water temp i saw was 39c


Im running 1x360mm and 1x240mm with two GPU's in the loop of a single D5 pump res combo. The disadvantage I have over you though is that my case isn't exactly great when it comes to aiflow, looking at getting a modded top which by all acounts drop temps under load by around 10 to 12 degrees C.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Im running 1x360mm and 1x240mm with two GPU's in the loop of a single D5 pump res combo. The disadvantage I have over you though is that my case isn't exactly great when it comes to aiflow, looking at getting a modded top which by all acounts drop temps under load by around 10 to 12 degrees C.


What case is that? Well 10c is huge ..

Btw you can get a 10 dollar water temp sensor as i did... cheap toy


----------



## Kalpa

The first rule of the failed delidders club: you don't talk about the failed delidders club.

Be that as it may, since my previous skylake 6700K CPU very mysteriously died to a stab wound earlier today, I furiously had to get a replacement at our local walmart for computers. Since they had 7700Ks on shelf for 10 euros cheaper than 6700Ks, I bought a kabylake CPU instead (still, please do not ask about the price)

Now, freshly installed on this Z170 board (Gigabyte Gaming K3-EU, BIOS version F22), I'm currently running static voltage, dynamic frequencies overclock (multipliers 8-50, with 1/2/3/4 core utilization 50/49/49/48 respectively) - and AVX offset value of 4 (this setting looks promising - I may be able to have a nicer generic use overclock but not have to worry about temps too much when I leave the machine running [email protected] for nights and workdays)

At 1.320 BIOS set voltage (drops to 1.308V during load), this preliminarily seems to be a stable configuration with temps reaching ~80C the highest. Further stability testing is required on 1-3 core load situation, though. Initial validation link: https://valid.x86.fr/arjz7s

My system is air cooled with a Thermalright Macho Rev. B tower cooler.

Will proceed to run overnight stability test (although I'm bit at a loss what to run now, I need something non-AVX utilizing to test the real clocks, I guess I need to fetch an older version of Prime95...)

As a quick note I could get this thing to boot to Windows easily enough with 5GHz clocks at 1.375V BIOS set voltage, but temperatures start to kick in plus there are obvious stability issues with that setting.

Will continue testing.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> The first rule of the failed delidders club: you don't talk about the failed delidders club.
> 
> Will proceed to run overnight stability test (although I'm bit at a loss what to run now, I need something non-AVX utilizing to test the real clocks, I guess I need to fetch an older version of Prime95...)


How did you manage to fail?

Adding CpuSupportsAVX=0 to Prime95's local.txt will disable AVX so you don't need an older version. If you do want an older version, get v26.6.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> How did you manage to fail?


Razored through pcb topmost epoxy layer into wiring, evidently cutting some when I was about three quarters done. I knew I was pretty likely done for when instead of black rubbery stuff I got green plasticky stuff coming along the edge of the blade. I finished the process holding out hope that maybe with some divine luck I only managed to scratch the epoxy off, just exposing some conductors, but alas no. The thing wouldn't boot.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> What case is that? Well 10c is huge ..
> 
> Btw you can get a 10 dollar water temp sensor as i did... cheap toy


I know they are cheap might look into doing that when I next drain my loop. Phanteks-enthoo-evolv-atx case is what I have, nice case but not very thermally efficient. A lot of heat gets trapped in the top of my case which just gets circulated and circulated, my own testing has shown a 10 degree C temp drop by removing the lid with same stress test and ambient temp.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> The first rule of the failed delidders club: you don't talk about the failed delidders club.


Welcome to the club. I still have no clue how my delid failed. It was working great for several days... until one day I get a BSOD while stressing. From that point forward, the system would BSOD on (or before) windows startup regardless of BIOS settings (even stock settings) as long as that CPU was installed. Put in a different processor, and the machine was fine.

As part of the post-mortem, I pulled the lid back off and I can't find anything wrong. There's no CLU mess, no scratches, no visible damage whatsoever. My ONLY guess is that somehow the IHS rubbed against the die and somehow damaged it. The die appears slightly "scuffed" on the top (instead of perfectly mirror-like.) It's still smooth, and you can only see a slight discoloration/scuff at an angle. It might even be my imagination. That's just a wild guess, though. The honest truth is I have no clue why it died.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Not that overwhelming. You play with multiplier, Vcore and LLC levels (but once found a good LLC, you can stick to it pretty much).
> 
> Never leave voltage on stock when you OC. It will be way over the required one. Read first post or ASUS's guide: http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/.
> 
> 
> Set multi to 48 @ 1.25 Vcore adaptive voltage
> Set LLC level to 4-5 (wouldn't go higher because it's unpredictable and way too aggressive) that results the closest Vcore under load to what you've set in BIOS
> Set IA AC and DC Load Line to 0.01
> Set memory to stock 2133 MHz @ 1.2 V (to exclude memory instability from the equasion)
> Do a quick stress test (15 min RealBench enough) to see temperatures
> If stable, raise multi by 1
> If you crash and have temperature headroom (below 80-85 °C average) raise Vcore and retest
> Once you reached 80-85 °C average core temps, stop at the Vcore and play with multiplier to find the highest stable on that Vcore
> When you're done do an 8 hours RealBench stress test to be sure it's stable.


Thanks,

I'm using the Turbo Boost v.core setting, (adaptive) and have now manually applied 1.3v

With a 1.3v v.core _(under Turbo v.core)_ with LLC at stock.. v.core stays at 1.296v (with the odd occasional jump to 1.311 during Realbench _(so it looks like ASUS has LLC set up correctly by default)._

Just passed a Realbench test at a multiplier of 48 (4.8Ghz) at the above settings

*Something I don't understand yet though:*

It's at *near idle* conditions when voltage seems to be overshooting.
I.E. system at idle (after booting up) but clocks still at 4.9Ghz (before it down-clocks to 800Mhz power saving levels)

Despite me setting 1.3v (as explained above) it's reporting 1.376v in Windows. As soon as I start Realbench the voltage settles down to what I set it at.

*UPDATE:*

So with LLC on auto it looked like I'd lost the lottery lol!

Was BARELY stable at:
4.9Ghz & 1.35v
(set as adaptive 'additional Turbo v.core')
(reports as 1.4v in Windows during IDLE and 1.344 - 1.366 under load)

-PASSED 15 min Realbench stress test
-But hwinfo64 threw up *one* 'L0 cache' error.
-Lots of "micro-stuttering on desktop" (I'd lose control of mouse for a second & screen would freeze _*despite* no other adverse affects_)..

Average CPU package temp was 81c with a good, full custom EK loop.

CHANGED LLC to level 4 and like magic look what happened:

"Feels" more stable at:
4.9Ghz & *1.3v*
(set as adaptive 'additional Turbo v.core')
(reports as 1.354v in Windows during IDLE and 1.328 _(mainly)_ - 1.36 _(occasionally)_ under load)

-PASSED 15 min Realbench stress test
-This time hwinfo64 threw up *two* L0 cache errors
-*But NO micro-stuttering* on desktop. NO losing control of mouse or mini-freezes

Avg. temps are about the same.

*For 5GHZ* CinebenchR15 multi-core completion I need the following:

1.365v (adaptive "additional turbo v.core")
LLC level 4
Shows in Windows as 1.408v during cinebench

Realbench however, doesn't even last 2 seconds!

*I'm not comfortable going any higher on voltage. Have I lost the lottery?* (I don't assume it's safe running these chips over 1.41v)?


----------



## dirtyred

Asus default LLC level is 2 I guess but somebody will know better. If it reports more than maybe the LLC 4 is a bit too aggressive, try 3. You should have preferably slighly less Vcore under load then what you've set (to be on the safer side).

During idle it should be around 0.8 V. Check idle voltage setting in BIOS. Set it to 0.8 - 0.85 V.

If you have stability issues, you can add just a bit of offset voltage too, like 0.05 V and substract that for turbo voltage so the total will be the same.

Be sure you're on stock 2133 MHZ on RAM to eliminate it. If you had XMP enabled previously I suggest you reset your BIOS and don't activate XMP.

Check cache ratio to be on auto or 3-5 steps lower than the multiplier. AVX offset could cause some stability issues, getting less voltage then needed because the voltage table is not accurate enough (offset voltage can help with that).

What I've found that if I had MSI Afterburner running (even when not OC'ing the GPU) or the Gigabyte tool RealBench would crash soon. Took me days to figure out it wasn't my CPU.

I would try a 48 multi with voltage between 1.25-1.3 V to see how it behaves. Of just leave voltage as is and reduce multi to 48.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Asus default LLC level is 2 I guess but somebody will know better. If it reports more than maybe the LLC 4 is a bit too aggressive, try 3. You should have preferably slighly less Vcore under load then what you've set (to be on the safer side).
> 
> During idle it should be around 0.8 V. Check idle voltage setting in BIOS. Set it to 0.8 - 0.85 V.
> 
> If you have stability issues, you can add just a bit of offset voltage too, like 0.05 V and substract that for turbo voltage so the total will be the same.
> 
> Be sure you're on stock 2133 MHZ on RAM to eliminate it. If you had XMP enabled previously I suggest you reset your BIOS and don't activate XMP.
> 
> Check cache ratio to be on auto or 3-5 steps lower than the multiplier. AVX offset could cause some stability issues, getting less voltage then needed because the voltage table is not accurate enough (offset voltage can help with that).
> 
> What I've found that if I had MSI Afterburner running (even when not OC'ing the GPU) or the Gigabyte tool RealBench would crash soon. Took me days to figure out it wasn't my CPU.
> 
> I would try a 48 multi with voltage between 1.25-1.3 V to see how it behaves. Of just leave voltage as is and reduce multi to 48.


Same thing here with the msi afterburner that causes crashes.. i thought its only me








I figured out that i still need find a point when the Oc is stable with msi burner running anyway, because i still needed it for games ....
now im using nzxt Cam ... didnt test yet if this one does crashes when stress testing.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> I'm using the Turbo Boost v.core setting, (adaptive) and have now manually applied 1.3v
> 
> With a 1.3v v.core _(under Turbo v.core)_ with LLC at stock.. v.core stays at 1.296v (with the odd occasional jump to 1.311 during Realbench _(so it looks like ASUS has LLC set up correctly by default)._
> 
> Just passed a Realbench test at a multiplier of 48 (4.8Ghz) at the above settings
> 
> *Something I don't understand yet though:*
> 
> It's at *near idle* conditions when voltage seems to be overshooting.
> I.E. system at idle (after booting up) but clocks still at 4.9Ghz (before it down-clocks to 800Mhz power saving levels)
> 
> Despite me setting 1.3v (as explained above) it's reporting 1.376v in Windows. As soon as I start Realbench the voltage settles down to what I set it at.
> 
> *UPDATE:*
> 
> So with LLC on auto it looked like I'd lost the lottery lol!
> 
> Was BARELY stable at:
> 4.9Ghz & 1.35v
> (set as adaptive 'additional Turbo v.core')
> (reports as 1.4v in Windows during IDLE and 1.344 - 1.366 under load)
> 
> -PASSED 15 min Realbench stress test
> -But hwinfo64 threw up *one* 'L0 cache' error.
> -Lots of "micro-stuttering on desktop" (I'd lose control of mouse for a second & screen would freeze _*despite* no other adverse affects_)..
> 
> Average CPU package temp was 81c with a good, full custom EK loop.
> 
> CHANGED LLC to level 4 and like magic look what happened:
> 
> "Feels" more stable at:
> 4.9Ghz & *1.3v*
> (set as adaptive 'additional Turbo v.core')
> (reports as 1.354v in Windows during IDLE and 1.328 _(mainly)_ - 1.36 _(occasionally)_ under load)
> 
> -PASSED 15 min Realbench stress test
> -This time hwinfo64 threw up *two* L0 cache errors
> -*But NO micro-stuttering* on desktop. NO losing control of mouse or mini-freezes
> 
> Avg. temps are about the same.
> 
> *For 5GHZ* CinebenchR15 multi-core completion I need the following:
> 
> 1.365v (adaptive "additional turbo v.core")
> LLC level 4
> Shows in Windows as 1.408v during cinebench
> 
> Realbench however, doesn't even last 2 seconds!
> 
> *I'm not comfortable going any higher on voltage. Have I lost the lottery?* (I don't assume it's safe running these chips over 1.41v)?


Nope you did not lose the lottery.
If you dellid you would get better resoult in temps and voltage .... im more then 100% sure. Well in this thread i did not see any single guy that dellided his cpu to say it wasnt worth it....
Personally for me delliding made a significant difference. I went from 5.0 to 5.1 with same voltage and less temp on load as my loop really started to work as a liquid cooling .

This is why one of the guys answered you that before delliding good air cooler or a custom loop wont make big difference . If you will dellid yourself you will see how thik is the silicone that holds ihs to the chip. ..


----------



## Primithras

Has anyone played around with downclocking the uncore to get a higher core frequency by the way?

Back with my previous Haswell build, I remember being stuck on 4.2ghz, no matter what I did, I could not get it stable any higher. However after simply downclocking the uncore by 200mhz, I was able to get it stable at 4.6ghz somehow.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> CB15 draws as much power at 5.4 with 1.5v as realbench will do at 5 with 1.3v IME... When 1.5v was with the help of outdoor winter air. CB15 is fun, but it's a far cry from proof of stability IMO
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


it's simply a quick guage of capability, not stability in a true sense.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> 1.365v set in bios
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


lol - you can expect some PMs
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> If you don't mind me asking, are you in the USA??


lol - a discrete query. would go good with the mocf.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> I am. Why?


post that on HWbot.. you may get offers of $1000 for the cpu.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Primithras*
> 
> Has anyone played around with downclocking the uncore to get a higher core frequency by the way?
> 
> Back with my previous Haswell build, I remember being stuck on 4.2ghz, no matter what I did, I could not get it stable any higher. However after simply downclocking the uncore by 200mhz, I was able to get it stable at 4.6ghz somehow.










)) interesting 0. 4ghz gain.

Well thx for info ill try it .... even a 3.5 ucore will do for me if i could get from 5.1 to 5.4







sounds kinda unreal
I know for sure that overclocking uncore requires a lot voltage increase for my chip

Edit: just made uncore from 46 to 35 and multiplier from 5.1 to 5.2 CB freezes. Vcore 1.385 in bios 1.4 in windows
Did you increase voltage a bit also from4.2 to 4.6?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> post that on HWbot.. you may get offers of $1000 for the cpu.


I did get the same 1135 points with 200 MHz less.









http://hwbot.org/submission/3552414_

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )) interesting 0. 4ghz gain.
> 
> Well thx for info ill try it .... even a 3.5 ucore will do for me if i could get from 5.1 to 5.4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sounds kinda unreal
> I know for sure that overclocking uncore requires a lot voltage increase for my chip


I think you'd lose more performance that you'd gain by clock speed.


----------



## Primithras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I think you'd lose more performance that you'd gain by clock speed.


Well as the OP states, you gain more performance with a 100mhz core overclock than with a 1000mhz cache overclock so I'm kinda guessing the same applies when downclocking.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Primithras*
> 
> Well as the OP states, you gain more performance with a 100mhz core overclock than with a 1000mhz cache overclock so I'm kinda guessing the same applies when downclocking.


Maybe...
Cuz im also refering to the first page resoults of uncore Oc...
ill get a bit deep in to it with testing ...
Cb r15 is my friend on that


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

OK, decided to try my hand at OCing my RAM on the 7700K rig. I've never had much luck OCing RAM, so I'm skittish about jacking with this one.

I don't want to run XMP, but I would like to give the XMP timings a shot. The DDR4 in question is G.Skill F4-3600C15D-16GTZ.

This is what I got when I printed off the Aida64 XMP timings and tried to load them, they look jacked but almost passed 100% (shooting for at least a few hundred %) HCI before getting an error (3 in succession), 8 instances of 1900MB.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Nope you did not lose the lottery.
> If you dellid you would get better resoult in temps and voltage .... im more then 100% sure. Well in this thread i did not see any single guy that dellided his cpu to say it wasnt worth it....
> Personally for me delliding made a significant difference. I went from 5.0 to 5.1 with same voltage and less temp on load as my loop really started to work as a liquid cooling .
> 
> This is why one of the guys answered you that before delliding good air cooler or a custom loop wont make big difference . If you will dellid yourself you will see how thik is the silicone that holds ihs to the chip. ..


Thanks.

A de-lid does sound nice.

I'd lose warranty, but it would get me to 5 Ghz.

Right now, I'm stuck at 4.9 Ghz.

To get 4.9 Ghz stability in everything simultaneously I need the following:

1.325v & LLC 4
OR
1.35v & LLC 5

Both result in a Realbench load v.core of 1.360v _(reported)_

However both also cause a v.core of 1.376 -> 1.424 during games and benches









If I lower anything then I can't get through Realbench without mini-freezes on desktop + hwinfo64 cache errors.

Temps are 83c

I'm not actually comfortable running at this v.core
Thinking I may have to drop back to 4.8 Ghz.

*Edit:*
Instead of dropping back to 4.8Ghz I'm using ASUS CPU Temp Control to down-clock 100Mhz to 4.8Ghz after an upper temp limit of 71c is breached.

4.9Ghz is stable below 71c. Benchmarks all stay below this & so do games.

It's only after stress tests _(like Realbench)_ have been running for 3+ minutes I begin to lose stability at 4.9Ghz _under_ 1.35v _(due to rising temps)_

This has also allowed me to keep my max v.core _(under any situation)_ 1.36v or lower. And still run at 4.9Ghz 95% of the time.

Clocks return to 4.9Ghz as soon as temp drops to 61c or lower.

My only complaint about this "ASUS function of the BIOS" is that voltages you apply to the rules are only enforced if you change the multiplier. Ideally.. Instead of down-clocking 100Mhz over 71C, I'd of preferred to of been able to keep the clock and just add 25 milli volts _(for example)._ You can do both. Voltage & multiplier. But you can't just do voltage on it's own.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Primithras*
> 
> Has anyone played around with downclocking the uncore to get a higher core frequency by the way?
> 
> Back with my previous Haswell build, I remember being stuck on 4.2ghz, no matter what I did, I could not get it stable any higher. However after simply downclocking the uncore by 200mhz, I was able to get it stable at 4.6ghz somehow.


I just did some quick testing for my cpu.

So i lowerd the voltage on the cpu till it would crash in cb r15, apears to be 1.30 (from 1.38.1.31 still passes)for 5.1 with uncore 46
Then i undervolted uncore to 35 an got a crash in like 1 sec in rb15
39 uncore gave me like 3 sec of rb15
42 gave me like 5 sec of r15
43 44 uncore would be same as 42 ,5 sec of rb15
So for my chip... undervolting uncore would get me mb even not as good resoults then stock.
Try yours , interesting whats your resoults are.
Thx for the input


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I did get the same 1135 points with 200 MHz less.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3552414_
> 
> 
> I think you'd lose more performance that you'd gain by clock speed.


memory settings most likely... but voltage... it's the voltage!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> OK, decided to try my hand at OCing my RAM on the 7700K rig. I've never had much luck OCing RAM, so I'm skittish about jacking with this one.
> 
> I don't want to run XMP, but I would like to give the XMP timings a shot. The DDR4 in question is G.Skill F4-3600C15D-16GTZ.
> 
> This is what I got when I printed off the Aida64 XMP timings and tried to load them, they look jacked but almost passed 100% (shooting for at least a few hundred %) HCI before getting an error (3 in succession), 8 instances of 1900MB.


looks good... need to see the SPD tab in cpuZ and vdimm, vsa and vccio also. What are you looking to get to.. and before heading down the ram rabbit hole, be sure to have a good system image in the bank.









I think you should be able to lower tCWL and did you manually se thte four "12" values?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

It's running HCI right now, those timings didn't pass.

VSA is 1.225v in BIOS, VCCIO, is 1.125v in BIOS. VDIMM is 1.4V

Changes I made were tRFC to 289 (there are 3 different tRFC values in the Aida64 printout) and tFAW to 40.

I'd be tickled to death to get a solid 3600C15 1T out of it, basically the XMP profile without all the other changes XMP imposes.

And I didn't set those 12s, even some of the secondaries are still popping up as AUTO in the BIOS,

These didn't pass. What's the tRC equivalent? The XMP value is 50, I don't see anything in the AS Rock called tRC, and I'm not sure there's one in BIOS.

That tWR 31 in ASRock was one of the autos in BIOS, I set it to 32 and started HCI again


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> It's running HCI right now, those timings didn't pass.
> 
> VSA is 1.225v in BIOS, VCCIO, is 1.125v in BIOS. VDIMM is 1.4V
> 
> Changes I made were tRFC to 289 (there are 3 different tRFC values in the Aida64 printout) and tFAW to 40.
> 
> I'd be tickled to death to get a solid 3600C15 1T out of it, basically the XMP profile without all the other changes XMP imposes.
> 
> And I didn't set those 12s, even some of the secondaries are still popping up as AUTO in the BIOS,
> 
> These didn't pass. What's the tRC equivalent? The XMP value is 50, I don't see anything in the AS Rock called tRC, and I'm not sure there's one in BIOS.
> 
> That tWR 31 in ASRock was one of the autos in BIOS, I set it to 32 and started HCI again


that's okay - leave those 2nds and 3rds on Auto (for now). I have those same sticks and they perform EXACTLY the same as the 4266c16 b-die kit (they are actually in a C6H/1600x bench right now







) So FAW and tRTP are loose. here's the plug and play that works for 3866c15 on that kit... your vccio and vsa may need to be adjusted vs this, but I thin you really shouldn't need 1.225V. This screenine is trained at 1.45V and runm at 1.425V. If that board has "eventual Dram Voltage" - I think you know how to use it.
I need to switch kits around...


on win10, enable Developers mode and install BASH. this way you can quickly test the ram using GSAT without installing a MInt boot.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

The part that's throwing me is how the abbreviations in the ASRock app don't correspond to the Asus bios abbreviations. I don't know what I'm changing, but I've messed with it all evening and can only load settings that will boot and not pass HCI or not boot. Typical RAM OCing experience for me, I have rebooted so many times already and am no closer to running at 3600 that I was when I first booted this thing up.


----------



## nrpeyton

My 3600Mhz C16 TridentZ is overclocking like a dream.

Changed timings to 19, 19, 19, 39 and it booted.
Failed Aida64 memory test.

So upped voltage to 1.4v.

Now running at *4133Mhz.*

10 minutes and counting on Aida64 memory test









Now just wish I could get ahold of all the secondary and tertiary timings off someone who actually owns a 4133 kit (or g.skill) as it feels like that would guarantee long-term stability.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> My 3600Mhz C16 TridentZ is overclocking like a dream.
> 
> Changed timings to 19, 19, 19, 21 and it booted.
> Failed Aida64 memory test.
> 
> So upped voltage to 1.4v.
> 
> Now running at *4133Mhz.*
> 
> 10 minutes and counting on Aida64 memory test
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now just wish I could get ahold of all the secondary and tertiary timings off someone who actually owns a 4133 kit (or g.skill) as it feels like that would guarantee long-term stability.


tRas on 21 could be the issue. As far as I know you can go down to 28. As far as I know that's the minimum on z170/270 no matter of what voltage you pump into.

Every RAM is a bit different like CPUs. And some G.SKILL are made of B-Die and some of E-Die even from the same series. Depends on when they were manufactured. You'd have to take off the heatsink to check that. So not necessarily you can copy other's settings.

I don't know how Aida64 memtest works but HCI Memtest sure finds memory instability pretty fast. Run as many instances as logical cores (8) and devide between them the amount of free memory you have. For example 15.9 GB - 1.4 (Windows usage) = 14.5 GB / 8 = 1.8125 GB so give them rougly 1750-1800 MB. Let it run until 500% (2-3 hours). Sometimes it finds errors at 60 or even 30%.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> The part that's throwing me is how the abbreviations in the ASRock app don't correspond to the Asus bios abbreviations. I don't know what I'm changing, but I've messed with it all evening and can only load settings that will boot and not pass HCI or not boot. Typical RAM OCing experience for me, I have rebooted so many times already and am no closer to running at 3600 that I was when I first booted this thing up.


which ones do not correspond? we'll just use the long names if needed The ATC maps directly... have you tried the primary settings i posted (leave 2nd and 3rd on auto?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> tRas on 21 could be the issue. As far as I know you can go down to 28. As far as I know that's the minimum on z170/270 no matter of what voltage you pump into.
> 
> Every RAM is a bit different like CPUs. And some G.SKILL are made of B-Die and some of E-Die even from the same series. Depends on when they were manufactured. You'd have to take off the heatsink to check that. So not necessarily you can copy other's settings.
> 
> I don't know how Aida64 memtest works but HCI Memtest sure finds memory instability pretty fast. Run as many instances as logical cores (8) and devide between them the amount of free memory you have. For example 15.9 GB - 1.4 (Windows usage) = 14.5 GB / 8 = 1.8125 GB so give them rougly 1750-1800 MB. Let it run until 500% (2-3 hours). Sometimes it finds errors at 60 or even 30%.


tRAS = cas+tRCD+tRTP (+/-2). the ras window needs to be open the entire time (ticks) it takes to complete all 3 operations. Any values lower than this are likely corrcted at the board level to fix the timing error. (and the operating value is not reported in the OS). Very low stable values are likely due to application of an offset.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> which ones do not correspond? we'll just use the long names if needed The ATC maps directly... have you tried the primary settings i posted (leave 2nd and 3rd on auto?


I'll have to look at it, I need to snag a USB stick and screen cap the BIOS - I can't remember what they're called except that when I have these ASRock screen caps pulled up on another machine, the abbreviations don't correspond.

No, I haven't tried the timings you gave, I wanted to see if I could just get the XMP timings to run. I've never been able to even run the rated speed/timings on any DDR4 RAM I've owned, much less above that.


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> tRAS = cas+tRCD+tRTP (+/-2). the ras window needs to be open the entire time (ticks) it takes to complete all 3 operations. Any values lower than this are likely corrcted at the board level to fix the timing error. (and the operating value is not reported in the OS). Very low stable values are likely due to application of an offset.


I'm a bit confused about the calculation. So if someone is running straight 15's. 15-15-15 wouldn't tRAS need to be (+/-2) 45? I've yet to see anyone with a tRAS over 40 so I'm pretty sure there's something I'm not understanding. Thanks for schooling me in advance!


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

His calculation is using tRTP, the "15" in the primary timings is tRP.

That said, in at least one of my screen shots, tRP and tRTP are both 15.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> I'm a bit confused about the calculation. So if someone is running straight 15's. 15-15-15 wouldn't tRAS need to be (+/-2) 45? I've yet to see anyone with a tRAS over 40 so I'm pretty sure there's something I'm not understanding. Thanks for schooling me in advance!


There are instances where I used tRAS at or over 40...
2x16GB 17-17-17-40/41.....18-18-18-42 @ 4133+

Me personally I do 15x3 -10 and than go +/- 7 Max


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wholeeo*
> 
> I'm a bit confused about the calculation. So if someone is running straight 15's. 15-15-15 wouldn't tRAS need to be (+/-2) 45? I've yet to see anyone with a tRAS over 40 so I'm pretty sure there's something I'm not understanding. Thanks for schooling me in advance!


yeah - it's tRTP, not tRP. Lowering this will help drive down tRAS (170 and 270 min is ~ 6). I stay within +/-2 of the min sum value and it holds (for like a year with no drift or performance sacrifice as a 24/7 ram).
Same for x99... my 7700K rig is "resting" right now.








FAW is a dependent timing also... min is 4x tRRD

x99


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I just don't think this board was really designed with RAM OCing in mind. Many of the secondary timings in the BIOS (and even one of the primary timings) are missing altogether - there's no way to set them. They show up in the ASRock panel, but they are not in the BIOS fields. There is no DRAM training voltage feature. There is some setting where you can enter a multiplier that I think is similar to DRAM training, it was under some MRC field. Can't find it at the moment since the system will not even POST today after running last evening.

I think this mobo was just intended as a toy that you could enter the XMP profile and be done - but mine won't post with the XMP profile loaded so that's not really doing me any good, either.

Here are shots from the web, courtesy of [H]ardOCP. Their bios is blue, mine is red. I'm running the most recent 0704 bios.

This is it. There are a whole lot of third timings that take up more than a single screen shot can hold, but here are the first and seconds


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I just don't think this board was really designed with RAM OCing in mind. Many of the secondary timings in the BIOS (and even one of the primary timings) are missing altogether - there's no way to set them. They show up in the ASRock panel, but they are not in the BIOS fields. There is no DRAM training voltage feature. There is some setting where you can enter a multiplier that I think is similar to DRAM training, it was under some MRC field. Can't find it at the moment since the system will not even POST today after running last evening.
> 
> I think this mobo was just intended as a toy that you could enter the XMP profile and be done - but mine won't post with the XMP profile loaded so that's not really doing me any good, either.
> 
> Here are shots from the web, courtesy of [H]ardOCP. Their bios is blue, mine is red. I'm running the most recent 0704 bios.
> 
> This is it. There are a whole lot of third timings that take up more than a single screen shot can hold, but here are the first and seconds
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


try this.. clrcmos, set up your known-good CPU voltage/clock. Select 3600 ram freq. IN the dram timings page, enter 15-15-35-1T. Leave everything else on auto. set dram voltage to 1.4, vccio to 1.15V, vsa to 1.2 - 1.25V (or as close as your comfort zone allows). If it will post, F2 and save. F10 and boot into windows. post up a ATC screenshot plz. Curious about the RTLs and IO-Ls.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I'm pretty sure that config will not post, that was the first thing I tried









And this board doesn't have any of the MemOK, Re-try, or even a reset button. If it doesn't post, you have to unplug the PSU or CLR CMOS


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I'm pretty sure that config will not post, that was the first thing I tried
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this board doesn't have any of the MemOK, Re-try, or even a reset button. If it doesn't post, you have to unplug the PSU or CLR CMOS


hold down the start button for like 7 seconds.. should safeboot. (lol - may be your last non-ROG board.







)

regarding the above settings. when it failed before, was that immediately after a clrcmos.. or had the bios been asked to load XMP at anytime prior to a flush? Hard to believe that board can;t do 3600c15.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> tRas on 21 could be the issue. As far as I know you can go down to 28. As far as I know that's the minimum on z170/270 no matter of what voltage you pump into.
> 
> Every RAM is a bit different like CPUs. And some G.SKILL are made of B-Die and some of E-Die even from the same series. Depends on when they were manufactured. You'd have to take off the heatsink to check that. So not necessarily you can copy other's settings.
> 
> I don't know how Aida64 memtest works but HCI Memtest sure finds memory instability pretty fast. Run as many instances as logical cores (8) and devide between them the amount of free memory you have. For example 15.9 GB - 1.4 (Windows usage) = 14.5 GB / 8 = 1.8125 GB so give them rougly 1750-1800 MB. Let it run until 500% (2-3 hours). Sometimes it finds errors at 60 or even 30%.


Sorry, typo. I meant to type 39. Not 21.

So settings were: 19, 19, 19, 39.

That mem test app is a god send.

It found errors almost immediately. So I've knocked the frequency back to 3600 C16 (as per the XMP profile); until I can get my hands on correct secondary and tertiary timings. _(I.E. those that would come with an XMP profile for a 4133 kit)._

My system seems to be automatically setting "unsafe" voltages for VCCIO and System Agent:
_(Lucky for me I spotted it)._


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hold down the start button for like 7 seconds.. should safeboot. (lol - may be your last non-ROG board.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


It'll eventually shut down if you hold the start button down, but it won't boot again. You get a red LED on the diagnostic LEDs and that's all she wrote. Easier to just unplug it and skipp all the steps in between.
Quote:


> regarding the above settings. when it failed before, was that immediately after a clrcmos.. or had the bios been asked to load XMP at anytime prior to a flush?


No, I never actually tried to load XMP until the last couple of days, after the [email protected] stuff was done. Loading the stock 15-15-15-35-1T stock settings was right after I got it running. I worked my way up to 3200 at 15-15-15-35-1, tried the next two (3333? and 34something?) and could get it to boot to Windows but highly unstable. I never got to Windows @ 3600 until last night when I manually loaded the XPM timings off the Aida64 report - what is it mobo-memory-SMP? or something like that? Gives all the timings for different speeds and the the last entry is the XMP profile timings.
Quote:


> Hard to believe that board can;t do 3600c15.


No hard for me to believe. I was beside myself when I got a 400% HCI stable 3200 @ 15-15-15-1, I would have bet $100 it'd never do 3600 at anything. I have dismal luck at RAM OCing, always have.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Sorry, typo. I meant to type 39. Not 21.
> So settings were: 19, 19, 19, 39.
> That mem test app is a god send.
> It found errors almost immediately. So I've knocked the frequency back to 3600 C16 (as per the XMP profile); until I can get my hands on correct secondary and tertiary timings. _(I.E. those that would come with an XMP profile for a 4133 kit)._
> 
> *My system seems to be automatically setting "unsafe" voltages for VCCIO and System Agent:*
> _(Lucky for me I spotted it)._
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> [
> 
> 
> /quote]
> At that ram speed the auto rules need to be "generous". Whenever runningf any MB at that high ram freq (vs the mb spec) you can expect this. Just lower them to values more acceptable to you.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> It'll eventually shut down if you hold the start button down, but it won't boot again. You get a red LED on the diagnostic LEDs and that's all she wrote. Easier to just unplug it and skipp all the steps in between.
> No, I never actually tried to load XMP until the last couple of days, after the [email protected] stuff was done. Loading the stock 15-15-15-35-1T stock settings was right after I got it running. I worked my way up to 3200 at 15-15-15-35-1, tried the next two (3333? and 34something?) and could get it to boot to Windows but highly unstable. I never got to Windows @ 3600 until last night when I manually loaded the XPM timings off the Aida64 report - what is it mobo-memory-SMP? or something like that? Gives all the timings for different speeds and the the last entry is the XMP profile timings.
> 
> No hard for me to believe. I was beside myself when I got a 400% HCI stable 3200 @ 15-15-15-1, I would have bet $100 it'd never do 3600 at anything. I have dismal luck at RAM OCing, always have.
> 
> 
> 
> lol - gave me a chuckle. Ram is a rabbit hole most of the time for sure. Okay so, that board only has a clr RTC 2 pin (which you manually short). YOu can do this, but before going there, many systems need to load opt defaults before new ram settings can stick (it's pretty common). TRy that and manually entering the XMP again. BTW - what the default VSA and VCCIO?
> Damn - with that very good 7700K you have and that 1% 'er TXp... yoiu need an Apex.
Click to expand...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Apex won't fit in the Death Bomb. Asus kinda didn't give the Z270 lineup much thought, this ITX board got rave reviews, guess none of them actually tried to manually OC the RAM. Still trying to comprehend why leaving out half the timing entries in BIOS seemed like a solid plan.

OK, here's what the stock timings but with 3600 speed. It booted, must have been tweeks on the IO/SA that did it. Still only passes 61% HCI before kicking an error.

The VCCIO is set in bios @ 1.175, SA is 1.225 pretty sure, I'll confirm when I re-boot (they never read the same in the Aida64 overlay).

Edit: I'm very well acquainted with the 2-pin CLR header - I can find it with my eyes closed.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Apex won't fit in the Death Bomb. Asus kinda didn't give the Z270 lineup much thought, this ITX board got rave reviews, guess none of them actually tried to manually OC the RAM. Still trying to comprehend why leaving out half the timing entries in BIOS seemed like a solid plan.
> 
> OK, here's what the stock timings but with 3600 speed. It booted, must have been tweeks on the IO/SA that did it. Still only passes 61% HCI before kicking an error.
> 
> The VCCIO is set in bios @ 1.175, SA is 1.225 pretty sure, I'll confirm when I re-boot (they never read the same in the Aida64 overlay).
> 
> Edit: I'm very well acquainted with the 2-pin CLR header - I can find it with my eyes closed.


When you enter settings that will not work in Bios, will it boot to a default Bios menu?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When you enter settings that will not work in Bios, will it boot to a default Bios menu?


It'll get you to the F1 failed OC screen after you unplug it and let it sit a while, but if it won't boot, you get a red LED and that's it until it's been powered off a while. I think it's tried to boot twice once - failed boot, powered off on its own, re-booted on its own without unplugging. It's not very friendly towards failed settings.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> At that ram speed the auto rules need to be "generous". Whenever runningf any MB at that high ram freq (vs the mb spec) you can expect this. Just lower them to values more acceptable to you.


I got the recommendations from the opening thread (post 1) as follows:

"Safe Voltages (Always TENTATIVE):
Vcore: 1.45v/1.37v
VCCIO: 1.25v/1.2v
System Agent (SA): 1.3v/1.25v
Vdimm: 1.4v/1.35v

The first value shows voltages a pretty ballsy person can use. The voltage after the forward slash shows voltages for regular users who don't want to live on the edge. Refer to the disclaimer spoiler."

If I was using an actual 4133 kit (with 4133 XMP profile) would my board be automatically running at those higher VCCIO & System Agent voltages, anyway? (I.E 1.34 / 1.38)


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Got the stressapptest running in BASH now, we'll see how that goes. This config seems close to stable, it boots, re-boots, runs fairly clean. It's close.

But no cigar. 6 hardware incidents, 0 errors. No idea what that means or how to fix it, but at least I know my RAM still isn't working.

This is what failed


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> RealBench V2.54, is it new?


Fail on my part, meant OCCT.

BTW, here's link to Prime v27.9, because it is getting harder to find:

http://www.mersenne.org/ftp_root/gimps/p95v279.win64.zip

I believe you can just take 28.1 and disable FMA3 for the same thing right?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> I got the recommendations from the opening thread (post 1) as follows:
> 
> "Safe Voltages (Always TENTATIVE):
> Vcore: 1.45v/1.37v
> VCCIO: 1.25v/1.2v
> System Agent (SA): 1.3v/1.25v
> Vdimm: 1.4v/1.35v
> 
> The first value shows voltages a pretty ballsy person can use. The voltage after the forward slash shows voltages for regular users who don't want to live on the edge. Refer to the disclaimer spoiler."
> 
> If I was using an actual 4133 kit (with 4133 XMP profile) would my board be automatically running at those higher VCCIO & System Agent voltages, anyway? (I.E 1.34 / 1.38)


Nope. At least mine doesn't always get the right voltages when set to Auto. So if I use 1.22 V (right now, testing) for RAM I set VCCIO to 1.02 V, SA to 1.15 V. My board actually tells me that VCCIO <= RAM - 0.2 V.

Most of the times auto works fine for me. Problems arise when using higher speed than 3000 MHz. That's when I set them manually. ASUS on this page even tells you the recommended voltages for different speed intervals. Seems a bit conservative but gives you a good idea.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Apex won't fit in the Death Bomb. Asus kinda didn't give the Z270 lineup much thought, this ITX board got rave reviews, guess none of them actually tried to manually OC the RAM. Still trying to comprehend why leaving out half the timing entries in BIOS seemed like a solid plan.
> 
> OK, here's what the stock timings but with 3600 speed. It booted, must have been tweeks on the IO/SA that did it. Still only passes 61% HCI before kicking an error.
> 
> The VCCIO is set in bios @ 1.175, SA is 1.225 pretty sure, I'll confirm when I re-boot (they never read the same in the Aida64 overlay).
> 
> *Edit: I'm very well acquainted with the 2-pin CLR header - I can find it with my eyes closed.
> *











add some voltage to these settings... and see if the RTLs align.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> I got the recommendations from the opening thread (post 1) as follows:
> 
> "Safe Voltages (Always TENTATIVE):
> Vcore: 1.45v/1.37v
> VCCIO: 1.25v/1.2v
> System Agent (SA): 1.3v/1.25v
> Vdimm: 1.4v/1.35v
> 
> The first value shows voltages a pretty ballsy person can use. The voltage after the forward slash shows voltages for regular users who don't want to live on the edge. Refer to the disclaimer spoiler."
> 
> *If I was using an actual 4133 kit (with 4133 XMP profile) would my board be automatically running at those higher VCCIO & System Agent voltages, anyway*? (I.E 1.34 / 1.38)


maybe not those exact voltages but yes, they will ramp up with dram frequency
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Got the stressapptest running in BASH now, we'll see how that goes. This config seems close to stable, it boots, re-boots, runs fairly clean. It's close.
> 
> But no cigar. 6 hardware incidents, 0 errors. No idea what that means or how to fix it, but at least I know my RAM still isn't working.
> 
> This is what failed


those hardware incidents are likely bash use too much ram. I forgety the command, but limit the ram to 12288 out of 16. It will use too much otherwise. (check scone's thread)

anyway - we're getting closer. with the above setting for 3600. enter bios, add 25mV to vdimm, and nav to the RTL ram settings (it has those - was in an earlier screen shot) set RTL ChA D0 to 55, ChB D0 to 56, IO-L ChA D0 to 7, IO-L ChB to 7. Change nothing else. F10 and test the ram with HCi memtest (until we get the command to limit ram in Bash/GSAT.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> add some voltage to these settings... and see if the RTLs align.
> maybe not those exact voltages but yes, they will ramp up with dram frequency
> those hardware incidents are likely bash use too much ram. I forgety the command, but limit the ram to 12288 out of 16. It will use too much otherwise. (check scone's thread)
> 
> anyway - we're getting closer. with the above setting for 3600. enter bios, add 25mV to vdimm, and nav to the RTL ram settings (it has those - was in an earlier screen shot) set RTL ChA D0 to 55, ChB D0 to 56, IO-L ChA D0 to 7, IO-L ChB to 7. Change nothing else. F10 and test the ram with HCi memtest (until we get the command to limit ram in Bash/GSAT.


-stressapptest -s 7200 -M 12288 -Q

-s means time in seconds
-M (capital M) size in Megabytes
-Q use CPU stressful instructions...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> -stressapptest -s 7200 -M 12288 -Q
> 
> -s means time in seconds
> -M (capital M) size in Megabytes
> -Q use CPU stressful instructions...


thanks! I knew a linux guy would show up sooner or later.. usually sooner since they have a faster OS.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> thanks! I knew a linux guy would show up sooner or later.. usually sooner since they have a faster OS.


Since I fried my banana CPU I had to switch to linux









You'r always welcome, no worries


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

When I ran that last night, I entered the -W argument, not really knowing what it meant. stressapptest -W -s 3600 is what I found in Scone's memory thread. This morning I looked up the stressapptest wiki and found the entire command set. Looks like the -W is just another command designed to do CPU stressful testing.

I'll try it with less RAM tonight, that makes sense I guess since you have to back off a little on the total even in HCI


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> thanks! I knew a linux guy would show up sooner or later.. usually sooner since they have a faster OS.












Not sure, didn't test how fast it boots on my new machine. Windows needs 7.8 seconds from pressing the power button. This should be an overclocking challenge as well.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Since I fried my banana CPU I had to switch to linux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You'r always welcome, no worries


I really enjoy Debian and Ubuntu. I'd switch if apps I use (3ds Max, Photoshop, Lightroom) and games I play would be supported. But for everyday usage wins in every aspect.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure, didn't test how fast it boots on my new machine. Windows needs 7.8 seconds from pressing the power button. This should be an overclocking challenge as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *I really enjoy Debian and Ubuntu. I'd switch if apps I use (3ds Max, Photoshop, Lightroom) and games I play would be supported. But for everyday usage wins in every aspect*.


This is unfortunate.. I really like Mint and initially loaded in on my ryzen rig, but alas, needed to load w10 for comparability reasons.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


By the way... would you know where one would source a temperature probe small enough to put trough asus CPU socket hole on the underside ??...


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> This is unfortunate.. I really like Mint and initially loaded in on my ryzen rig, but alas, needed to load w10 for comparability reasons.


Mint is Debian/Ubuntu based just with different user interface.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> By the way... would you know where one would source a temperature probe small enough to put trough asus CPU socket hole on the underside ??...


Do you want to burn another CPU?









My really old (15 years) case had a thermo sensor with digital display and the probe was flat and you had to put it between the CPU and the cooler. Maybe try a second hand PC shop?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

My RVE came with three little temp probes, a bead maybe 1/8" or so on the ends of the wires. I'd part with one if I can dig them up.


----------



## becks

Asus boards.....have a little hole just under the CPU socket...underneath the CPU....not many even know about it....but its so small I can't find a temperature probe small enough to put trough....


----------



## dirtyred

Cut the probe, pull the wire through, solder or just twist-join (not sure if that's a word). Not sure why you'd want to do that, you'd be measuring package temperatures somewhat accurately but depends also on the sensor.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Cut the probe, pull the wire through, solder or just twist-join (not sure if that's a word). Not sure why you'd want to do that, you'd be measuring package temperatures somewhat accurately but depends also on the sensor.


You don't see what's on the other side of the hole....as it is under the CPU socket...so I would not put something not isolated there...
But if successful it will give me a 100% accurate CPU packet temperature when I mess with PLL V and what not..CPU temp while loading OS, during a bench run when I don't want monitoring software to interfere etc etc


----------



## dirtyred

Check this: http://www.overclock.net/t/1191113/asus-optional-thermal-sensor

Apparently you can purchase asus thermal sensor cable for ROG boards. Not sure from where.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> You don't see what's on the other side of the hole....as it is under the CPU socket...so I would not put something not isolated there...


In the not too distant past, CPU's didn't have built in thermal monitoring. Nearly all motherboards had a thermistor mounted on the m/b directly below the CPU mount. The pins on the CPU (and the socket) left a gap in the middle, and people would struggle to pull that thermistor up so it made contact with the underside of the CPU in order to get the most accurate possible temp readings.

When Intel started putting temperature monitoring into the processor itself, we realized how incredibly useless those thermistors were. Most of us had no clue whatsoever that the core INSTANTLY shot up to very high temps under load and then just as instantly would drop down. It'd take the thermistor a good minute to catch up.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Check this: http://www.overclock.net/t/1191113/asus-optional-thermal-sensor
> 
> Apparently you can purchase asus thermal sensor cable for ROG boards. Not sure from where.


Checked that link ....and it's not good... I have that type of sensor and its wide...like a tape...
It's really hard to find any pictures or information on the internet so I will just post some pictures when I get the board back...
All this information being so "classified" makes me sure that is something only for extreme overclock's....


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> In the not too distant past, CPU's didn't have built in thermal monitoring. Nearly all motherboards had a thermistor mounted on the m/b directly below the CPU mount. The pins on the CPU (and the socket) left a gap in the middle, and people would struggle to pull that thermistor up so it made contact with the underside of the CPU in order to get the most accurate possible temp readings.
> 
> When Intel started putting temperature monitoring into the processor itself, we realized how incredibly useless those thermistors were. Most of us had no clue whatsoever that the core INSTANTLY shot up to very high temps under load and then just as instantly would drop down. It'd take the thermistor a good minute to catch up.


I know what are you referring to...but this hole is different


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> anyway - we're getting closer. with the above setting for 3600. enter bios, add 25mV to vdimm, and nav to the RTL ram settings (it has those - was in an earlier screen shot) set RTL ChA D0 to 55, ChB D0 to 56, IO-L ChA D0 to 7, IO-L ChB to 7. Change nothing else. F10 and test the ram with HCi memtest (until we get the command to limit ram in Bash/GSAT.


Made the changes, got it running stressapptest on 12288 for 30 minutes, all I can pound out during lunch.

I'll screen cap the ASRock screen before I leave.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Asus boards.....have a little hole just under the CPU socket...underneath the CPU....not many even know about it....but its so small I can't find a temperature probe small enough to put trough....


single wire, J-type or K-type thermocouple... coated. It's not something you plug into a MB 2-pin header.




cool!


----------



## becks

Thank you @Jpmboy...
For anyone else interested...this is it ....


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

OK, see if this is what you were looking to see, passed the 30 min no errors, I'll run it longer this evening.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> OK, see if this is what you were looking to see, passed the 30 min no errors, I'll run it longer this evening.


perfect... looks pretty good! was that 30min GSAT?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> perfect... looks pretty good! was that 30min GSAT?


Yeah, I went home at lunch, changed the bios settings and ran it for 30 minutes, used the -M 12288 command becks provided. Ran great, I had a feeling it was close - this is a twitchy little bugger and it'll refuse to play if it's not happy, but it's been booting, cold boot, re-boot, you name it without a hitch.

All the benches I ran were at 3200 - I came within .2 fps of your single card Heaven score last night while fooling around


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Yeah, I went home at lunch, changed the bios settings and ran it for 30 minutes, used the -M 12288 command becks provided. Ran great, I had a feeling it was close - this is a twitchy little bugger and it'll refuse to play if it's not happy, but it's been booting, cold boot, re-boot, you name it without a hitch.
> 
> All the benches I ran were at 3200 - I came within .2 fps of your single card Heaven score last night while fooling around


Lol - you gonna make me run Heaven again? (or is that a hint to update the thread?








)


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

No, thread's fine. I was just curious if the extra RAM speed would do anything and the AB profile I run for Heaven was already loaded so I just gave it a quick spin.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> No, thread's fine. I was just curious if the extra RAM speed would do anything and the AB profile I run for Heaven was already loaded so I just gave it a quick spin.


Lol - nah man, I hope to do grab those extra FPS! That's what this whole website's about!


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I really like that little rig. I'm not much of an early adopter, the TXp was my first Pascal card and Kaby's been out a while. I just get a kick out of something that small and unassuming packing that much punch. I want a fast 1440p monitor to go with it now, call it finished. It's running the GSAT for an hour right now, if it passes I'm slapping the side back on it and calling it good.

P.S. Did you get the solder?


----------



## nrpeyton

Anyone running at 1.425v (or higher) in BIOS with LLC 4 (or higher) for 24/7?
_(results in v.core under load of 1.45 -> 1.475 (reported) with some ocasional swings to 1.504v when not under load)_

Thats what I need for 5.0Ghz.
_
Full custom loop (triple radiator)._

No delid.

I can do 4.9GHZ at only 1.30v in BIOS with LLC 4.

So a *massive* jump in voltage is needed for me to hit 5.0Ghz. (over 100mv more for 100Mhz over 4.9).


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Thank you @Jpmboy...
> For anyone else interested...this is it ....


I would grab one also to see that pll v changes effects. I wonder if mai board has that hole you are talking about. Can you make a picture of it when you mb take your cpu off? Thx


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I really like that little rig. I'm not much of an early adopter, the TXp was my first Pascal card and Kaby's been out a while. I just get a kick out of something that small and unassuming packing that much punch. I want a fast 1440p monitor to go with it now, call it finished. It's running the GSAT for an hour right now, if it passes I'm slapping the side back on it and calling it good.
> 
> P.S. Did you get the solder?


sure did.. but haven't done anything with the TXps yet... Too "befuddled" by this Crosshair Hero and Ryzen chip.. well not the cpu, but RAM management is completely borked. I do know what you mean by these small ITX or mITX boards. I built my wife's PC with a z170 Impact and puyt it in a very small Lian case - as small as a toaster. [email protected] 4.8 (engineering sample) AIO, GTX 960 (which she does not need - but the 30" HP 1600P monitor I gave her would not run off the iGPU). Linked to a secure NAS and extra security it is her Tax business box. That Lian m-ITX case is sweet. Needed an SFX form factor PSU.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Anyone running at 1.425v (or higher) in BIOS with LLC 4 (or higher) for 24/7?
> _(results in v.core under load of 1.45 -> 1.475 (reported) with some ocasional swings to 1.504v when not under load)_
> Thats what I need for 5.0Ghz.
> _
> Full custom loop (triple radiator)._
> No delid.
> I can do 4.9GHZ at only 1.30v in BIOS with LLC 4.
> So a *massive* jump in voltage is needed for me to hit 5.0Ghz. (over 100mv more for 100Mhz over 4.9).


two questions:
1) Why use LLC4? beter off with a higher idle vcore with healthy droop.
2) what temperatures are you seeing? as important as the voltage.
3) is 5.0 worth that much more than 4.9 to you?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Too "befuddled" by this Crosshair Hero and Ryzen chip.. well not the cpu, but RAM management is completely borked.


At least you give the Ryzen a whirl - I think the next gen Ryzen will be the one to get. Let them get the teething pains out of the way, that thing shows some promise in multithreaded work applications.

Couldn't pass GSAT with the previous settings, am trying some slight changes with good results so far. \\ No more than typed that and got a hardware error 2400 seconds into 3600


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> sure did.. but haven't done anything with the TXps yet... Too "befuddled" by this Crosshair Hero and Ryzen chip.. well not the cpu, but RAM management is completely borked. I do know what you mean by these small ITX or mITX boards. I built my wife's PC with a z170 Impact and puyt it in a very small Lian case - as small as a toaster. [email protected] 4.8 (engineering sample) AIO, GTX 960 (which she does not need - but the 30" HP 1600P monitor I gave her would not run off the iGPU). Linked to a secure NAS and extra security it is her Tax business box. That Lian m-ITX case is sweet. Needed an SFX form factor PSU.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> two questions:
> 1) Why use LLC4? beter off with a higher idle vcore with healthy droop.
> 2) what temperatures are you seeing? as important as the voltage.
> 3) is 5.0 worth that much more than 4.9 to you?


I hear what you're saying regarding how important the 5.0 is.

But I've been here before. I could do 4.9Ghz on my last CPU (FX-8350). But not 5Ghz.

And this is a repeat of that.

Most reviews I've read say that most 7700k's can hit 5Ghz out of the box. Many on air.

I invested 250 bux in the best motherboard (IX APEX). And I look at the table on the opening thread. Everyone is running at 5 / 5.1/ 5.2.

I know in terms of FPS or whatnot.. the gains are minimal. However It would just sit more comfortably with me if I'd been able to hit the 5Ghz 24/7. Put it to bed then move on. And relax. You know?

None of the automatic tuning stuff that comes with the ASUS board seems to work for me either (it's all geared towards 5Ghz at about 1.35v).
(Okay.. I wouldn't be using it anyway.. but it's nice to play about with).

It just feels like I've missed the mark (lost the lottery twice) in a row now. As my CPU looks to be in the bottom 33% that can't hit 5Ghz even on a full custom loop.

I'm asking myself:
1) I could de-lid but would that get me 5Ghz at decent voltages
or
2) Would the money be better spent on the intel tuning plan. I could run at 1.45v+ with peace of mind.

Temps are quite high. 85c+ but it doesn't appear to be thermal throttling. Even when running Realbench.

I'll take your advice and try without LLC and maybe look at some other configurations to see if I can find a healthier way.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Anyone running at 1.425v (or higher) in BIOS with LLC 4 (or higher) for 24/7?
> _(results in v.core under load of 1.45 -> 1.475 (reported) with some ocasional swings to 1.504v when not under load)_
> 
> Thats what I need for 5.0Ghz.
> _
> Full custom loop (triple radiator)._
> 
> No delid.
> 
> I can do 4.9GHZ at only 1.30v in BIOS with LLC 4.
> 
> So a *massive* jump in voltage is needed for me to hit 5.0Ghz. (over 100mv more for 100Mhz over 4.9).


Ive been running 51x @ 1.435v in bios LLC5 (1.424v-1.440v in cpuz), my major jump in voltage was from 50x to 51x I only need 1.36v for 50x LLC5
triple rad + monsta rad no delid


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Ive been running 51x @ 1.435v in bios LLC5 (1.424v-1.440v in cpuz), my major jump in voltage was from 50x to 51x I only need 1.36v for 50x LLC5
> triple rad + monsta rad no delid


Thanks.

Just doing some testing at 5Ghz now.

I either need 1.41v at LLC level 4.
or
1.445v (LLC at default).

Without LLC (default) the CPU-Z voltages are:

-1.44v in Realbench _(funnily enough)_
-1.472v in non-AVX prime95 blend. (Temps here are averaging about 78c).
- 1.456v CinebenchR15

What's interesting.. *it is able to handle it.* (the extra voltage).

I'm not temp throttling and I still have 25-30c before TjMAX and the extra voltage isn't causing instability at these temps. (v27.9, Prime95)

If you compare that to modern Nvidia GPU's _(for example)_ which _don't even respond_ to voltages over 1.1-1.2v and where it actually causes instability and nets you no extra performance.

For me; I do seem to be able to hit this 5Ghz with no adverse affects. The only "adverse" thing about it being my own "worry" about the long-term health of my CPU at these voltages.

I'm not going to be running stress tests 24/7 either. So the load on the CPU will be fair. (gaming e.t.c).

Also got me my best score yet: _(although temps on this bench peak at 90c)_


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> I hear what you're saying regarding how important the 5.0 is.
> 
> But I've been here before. I could do 4.9Ghz on my last CPU (FX-8350). But not 5Ghz.
> 
> And this is a repeat of that.
> 
> Most reviews I've read say that most 7700k's can hit 5Ghz out of the box. Many on air.
> 
> I invested 250 bux in the best motherboard (IX APEX). And I look at the table on the opening thread. Everyone is running at 5 / 5.1/ 5.2.
> 
> I know in terms of FPS or whatnot.. the gains are minimal. However It would just sit more comfortably with me if I'd been able to hit the 5Ghz 24/7. Put it to bed then move on. And relax. You know?
> 
> None of the automatic tuning stuff that comes with the ASUS board seems to work for me either (it's all geared towards 5Ghz at about 1.35v).
> (Okay.. I wouldn't be using it anyway.. but it's nice to play about with).
> 
> It just feels like I've missed the mark (lost the lottery twice) in a row now. As my CPU looks to be in the bottom 33% that can't hit 5Ghz even on a full custom loop.
> 
> I'm asking myself:
> 1) I could de-lid but would that get me 5Ghz at decent voltages
> or
> 2) Would the money be better spent on the intel tuning plan. I could run at 1.45v+ with peace of mind.
> 
> Temps are quite high. 85c+ but it doesn't appear to be thermal throttling. Even when running Realbench.
> 
> I'll take your advice and try without LLC and maybe look at some other configurations to see if I can find a healthier way.


Intell tuning plan , ok you get it and on 1.45 your temps would be like?
Man , i feel you .... my first 7700k would not go more then 4.9 dellided and would have really high temps even after delliding. ( 4.9 at 1.4v after delidding)All in all i have tried 5 cpus till i did get this one that runs 5.1 at 1.39 fine . But it will just wont accept 5.2 in normal voltage.

Well if i would put me in your situation, and i was there








1. Return and take other cpu ( i know its a long drive there to mc for you)
2. Delid and relid with silicone in exact same way if you can , so if after delliding you arent happy you can return it. ( i have use seringe to make a really thin coat of silicon to match stock one) make pictures of it before delid and dont forget about little gap there in silicone.
3.just delid and use that extra bonus that it gives and live with it.
4. Return the cpu and buy one from silicone lotery website with desired specs.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Intell tuning plan , ok you get it and on 1.45 your temps would be like?
> Man , i feel you .... my first 7700k would not go more then 4.9 dellided and would have really high temps even after delliding. ( 4.9 at 1.4v after delidding)All in all i have tried 5 cpus till i did get this one that runs 5.1 at 1.39 fine . But it will just wont accept 5.2 in normal voltage.
> 
> Well if i would put me in your situation, and i was there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Return and take other cpu ( i know its a long drive there to mc for you)
> 2. Delid and relid with silicone in exact same way if you can , so if after delliding you arent happy you can return it. ( i have use seringe to make a really thin coat of silicon to match stock one) make pictures of it before delid and dont forget about little gap there in silicone.
> 3.just delid and use that extra bonus that it gives and live with it.
> 4. Return the cpu and buy one from silicone lotery website with desired specs.


In my country you get 14 days cooling off period for anything bought online. (Distance selling regulations).

You can return it-- no questions asked.

If I decide to return it and *try again* I only have until Monday 4pm to decide.

It's certainly an option. But a lot of hassle for 100Mhz.

It's all "well and nice" sitting here trying to o/c it to 5Ghz at a decent voltage (beleiving I'll somehow find an acceptable set of settings) that will give me the voltage I want.
I could sit here all day trying. lol

But when I begin to think about returns e.t.c (hoping I could get a better chip). Reality suddenly begins setting in and I realise: "I must be mad to even consider it".

Then a differerent way to look at that is: Indeed there are people who use services such as Silicon Lottery or overclockers here in the U.K

But here in the U.K you're paying:

-£19 extra for 4.7 (which I already have for free) _<-- also a con (never heard of one not doing 4.7)?_
-£50 extra for a 4.9 chip (which I already have for free) _<-- that sounds like a 'con'; you're PAYING for someone elses rejects_
-£100 extra for a 5Ghz chip
-£250 extra for 5.1
-£550 extra _(£900)_ for 5.2

You'd have to be mad in my eyes to spend £900 for 5.2.

*T*he intel tuning plan is looking more attractive by the minute. After exchange rates are accounted for I'm only paying £23. And I'll be able to run at 1.45v 5Ghz all day long.. with peace of mind. _If I'm not thermal throttling @ 1.45v & the temps aren't causing instability then they shouldn't matter*?*
_
I assume they don't accept processors which have been de-lidded*?*


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> It just feels like I've missed the mark (lost the lottery twice) in a row now. As my CPU looks to be in the bottom 33% that can't hit 5Ghz even on a full custom loop.
> 
> I'm asking myself:
> 1) I could de-lid but would that get me 5Ghz at decent voltages
> or
> 2) Would the money be better spent on the intel tuning plan. I could run at 1.45v+ with peace of mind.
> 
> Temps are quite high. 85c+ but it doesn't appear to be thermal throttling. Even when running Realbench.


I feel for ya, but like your aware, it's a small difference. Can you do 5 with AVX offset to 4.9? These chips are extremely sensitive to ambient temperatures. A change in the seasons has my 5.2 on the chart gas me at 5 right now so I don't have too worry when the wife doesn't want the AC on. I was at 5 prior to delidding and at most I gained 200mhz with cooler ambient, but a 100 gain would be more accurate. 50 dollars for 2℅ wasn't a good value, but it'll get you to 5. Don't do the plan IMO.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I feel for ya, but like your aware, it's a small difference. Can you do 5 with AVX offset to 4.9? These chips are extremely sensitive to ambient temperatures. A change in the seasons has my 5.2 on the chart gas me at 5 right now so I don't have too worry when the wife doesn't want the AC on. I was at 5 prior to delidding and at most I gained 200mhz with cooler ambient, but a 100 gain would be more accurate. 50 dollars for 2℅ wasn't a good value, but it'll get you to 5. Don't do the plan IMO.


Aye,

It's a difficult decision. (If I was already hitting 5Ghz 1.39v I wouldn't of considered the plan for a second-- I'd have de-lidded for the experience, for lower temps and so I could run that 5Ghz at even less voltage).
But when you're not hitting 5Ghz until 1.45v - 1.5v-- it all looks a bit different!

And nope ACX isn't the issue. I can't even complete a Realbench test at anything less than 1.45v _(or 1.41v LLC 4)_
I need 1.45v for stable 5Ghz _(there's no getting around that)!_

I'm struggling to believe the de-lid will reduce that voltage requirement for 5Ghz from 1.45v to 1.35v?

I'm not hitting thermal throttle with *normal use scenarios* at 1.45v. And the tuning plan is only £23.

I could spend double that on a de-lid tool, and still not get comfortable enough voltages?

_What's also crossing my mind is this:
-Reviewers of my motherboard (IX APEX) have said they were easily able to hit 5Ghz on chips they were only able to get to 4.9Ghz on other boards.
-I'm also on a fully fledged custom loop.

If I was on a more 'mainstream' motherboard with air or AIO cooling it's completely possible that this wouldn't even be a 4.9 chip. It seems more like a 4.8Ghz chip with the benefits of a full loop + world-record-breaking motherboard pushing it to 4.9 with barely comfortable voltages. I'm just not sure it's going to let me push it any further. A de-lid may get me lower temps but those lower temps won't be worth anything if they aren't actually netting any extra O/C range up to 1.39v

Still -- I'd love to de-lid and prove myself wrong...
_


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> In my country you get 14 days cooling off period for anything bought online. (Distance selling regulations).
> 
> You can return it-- no questions asked.
> 
> If I decide to return it and *try again* I only have until Monday 4pm to decide.
> 
> It's certainly an option. But a lot of hassle for 100Mhz.
> 
> It's all "well and nice" sitting here trying to o/c it to 5Ghz at a decent voltage (beleiving I'll somehow find an acceptable set of settings) that will give me the voltage I want.
> I could sit here all day trying. lol
> 
> But when I begin to think about returns e.t.c (hoping I could get a better chip). Reality suddenly begins setting in and I realise: "I must be mad to even consider it".
> 
> Then a differerent way to look at that is: Indeed there are people who use services such as Silicon Lottery or overclockers here in the U.K
> 
> But here in the U.K you're paying:
> 
> -£19 extra for 4.7 (which I already have for free) _<-- also a con (never heard of one not doing 4.7)?_
> -£50 extra for a 4.9 chip (which I already have for free) _<-- that sounds like a 'con'; you're PAYING for someone elses rejects_
> -£100 extra for a 5Ghz chip
> -£250 extra for 5.1
> -£550 extra _(£900)_ for 5.2
> 
> You'd have to be mad in my eyes to spend £900 for 5.2.
> 
> *T*he intel tuning plan is looking more attractive by the minute. After exchange rates are accounted for I'm only paying £23. And I'll be able to run at 1.45v 5Ghz all day long.. with peace of mind. _If I'm not thermal throttling @ 1.45v & the temps aren't causing instability then they shouldn't matter*?*
> _
> I assume they don't accept processors which have been de-lidded*?*


So why don't you buy a 7700K from Silicon Lottery? 5.2Ghz is US $580 which is not much more than the price you pay retail in the UK for a non binned one. Also keep in mind Cinebench R15 requires less volts than say Realbench or OCCT assuming the Vcore you are quoting is for Cinebench?


----------



## Kalpa

Slight update on my progress.

For my new chip I've now settled for 4.7GHz with bios set voltage of 1.280 (1.272 during load according to mb sensors), uncore 4.4GHz, AVX offset of 3.

The chip itself seems average, and my overclock is limited by motherboard (Gigabyte Z170 Gaming K3-EU) and thermals (air cooled, not delidded)

Going to 4.8 requires at least 1.320V for stability and the increase of temps is not worth it.

I tried getting a basic cinebench run at 5.0GHz, even at 1.415 bios set voltage the run kept crashing and temps were almost hitting thermal throttle limit making further tries moot.

During my OC endeavors I came to the conclusion that WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERROR arises easily with too high an uncore (which makes sense as the WHEA error is related to CPU cache), and instead of fixing with increased VCore one can simply just downclock uncore ratio


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I would grab one also to see that pll v changes effects. I wonder if mai board has that hole you are talking about. Can you make a picture of it when you mb take your cpu off? Thx


Will post when I get my motherboard / cpu back


----------



## becks

Hmm... so @Jpmboy basically you are saying that its always better to have a negative drop under load on a CPU for 24/7....

Correct me if I understood it wrong but you are saying that:

1.365+llc 6 = 0.800 - 1.352 Idle OS / 1.376 Light Load OS / 1.392 AVX Load OS - is worse than...
1.385+llc 3 = 0.800 - 1425 Idle OS / 1.386 Light Load OS / 1.365 AVX Load OS - this is better ?!

(Just made those no out, so I might got them a bit wrong ....)


----------



## jasjeet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Hmm... so @Jpmboy basically you are saying that its always better to have a negative drop under load on a CPU for 24/7....
> 
> Correct me if I understood it wrong but you are saying that:
> 
> 1.365+llc 6 = 0.800 - 1.352 Idle OS / 1.376 Light Load OS / 1.392 AVX Load OS - is worse than...
> 1.385+llc 3 = 0.800 - 1425 Idle OS / 1.386 Light Load OS / 1.365 AVX Load OS - this is better ?!
> 
> (Just made those no out, so I might got them a bit wrong ....)


Latter is better, but obviously choose an LLC setting that brings idle just a hair above load vcore.


----------



## becks

I always went with the first... seeing it pointless for the CPU to sit higher at idle where its not needed...maybe that's how I overshoot and killed the poor CPU


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> At least you give the Ryzen a whirl - I think the next gen Ryzen will be the one to get. Let them get the teething pains out of the way, that thing shows some promise in multithreaded work applications.
> 
> Couldn't pass GSAT with the previous settings, am trying some slight changes with good results so far. \\ No more than typed that and got a hardware error 2400 seconds into 3600


Hardware or "mismatch"?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Hmm... so @Jpmboy basically you are saying that its always better to have a negative drop under load on a CPU for 24/7....
> 
> Correct me if I understood it wrong but you are saying that:
> 
> 1.365+llc 6 = 0.800 - 1.352 Idle OS / 1.376 Light Load OS / 1.392 AVX Load OS - is worse than...
> 1.385+llc 3 = 0.800 - 1425 Idle OS / 1.386 Light Load OS / 1.365 AVX Load OS - this is better ?!
> 
> (Just made those no out, so I might got them a bit wrong ....)


Yes. vdroop is there to mitigate V_ovs (transient load line over/under shoot - not something you see with a DMM or anything but a uSec oscilloscope). for 24/7 settings, vdroop is your friend. Set KBL for 30+ mV droop by adjusting LLC. It will help with voltage ove4rshoot during load transitions. Fine tuning this really needs to look at whether or not there is too much undershoot - eg, the chip washes out when a high current load abruptly ends. If that occurs alot (I doubt it will) adjust LLC for less vdroop.
There is this misconception that LLC is there to keep voltage constant (as we see in cpuZ or by a DMM). It is not. It is there to manage V_ovs.

Vdroop is an inherent property of current management in a voltage-clamp setting. Lock the voltage, and change the current (work load for us)... the voltage pops and decays over time. That's V_ovs

Idle voltage is meaningless/harmless (within reason). current kills.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Hardware or "mismatch"?
> Yes. vdroop is there to mitigate V_ovs (transient load line over/under shoot - not something you see with a DMM or anything but a uSec oscilloscope). for 24/7 settings, vdroop is your friend. Set KBL for 30+ mV droop by adjusting LLC. It will help with voltage ove4rshoot during load transitions. Fine tuning this really needs to look at whether or not there is too much undershoot - eg, the chip washes out when a high current load abruptly ends. If that occurs alot (I doubt it will) adjust LLC for less vdroop.
> There is this misconception that LLC is there to keep voltage constant (as we see in cpuZ or by a DMM). It is not. It is there to manage V_ovs.
> 
> Vdroop is an inherent property of current management in a voltage-clamp setting. Lock the voltage, and change the current (work load for us)... the voltage pops and decays over time. That's V_ovs
> 
> Idle voltage is meaningless/harmless (within reason). current kills.


Hopefully I won't be killing Chip no. 2 as well


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Hopefully I won't be killing Chip no. 2 as well


that war with x265 can do that.







It is a very high current benchmark. it is alway a combination of things... voltage/curent/temperature. none can be considered without the other 2.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Hardware or "mismatch"?


I think it calls it a Hardware Incident, mismatch on CPU_X Trying again with new data, then it gives what was read, what was re-tried and what was expected.

I can't pass an hour no matter what I try. I can usually get to around the half hour mark before getting the error, then they start coming at an increasing rate. If I increase SA above 1.225v, it won't boot so I tried decreasing it. No dice, but no worse. Same with VCCIO. The adjustments are really coarse in both, I think it's .0125v steps so it doesn't take long to parse through all the likely SA/IO combinations. I've read the guideline on timings in the OP of the big memory thread, I can't find anything that's way off. Tried increasing the VCcore some, no difference, tried increasing VDRAM (or VDIMM or whatever it's called) At 1.4v in bios it reads out over 1.425 in operation. LLC is 5 if that matters.

So no closer than I was, but pretty much on par with my memory OC experiences.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that war with x265 can do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very high current benchmark. it is alway a combination of things... voltage/curent/temperature. none can be considered without the other 2.


Well...I don't know for sure yet...might have been just the MB or something completely different ...haven't heard from RMA yet...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> I think it calls it a Hardware Incident, mismatch on CPU_X Trying again with new data, then it gives what was read, what was re-tried and what was expected.
> 
> I can't pass an hour no matter what I try. I can usually get to around the half hour mark before getting the error, then they start coming at an increasing rate. If I increase SA above 1.225v, it won't boot so I tried decreasing it. No dice, but no worse. Same with VCCIO. The adjustments are really coarse in both, I think it's .0125v steps so it doesn't take long to parse through all the likely SA/IO combinations. I've read the guideline on timings in the OP of the big memory thread, I can't find anything that's way off. Tried increasing the VCcore some, no difference, tried increasing VDRAM (or VDIMM or whatever it's called) At 1.4v in bios it reads out over 1.425 in operation. LLC is 5 if that matters.
> 
> So no closer than I was, but pretty much on par with my memory OC experiences.


vsa is an inverted "U" in effect... it has a optimum and slides downhill in either direction - more is not necessarily better.
I need to see the bios settings for the last attempt. F12 on each bios page OR ctrl-F2 on the save slot bios page to drop a txt file to USB.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> vsa is an inverted "U" in effect... it has a optimum and slides downhill in either direction - more is not necessarily better.
> I need to see the bios settings for the last attempt. F12 on each bios page OR ctrl-F2 on the save slot bios page to drop a txt file to USB.


Yeah, I was just going off of Raja's OC guide, it's suggests a general increase in SA as DRAM freq increases. But I've been at both ends and the middle of that U with no luck so far. This is just basically a replay of my X99 RAM OCing success, and I'll likely just settle for a lower setting and live with that. I've only got maybe a hundred re-boots invested in this thing, not going to tie up the thousand I did in X99 trying to get the RAM OCd.


----------



## Jpmboy

Need a final verdict.... my delid 7350K halts at Q-code 03 on the APEX. Pop a 7700K back in and it posts fine. Pretty sure that means dead.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Need a final verdict.... my delid 7350K halts at Q-code 03 on the APEX. Pop a 7700K back in and it posts fine. Pretty sure that means dead.


Had Q_code 01-03 when I was playing with ram (soft restart) try popping it back in...

Don't Give Up!! for god sake !!! ....

(P.S. Chips dyeing left and right...I'm sure it's something with the planet alignment







)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Had Q_code 01-03 when I was playing with ram (soft restart) try popping it back in...
> 
> Don't Give Up!! for god sake !!! ....
> 
> (P.S. Chips dyeing left and right...I'm sure it's something with the planet alignment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


yeah - I reseated it twice before putting the 7700K back in to verify the board is okay. Probably worth a thrid try.. but the chip has seen more than 1.6V benching - had a rough childhood.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - I reseated it twice before putting the 7700K back in to verify the board is okay. Probably worth a thrid try.. but the chip has seen more than 1.6V benching - had a rough childhood.


Oh...I know what happened...
Please tell me you didn't let it in the same room with Ryzen ?!

This is a classic romance story...Jealousy that's what it is my friend .... jealousy ...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Oh...I know what happened...
> Please tell me you didn't let it in the same room with Ryzen ?!
> 
> This is a classic romance story...Jealousy that's what it is my friend .... jealousy ...


I did... maybe the ryzen sliped it a mickey.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> So why don't you buy a 7700K from Silicon Lottery? 5.2Ghz is US $580 which is not much more than the price you pay retail in the UK for a non binned one. Also keep in mind Cinebench R15 requires less volts than say Realbench or OCCT assuming the Vcore you are quoting is for Cinebench?


That sounds like a great idea in theory.
(However I've looked into it). And I've also been stung before, too.

Anything brought in internationally; we get hit for taxes and handling fees when it lands in the U.K.

(The government tries to recoup everything they'd have got if I'd bought it here). Then parcel-force hits you for a 'slice of the cake' too. Then by the time they're all finished with you. You end up no better off. (So exchange rates e.t.c don't help).
In theory it looks that way, but in reality it's a very different story.

Only way around it, is if the company is prepared to mark the item as a gift. On outer packaging. But Silicon Lottery weren't prepared to do that. And I suppose you can't really blame them.

I think I'm just going to accept I've got a 4.9 chip. Which is a shame, considering most outlets here are charging £290 for my motherboard. (that's $378 dollars in U.S). _Not to mention the cost of a high quality, full-custom-loop.
_
If I really want; I can always run it at 1.45v for an odd benching session. But for now it looks like my 24/7 is stuck at 4.9Ghz.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

OK, rolling GSAT again. I snagged a USB stick and will screen cap those BIOS shots for you Jpmboy.


----------



## wingman99

With Asus can a screenshot of Bios be done with USB stick and pressing F12?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> That sounds like a great idea in theory.
> (However I've looked into it). And I've also been stung before, too.
> 
> Anything brought in internationally; we get hit for taxes and handling fees when it lands in the U.K.
> 
> (The government tries to recoup everything they'd have got if I'd bought it here). Then parcel-force hits you for a 'slice of the cake' too. Then by the time they're all finished with you. You end up no better off. (So exchange rates e.t.c don't help).
> In theory it looks that way, but in reality it's a very different story.
> 
> Only way around it, is if the company is prepared to mark the item as a gift. On outer packaging. But Silicon Lottery weren't prepared to do that. And I suppose you can't really blame them.
> 
> I think I'm just going to accept I've got a 4.9 chip. Which is a shame, considering most outlets here are charging £290 for my motherboard. (that's $378 dollars in U.S).
> 
> If I really want; I can always run it at 1.45v for an odd benching session. But for now it looks like my 24/7 is stuck at 4.9Ghz.


The battle for 5.0 witch is 2% better performance then 4.9 ... is way biger then the battle for that 2% performance itself







and i feel it also








Play a bit, mb try 100.5 or 100.4 to squeeze, a 4.94 from it , still closer to 5.0


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> With Asus can a screenshot of Bios be done with USB stick and pressing F12?


It can on RVE, this board isn't exactly feature rich, I'm not sure if it works the same.

And here are the errors I get. First one was 20 minutes in, the the second just a couple more minutes later. If I keep it running, they just keep piling up.


It's strange. I adjusted SA down just a bit, ran it again, got an error at exactly 2450 again. I don't know if that's a coincidence or what. No error at 2310, so that's progress. 2nd came @ 2080 this time


----------



## nrpeyton

On a happier note from me:

My DDR4 just passed memTest with 100% coverage at 97% of capacity.
@
*4000 Mhz 18, 19, 19, 39.* @ DRAM *1.40v* _(G.Skill actually have one kit on their site with an XMP profile running at 1.40v)_

And *acceptable VCCIO & VCCSA voltages*. 1.288v & 1.272v respectfully.








/\ which is actually an under-volt from my boards auto settings of 1.366v +

& 4.9Ghz @ 1.35v - 1.376v

I'm seeing 65-70 FPS at 4k in the Witcher 3. _(in the City of Velen).
_
_Everything turned up to Ultra in GFX & post-processing._

*Massive* contrast in comparison to my old AMD FX!

GPU is single 1080Ti Founders.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Well, you got THAT going for ya, which is nice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBWcRqPesws

OK, got the BIOS caps uploaded.

Bios1.zip 788k .zip file


Bios2.zip 761k .zip file


----------



## Spectryx

*Username*: Spectryx
*CPU Model*: i5-7600K
*Base Clock:* 100mhz
*Core Multiplier:* 49
*Core Frequency:* 4900mhz
*Cache Frequency:* 4500mhz
*Vcore in UEFI*: 1.3v
*Vcore:* 1.296
*FCLK*: 1000mhz
*Cooling Solution:* Noctua NH-D15 (non delid).
*Stability Test:* Realbench 2.54 - 8 Hours, Aida64 - 8 hours

*Batch Number:* L638F780 Norway
*Ram Speed:* 3000mhz - 15-15-17-35
*Ram Voltage:* 1.35
*VCCIO:*
*VCCSA:*
*Motherboard:* Asus Z270H Strix
*LLC Setting*: Auto
*Misc Comments:*
Temp;30c idle, 73c max


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> With Asus can a screenshot of Bios be done with USB stick and pressing F12?


Yes it can. I always do that and when in OS I grab it from the stick. I don't want the BIOS to mess with my drive.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> That sounds like a great idea in theory.
> (However I've looked into it). And I've also been stung before, too.
> 
> Anything brought in internationally; we get hit for taxes and handling fees when it lands in the U.K.
> 
> (The government tries to recoup everything they'd have got if I'd bought it here). Then parcel-force hits you for a 'slice of the cake' too. Then by the time they're all finished with you. You end up no better off. (So exchange rates e.t.c don't help).
> In theory it looks that way, but in reality it's a very different story.
> 
> Only way around it, is if the company is prepared to mark the item as a gift. On outer packaging. But Silicon Lottery weren't prepared to do that. And I suppose you can't really blame them.
> 
> I think I'm just going to accept I've got a 4.9 chip. Which is a shame, considering most outlets here are charging £290 for my motherboard. (that's $378 dollars in U.S). _Not to mention the cost of a high quality, full-custom-loop.
> _
> If I really want; I can always run it at 1.45v for an odd benching session. But for now it looks like my 24/7 is stuck at 4.9Ghz.


I know the feeling. When I was living in Romania, the VAT was 24%. Now I live in Hungary and it's 27% which is the highest in the EU and around the world while salaries are mediocre.

If it's labelled as gift it might pass customs but in Hungary even then you might have to pay the VAT if they don't believe you. Try talking with SL and hopefully they will agree to label it as gift.

I'm running 4.8 GHz @ 1.25 V for 24/7 because even on max fanspeeds I hit 84 °C (average 80 °C) in RealBench with a beefy cooler. Running less demanding apps it tops at around 70 °C. Might be that the airflow is not perfect. But I don't mind it much because not alot of daily apps benefit from 100-200 MHz extra.


----------



## ducegt

Are you Romanian @dirtyred? I travel through Bucharest once or twice a year and I usually bring hardware there, and bring back beer to the US. Next trip should be toward end of this summer.


----------



## becks

I'm Romanian as well







just living far far away at the moment...we might see each other one day haha

@nrpeyton the trouble with labelling as gift in the UK is - No return! ...and with post handling tax on top you get at the same price of buying here locally a binned 5.1 / 5.2 ++ ...(there are 3 or 4 shops on the market locally that offer warranty even on delid chips) but be careful as they are really tight binned and if you buy 5 for the life of it, it wont go past that...also they have offers once in a while ..
@Jpmboy on a side note I just got an email saying my parcel is on the way but I have no idea what the heck they did or replaced....only time will tell







.... how are you with your chip ? managed to revive it ?


----------



## ducegt

Haha! I had thought about asking if your username is taken from the beer Becks. I've got a case of it in my fridge right now and I'm aware it's regarded as one of the best there. We served it at our wedding in Romania. That being said, my Romanian speaking isn't very good as I'm only married to one. I've been to several Altex and Flanco stores and I've seen how technology isn't as easy to come by and afford there. The exception being internet providers and 4g networks of course.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Haha! I had thought about asking if your username is taken from the beer Becks. I've got a case of it in my fridge right now and I'm aware it's regarded as one of the best there. We served it at our wedding in Romania. That being said, my Romanian speaking isn't very good as I'm only married to one. I've been to several Altex and Flanco stores and I've seen how technology isn't as easy to come by and afford there. The exception being internet providers and 4g networks of course.










we will get there....eventually..

Just got a mail from DPD saying I will receive my parts (mobo + cpu) Monday...

No explanation given... so I have no freaking clue what was fried or repaired or what not...
Great Job customer support...

EDIT: I hope they have a representative lurking this forums...so I they see me ranting


----------



## MaKeN

Lol, im Romanian as well


----------



## becks

I think we need a sub-forum to so we can all register as members


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

3200 at these settings passes an hour no sweat. I still haven't stumbled on a 3600 configuration that will pass.


So close


----------



## ISee

Hi there,

I was stupid enough to delid my 7700k. I didn't apply liquid metal compound though (not brave enough for that), but just replaced the stock intel compound with a better one and temperatures went down by ~10°C. I was very happy, but after 2 days temperatures began to rise. I wanted to test another thermal compound anyway, so I redid the process (the cpu heat spreader is currently just floating and the motherboard bracket is holding it in place). Again the temperatures went down and even 4.9 GHz at 1.35v were possible (~80°C load), but today even 4.8 GHz at 1.31v is too much (90°C+). I'm clearly missing something and doing something wrong, no idea what though.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ISee*
> 
> Hi there,
> 
> I was stupid enough to delid my 7700k. I didn't apply liquid metal compound though (not brave enough for that), but just replaced the stock intel compound with a better one and temperatures went down by ~10°C. I was very happy, but after 2 days temperatures began to rise. I wanted to test another thermal compound anyway, so I redid the process (the cpu heat spreader is currently just floating and the motherboard bracket is holding it in place). Again the temperatures went down and even 4.9 GHz at 1.35v were possible (~80°C load), but today even 4.8 GHz at 1.31v is too much (90°C+). I'm clearly missing something and doing something wrong, no idea what though.


As long as it still work you are ok!
I may be wrong but, as i read , difference between LM and normal compaund is big not only in terms of bonus temps but also a non Lm compaund loses its abilities and resoult becomes in rising temps over time.
As i think , just buy LM and you will be fine soon.
Perhaps second time you reaplied or 2 much or 2 little or badly cleaned the old one.

Get lm , clean the compaund very good and aply LM , im sure you will see what you wanted to see

Ps: i dont beleve cpu degraded in that short perioud of time at that voltage, its the compaund or a bad aplication


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> As long as it still work you are ok!
> I may be wrong but, as i read , difference between LM and normal compaund is big not only in terms of bonus temps but also a non Lm compaund loses its abilities and resoult becomes in rising temps over time.
> As i think , just buy LM and you will be fine soon.
> Perhaps second time you reaplied or 2 much or 2 little or badly cleaned the old one.
> 
> Get lm , clean the compaund very good and aply LM , im sure you will see what you wanted to see
> 
> Ps: i dont beleve cpu degraded in that short perioud of time at that voltage, its the compaund or a bad aplication


How much difference LM makes depends on the type of application. Between CPU die and IHS, the difference it makes is quite large. Between IHS and water block/cooler the difference is very small. Maybe 2 or 3c. Much less surface area on the die so it's not as efficient as a large IHS.

Folks who delid and use thermal paste tend to experience paste pumping out and also paste drying up at an accelerated rate. This could be what @ISee is experiencing.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> How much difference LM makes depends on the type of application. Between CPU die and IHS, the difference it makes is quite large. Between IHS and water block/cooler the difference is very small. Maybe 2 or 3c. Much less surface area on the die so it's not as efficient as a large IHS.
> 
> Folks who delid and use thermal paste tend to experience paste pumping out and also paste drying up at an accelerated rate. This could be what @ISee is experiencing.


Exactly!

Yep i was talking about the difference in aplication between cpu and the ihs since we're talking about delliding.
But yes uou also confirmed what i have red about non Lm compund unders the ihs.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> It can on RVE, this board isn't exactly feature rich, I'm not sure if it works the same.
> 
> And here are the errors I get. First one was 20 minutes in, the the second just a couple more minutes later. If I keep it running, they just keep piling up.
> 
> 
> It's strange. I adjusted SA down just a bit, ran it again, got an error at exactly 2450 again. I don't know if that's a coincidence or what. No error at 2310, so that's progress. 2nd came @ 2080 this time


was aid64 running while gsat was? I just had several instances where it was causing errors with BASH Gsat (ryzen tho)


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Are you Romanian @dirtyred? I travel through Bucharest once or twice a year and I usually bring hardware there, and bring back beer to the US. Next trip should be toward end of this summer.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Haha! I had thought about asking if your username is taken from the beer Becks. I've got a case of it in my fridge right now and I'm aware it's regarded as one of the best there. We served it at our wedding in Romania. That being said, my Romanian speaking isn't very good as I'm only married to one. I've been to several Altex and Flanco stores and I've seen how technology isn't as easy to come by and afford there. The exception being internet providers and 4g networks of course.


I don't live in Romania anymore. I'm homesick but when I return to my parents twice a year and see that nothing ever changes in a good way in that country my homesickness sadly gets replaced by disgust. I live in Hungary now and while it's not much better the differences are still substantial.

Beck's is not romanian beer, it's actually german. Not bad but not really good either (Still better than US beer. No offense!). I don't really know any good romanian beer, maybe Ursus. Timișoreana was also regarded as one of the best but it lost it's reputation years ago but I heard it got better again. Didn't tasted it recently. I usually prefer unfiltered and hand made beers (try Csíki next time if you can find any but don't mistake it with Ciuc. Photo for reference: https://csikisor.hu/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/igazi-csiki-sor.jpg).

Altex and Flanco have poor selections and overpriced as f*ck. Many usually order online. The internet is blazing fast and dirt cheap so online shopping and piracy is not an issue


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> was aid64 running while gsat was? I just had several instances where it was causing errors with BASH Gsat (ryzen tho)


It was then, I have everything turned off now, AB, wifi, audio drivers, I was really close in the post up the page, 57 minutes out of 60 running at 3600.

Lowering the VDIMM is getting me further along than raising it. But I have a solid 3200 profile saved, I never really paid any attention to those RTLs before, I got a set of them and IO-Ls that play nice with my 3200 setting. After manually setting the RTLs for this 3600 profile, I can't just set the DRAM freq to 3200 and run, it won't post. Those things don't mess around.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Lowering the VDIMM is getting me further along than raising it. But I have a solid 3200 profile saved, I never really paid any attention to those RTLs before, I got a set of them and IO-Ls that play nice with my 3200 setting. After manually setting the RTLs for this 3600 profile, I can't just set the DRAM freq to 3200 and run, it won't post. Those things don't mess around.


Disable fast boot option and that should help. Or a hard reboot, not just a fast restart. If you left some timings on auto they have to be retrained.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Fast boot is disabled.


----------



## CH4OAddict

my first attempt at delidding with thermal grizzly ended up with me skeeting the entire contents of my tube onto my blinds. ***.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Grease or liquid metal


----------



## CH4OAddict

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Grease or liquid metal


I was lucky enough to scrap some off and use it to delid with lol


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> I was lucky enough to scrap some off and use it to delid with lol


Hah! Liiks funy!
On my first dellid i have managed somehow to seringe my self with little bit of lm under my finger skin while i was closing the seringe


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> It was then, I have everything turned off now, AB, wifi, audio drivers, I was really close in the post up the page, 57 minutes out of 60 running at 3600.
> 
> Lowering the VDIMM is getting me further along than raising it. But I have a solid 3200 profile saved, I never really paid any attention to those RTLs before, I got a set of them and IO-Ls that play nice with my 3200 setting. After manually setting the RTLs for this 3600 profile, *I can't just set the DRAM freq to 3200 and run, it won't post.* Those things don't mess around.


yrah - they do that. And at some frequencies you actually need to load opt defaults before manually setting rtl iol to retain everybody else to a new round trip latency...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> I was lucky enough to scrap some off and use it to delid with lol


*This is the post of the week!!*


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Just passed the 3000 second power spike test a couple of minutes ago - longest 4 remaining minutes of my life.

Finally. Had to go to 15-16-16. Tried a hundred other things before I tried relaxing the primaries


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Just passed the 3000 second power spike test a couple of minutes ago - longest 4 remaining minutes of my life.
> 
> Finally. Had to go to 15-16-16. Tried a hundred other things before I tried relaxing the primaries


ahh... that's the thing with the silicon lottery... sometimes the ram/IMC match up needs massaging.








looks good.

next... 3866 with 1.45V. 16-18-18-44-1T.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> next... 3866 with 1.45V. 16-18-18-44-1T.


Yeah, I think I'll have to pass on going higher. I wanted the darn stuff to run at the speed on the package and just missed out on that. Well, I guess it does just say 3600C15, so technically I guess I got there. But that's too much work, not enough juice for the squeeze, hunkered over doing countless re-boots only to have to wait so long to see if it stuck.

I do appreciate your help getting this far, I'd have thrown in the towel long ago.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Yeah, I think I'll have to pass on going higher. I wanted the darn stuff to run at the speed on the package and just missed out on that. Well, I guess it does just say 3600C15, so technically I guess I got there. But that's too much work, not enough juice for the squeeze, hunkered over doing countless re-boots only to have to wait so long to see if it stuck.
> 
> I do appreciate your help getting this far, I'd have thrown in the towel long ago.


save that profile. and simply punch in the values above (don;t forget to change rtl iol to AUTO). easy. If it posts.. then you can decide to chase the rabbit or not.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> save that profile.


Did that a few microseconds after completing the GSAT









Quote:


> and simply punch in the values above (don;t forget to change rtl iol to AUTO). easy. If it posts.. then you can decide to chase the rabbit or not.


Punching in the numbers is easy. If there's one think I've learned about RAM OCing is that what's easy for 99.9% of the RAM OCing universe is nigh on impossible for me. If I had a nickel for every time somebody told me how easy OCing RAM was, I could pay to fly a team of Intel, Asus, and G.Skill engineers in here to do it for me.

I might give it a whirl this evening after a few beers, yard work beckons this afternoon.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Just passed the 3000 second power spike test a couple of minutes ago - longest 4 remaining minutes of my life.
> 
> Finally. Had to go to 15-16-16. Tried a hundred other things before I tried relaxing the primaries


What ram speed did you achieve?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What ram speed did you achieve?


Massive 3600


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Need a final verdict.... my delid 7350K halts at Q-code 03 on the APEX. Pop a 7700K back in and it posts fine. Pretty sure that means dead.


My 5960x has finally become completely unusable.







The cache has been steadily dying for some time now.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Wanna sell it?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> I was lucky enough to scrap some off and use it to delid with lol


When Terminator masturbates.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> When Terminator masturbates.


Liquid metal... Oh dear


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> When Terminator masturbates.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liquid metal... Oh dear
Click to expand...

Now you know...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> Did that a few microseconds after completing the GSAT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Punching in the numbers is easy. If there's one think I've learned about RAM OCing is that what's easy for 99.9% of the RAM OCing universe is nigh on impossible for me. If I had a nickel for every time somebody told me how easy OCing RAM was, I could pay to fly a team of Intel, Asus, and G.Skill engineers in here to do it for me.
> 
> I might give it a whirl this evening after a few beers, yard work beckons this afternoon.


oh... I never said OCing ram was easy.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> My 5960x has finally become completely unusable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The cache has been steadily dying for some time now.


my 5960X died a month or so ago (involved a tennis ball and a corgi, well that's who I'm blaming). replaced under thge ITP in a day.








New one runs 4.7 at 1.3V !!


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> my 5960X died a month or so ago (involved a tennis ball and a corgi, well that's who I'm blaming). replaced under thge ITP in a day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New one runs 4.7 at 1.3V !!


Spring/summer is chip dying season.









Too funny. That Corgi would have been a little shorter after I got done with him/her.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Spring/summer is chip dying season.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too funny. That Corgi would have been a little shorter after I got done with him/her.


they already are low-rider


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> I was lucky enough to scrap some off and use it to delid with lol


Wow. You're brave. Most people who make a mess like that wipe it up and act like nothing happened. Hey Mods, perhaps a NSFW button tag (similar to the spoiler button)?


----------



## nrpeyton

Anyone noticed more stability _(less v.core for same frequency)_ when setting VRM switching frequency higher?

Just read on a different forum someone was reporting 5c lower core temps.

But the trade-off is VRM will put out more heat & run about 20c hotter.

Just interested if anyone has any experience to share?

Personally I've not noticed any extra stability by setting it to maximum (instead of auto). But others could be different?


----------



## ChariZarding

I can run at 4.8 no problem in asus real bench but in prime 95 it last 5-10 till an error. Should I be concerned? I know prime95 runs way hotter but still don't know why it always gives me a error


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChariZarding*
> 
> I can run at 4.8 no problem in asus real bench but in prime 95 it last 5-10 till an error. Should I be concerned? I know prime95 runs way hotter but still don't know why it always gives me a error


Can it run 8h Real Bench ? If yes ...don't worry about prime.


----------



## ChariZarding

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Can it run 8h Real Bench ? If yes ...don't worry about prime.


I haven't done 8h yet. What if a error happens when I'm asleep, would anything happen to mess it up?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChariZarding*
> 
> I haven't done 8h yet. What if a error happens when I'm asleep, would anything happen to mess it up?


#

Best case scenario RB stops ...with an error
Worst case scenario PC BSOD's and you find it restarted...or stuck in a black screen

Any of the above can be corrected with a notch more V to the CPU


----------



## ChariZarding

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> #
> 
> Best case scenario RB stops ...with an error
> Worst case scenario PC BSOD's and you find it restarted...or stuck in a black screen
> 
> Any of the above can be corrected with a notch more V to the CPU


Thanks, I've don't a 4 hour but was watching movies occasionally checking it incase this happened. Guess I'll try tonight and see what happens, thanks


----------



## dirtyred

Like becks said. It should be completely fine. Monitor the temps for the first 10-15 minutes and if the average is 80 °C or less, you're fine. Occasional peaks above that are acceptable.


----------



## becks

Just got a reply from Warranty..they Pronounced the CPU dead....RIP Malay L642G264. Hope your in Heaven cause for sure you burned in flames in this life









Will have to see what the new one brings...Joy or Pitty...cause once you go 5.1 you can't go back...

On a side note the MB is OK apparently.. can't really see how is possible for a MB to withstand a Burned CPU...usually the MB is the first thing that goes down, anyhow...will see...


----------



## ISee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> How much difference LM makes depends on the type of application. Between CPU die and IHS, the difference it makes is quite large. Between IHS and water block/cooler the difference is very small. Maybe 2 or 3c. Much less surface area on the die so it's not as efficient as a large IHS.
> 
> Folks who delid and use thermal paste tend to experience paste pumping out and also paste drying up at an accelerated rate. This could be what @ISee is experiencing.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> As long as it still work you are ok!
> I may be wrong but, as i read , difference between LM and normal compaund is big not only in terms of bonus temps but also a non Lm compaund loses its abilities and resoult becomes in rising temps over time.
> As i think , just buy LM and you will be fine soon.
> Perhaps second time you reaplied or 2 much or 2 little or badly cleaned the old one.
> 
> Get lm , clean the compaund very good and aply LM , im sure you will see what you wanted to see
> 
> Ps: i dont beleve cpu degraded in that short perioud of time at that voltage, its the compaund or a bad aplication


Thx, I'll give LM a go. Once it arrives.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Just got a reply from Warranty..they Pronounced the CPU dead....RIP Malay L642G264. Hope your in Heaven cause for sure you burned in flames in this life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will have to see what the new one brings...Joy or Pitty...cause once you go 5.1 you can't go back...
> 
> On a side note the MB is OK apparently.. can't really see how is possible for a MB to withstand a Burned CPU...*usually the MB is the first thing that goes down,* anyhow...will see...


nah... you can fry one cpu after another on a MB and it survives.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nah... you can fry one cpu after another on a MB and it survives.


Hopefully this time around I will OC it properly as I've done everything tits up with the last..


----------



## dirtyred

It did pass RMA even delidded? You either did a manufacturer quality level of sealing or I have no idea how.


----------



## becks

I had shop warranty, not Intel warranty, and they knew about the delid


----------



## dirtyred

What a nice shop, accepting delidded chips. I never thought that's possible.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Just got a reply from Warranty..they Pronounced the CPU dead....RIP Malay L642G264. Hope your in Heaven cause for sure you burned in flames in this life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will have to see what the new one brings...Joy or Pitty...cause once you go 5.1 you can't go back...
> 
> On a side note the MB is OK apparently.. can't really see how is possible for a MB to withstand a Burned CPU...usually the MB is the first thing that goes down, anyhow...will see...


What caused the CPU to die and why did Intel check the CPU? Is that a new procedure Intel did not check my last RMA.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What caused the CPU to die and why did Intel check the CPU? Is that a new procedure Intel did not check my last RMA.


CPU degraded quickly in a time span of 3 days without OC-ing or Benching...till it was unusable anymore and I had to RMA it...cause was unexpected and unknown..only speculations...

CPU was checked and replaced By Store! not by Intel....


----------



## ChariZarding

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Like becks said. It should be completely fine. Monitor the temps for the first 10-15 minutes and if the average is 80 °C or less, you're fine. Occasional peaks above that are acceptable.


Did a 8h realbench and it passed. Averaged between 75-82c with a random spike to 92c. Probably gonna keep it at 4.8 for a while


----------



## Jpmboy

to my UK brothers... stay strong.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> to my UK brothers... stay strong.


Well said +1


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> to my UK brothers... stay strong.


You are not alone +1


----------



## moorhen2

Username: moorhen2
CPU Model: 7700k
Base clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency: 5200
Cache Frequency: 4800
Vcore in UEFI: 1.400v
Vcore: 1.416v
FCLK Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delided, custom water cooling
Stability Test: 8 hours realbench

Batch Number: Malaysia L644G988
Ram Speed: (3866 16-16-16-36)
VCCIO: 1.180
VCCSA: 1.180
Ram voltage: 1.440
Motherboard: Gigabyte Aorus Z270X Gaming 9
LLC Setting: Extreme
Misc comments: No AVX offset set


----------



## becks

Fired Up my new CPU and it seems everything is working fine, now back to OC-ing (Funny enough they sent back a CPU with same Batch No. as the previous







Malay L642G264 ) seems a bit weaker from initial testing, will report back later...


----------



## moorhen2

Our thoughts are with the people of Manchester, stay strong.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Username: moorhen2
> CPU Model: 7700k
> Base clock: 4200
> Core Multiplier: 52
> Core Frequency: 5200
> Cache Frequency: 4800
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.400v
> Vcore: 1.416v
> FCLK Reminder: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Delided, custom water cooling
> Stability Test: 8 hours realbench
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L644G988
> Ram Speed: (3866 16-16-16-36)
> VCCIO: 1.180
> VCCSA: 1.180
> Ram voltage: 1.440
> Motherboard: Gigabyte Aorus Z270X Gaming 9
> LLC Setting: Extreme
> Misc comments: No AVX offset set


Very nice







cant see Vcore though obscured on screenshot.


----------



## moorhen2

Thanks, hope this helps, should have thought about not seeing vcore, sorry.











Under load, just to show 1.416v.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Fired Up my new CPU and it seems everything is working fine, now back to OC-ing (Funny enough they sent back a CPU with same Batch No. as the previous
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Malay L642G264 ) seems a bit weaker from initial testing, will report back later...


It gets more and more hilarious now...
So the initial RMA said: "CPU defective, was replaced..."
Now..after asking why or how come it has same Batch...they say: "CPU wasn't dead, it worked but it was defective"

So! it wasn't Replaced !? it was....fixed ?! ***!
And if it was "Fixed" why it performs different...under same profiles...

Jeez Christ.. one thing after another it just never ends...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Thanks, hope this helps, should have thought about not seeing vcore, sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Under load, just to show 1.416v.


As stated earlier very nice chip congrats







very similar to mine.


----------



## moorhen2

@ scracy, thanks mate.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> It gets more and more hilarious now...
> So the initial RMA said: "CPU defective, was replaced..."
> Now..after asking why or how come it has same Batch...they say: "CPU wasn't dead, it worked but it was defective"
> 
> So! it wasn't Replaced !? it was....fixed ?! ***!
> And if it was "Fixed" why it performs different...under same profiles...
> 
> Jeez Christ.. one thing after another it just never ends...


So you are saying Intel actually repaired the CPU, never heard of that, normally it's a replacement.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> So you are saying Intel actually repaired the CPU, never heard of that, normally it's a replacement.


No no...Intel had nothing to do with this...
The Shop I bought it from dealt with it..as it is Shop warranty..not Intel warranty

I've never heard of someone reviving a CPU or Fixing it in any way either...


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> No no...Intel had nothing to do with this...
> The Shop I bought it from dealt with it..as it is Shop warranty..not Intel warranty
> 
> I've never heard of someone reviving a CPU or Fixing it in any way either...


The mind boggles, lol. So, basicaly you recieved the same cpu back and now it works, new one on me.









Oh i see you are a Hampshire Hog as well.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> The mind boggles, lol. So, basicaly you recieved the same cpu back and now it works, new one on me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh i see you are a Hampshire Hog as well.


Wait wait...there's a difference between it limps and it works, and just booting into the OS is a start but nowhere near a final verdict... will be able to give a full answer only later on when I get back at it..
From initial testing it takes more V on same profile (stable 8h RB) to boot into OS and do the initial installation (that's the only think I managed to do yesterday)


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> It gets more and more hilarious now...
> So the initial RMA said: "CPU defective, was replaced..."
> Now..after asking why or how come it has same Batch...they say: "CPU wasn't dead, it worked but it was defective"
> 
> So! it wasn't Replaced !? it was....fixed ?! ***!
> And if it was "Fixed" why it performs different...under same profiles...
> 
> Jeez Christ.. one thing after another it just never ends...


Is the CPU you got back already delidded? If so is it not entirely possible that the retailer put your original IHS on a new delidded CPU?
That would explain why the batch number appears to be the same and also why the CPU behaves differently. I cant see how a retailer can repair a CPU


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Is the CPU you got back already delidded? If so is it not entirely possible that the retailer put your original IHS on a new delidded CPU?


Asked the same question (also it not un common to have more than 1 CPU with same batch on the market google says..)..

Here is the full conversation, maybe it makes sense to you cause I sure don't understand English anymore..

ME: What was the outcome ?
*Them: From looking into the RMA the CPU was causing the issue and that has been replaced. The Mobo was fine so that was returned*
ME: If the CPU was "Dead" how come I received a CPU with the same exact Batch ? (Reused the IHS on mine ? )
*Them: The CPU wasn't dead, it worked but it was defective*

....no more replies after that...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Asked the same question (also it not un common to have more than 1 CPU with same batch on the market google says..)..
> 
> Here is the full conversation, maybe it makes sense to you cause I sure don't understand English anymore..
> 
> ME: What was the outcome ?
> *Them: From looking into the RMA the CPU was causing the issue and that has been replaced. The Mobo was fine so that was returned*
> ME: If the CPU was "Dead" how come I received a CPU with the same exact Batch ? (Reused the IHS on mine ? )
> *Them: The CPU wasn't dead, it worked but it was defective*
> 
> ....no more replies after that...


It is possible that you did get another CPU from the same batch but what are the odds? Was your "new" CPU in a sealed box?


----------



## dirtyred

Entirely possible to be different CPU with same batch number. It's called batch because Intel makes many with the same number so they can identify the time and place where it was made if needed.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> It is possible that you did get another CPU from the same batch but what are the odds? Was your "new" CPU in a sealed box?


Of course not.. it was in a box, with the MB, same as I sent it...the mystery goes on...
Will proper test it when I get home, I will have the answers as I knew every single limit of that CPU before it went crazy.. so I will see if I hit same walls or different ones...


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Entirely possible to be different CPU with same batch number. It's called batch because Intel makes many with the same number so they can identify the time and place where it was made if needed.


Yes I know...I said this previously: "Asked the same question (also it's not un common to have more than 1 CPU with same batch on the market google says..).."


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Of course not.. it was in a box, with the MB, same as I sent it...the mystery goes on...
> Will proper test it when I get home, I will have the answers as I knew every single limit of that CPU before it went crazy.. so I will see if I hit same walls or different ones...


Your chip was a 5.1/4.9 one before your troubles started, let us know what it will do now, look forward to hearing from you.


----------



## moorhen2

My chip will boot @ 5.3ghz, slight increase in voltage, stability is of course a different matter, lol.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> My chip will boot @ 5.3ghz, slight increase in voltage, stability is of course a different matter, lol.


Very nice chip you have there







hope it has a nice and quiet life...

(P.S. If it runs CB, post on HWBot ...you might get offers of 1000+)


----------



## moorhen2

Runs Cinebench at 5.3ghz 1.428v in bios. Cache at 4.2, ram 2133, ie stock.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Runs Cinebench at 5.3ghz 1.428v in bios. Cache at 4.2, ram 2133, ie stock.


Submit to HWBot and GL ^_^ (Prices in $ with PayPal as a tough







)


----------



## dirtyred

1109 cb points are not spectacular. My CPU did 1135 on 5.1 GHz: http://hwbot.org/submission/3552414_. If you want to improve that score you need to OC the RAM as well.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> 1109 cb points are not spectacular. My CPU did 1135 on 5.1 GHz: http://hwbot.org/submission/3552414_. If you want to improve that score you need to OC the RAM as well.


Weak CB score is a sign of "almost" stable OC and needs a bit more V...(at least my CPU manifested itself that way)


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> 1109 cb points are not spectacular. My CPU did 1135 on 5.1 GHz: http://hwbot.org/submission/3552414_. If you want to improve that score you need to OC the RAM as well.


I don't think getting a high Cinebench R15 score was @moorehen2 point, more the fact he can run it at @5.3Ghz, very few chips will.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I don't think getting a high Cinebench R15 score was @moorehen2 point, more the fact he can run it at @5.3Ghz, very few chips will.


Exactly, the score is irrelevant, passing is what we are looking at here, I did state cache and ram at stock. Thank you sir.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Exactly, the score is irrelevant, passing is what we are looking at here, I did state cache and ram at stock. Thank you sir.


No worries, in terms of Vcore and maximum stable frequency both our CPU's are very similar BUT no way will mine run 5.3Ghz with any sort of stability at least not at those volts.


----------



## moorhen2

The Uncore on this chip is quite strong, bearing in mind the kit I am running at 3866 is a 3200 32 gig kit on 4.8 uncore, so a descent kit I think.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Very nice chip you have there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hope it has a nice and quiet life...
> 
> (P.S. If it runs CB, post on HWBot ...you might get offers of 1000+)


You people keep saying this, but you don't know how it works. At this point in time, you won't even get $500 for that chip, let alone a $1000+.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> The Uncore on this chip is quite strong, bearing in mind the kit I am running at 3866 is a 3200 32 gig kit on 4.8 uncore, so a descent kit I think.


Good chips can run uncore at around 300Mhz below core speed, some according to the chart in opening post can run uncore at same speed as core (though I don't know how?). I can run Realbench at 5200Mhz Core/4900Mhz [email protected] under load but OCCT requires me dropping cache to 4800Mhz and upping Vcore to 1.403V under load. 5300mhz is a no go


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> You people keep saying this, but you don't know how it works. At this point in time, you won't even get $500 for that chip, let alone a $1000+.


Its a keeper, not interested in selling anyway.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Good chips can run uncore at around 300Mhz below core speed, some according to the chart in opening post can run uncore at same speed as core (though I don't know how?). I can run Realbench at 5200Mhz Core/4900Mhz [email protected] under load but OCCT requires me dropping cache to 4800Mhz and upping Vcore to 1.403V under load. 5300mhz is a no go


I think the rule of thumb is a cache of 400 below core, so I have read somewhere, but like you say some chips in OP are equal core/cache. What I was saying is that I am running 32 gig @3866 with a 3200 kit with reasonable timings.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> You people keep saying this, but you don't know how it works. At this point in time, you won't even get $500 for that chip, let alone a $1000+.


Just replied with what I've read couple of pages back.
If its true or not I don't know...
But you are right I should have researched before I replied but don't always have time to do that so I trust people in what they say.

EDIT: Check post 2555


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> I think the rule of thumb is a cache of 400 below core, so I have read somewhere, but like you say some chips in OP are equal core/cache. What I was saying is that I am running 32 gig @3866 with a 3200 kit with reasonable timings.


Mine passed all stress test's with 5.1 Core / 5.1 Uncore (In Bios) but for some reason my board caps cache at 49 (it won't go higher no matter what) so that's that..


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Mine passed all stress test's with 5.1 Core / 5.1 Uncore (In Bios) but for some reason my board caps cache at 49 (it won't go higher no matter what) so that's that..


So you are saying your board is limiting uncore to 4.9 ?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> oh... I never said OCing ram was easy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my 5960X died a month or so ago (involved a tennis ball and a corgi, well that's who I'm blaming). replaced under thge ITP in a day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New one runs 4.7 at 1.3V !!


The new one arrives this morning, but I hope to get similar results. I'll get to play with it tomorrow after this month's FAT ends.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> they already are low-rider


Good to see all those GPUs well protected. With muscle like that around the house who would dare?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> So you are saying your board is limiting uncore to 4.9 ?


Yes..whatever I set in Bios...50...51...52... every software reads it 49 in OS....
Only one seeing it as 5.0 - 5.2 is XTU in set Bios section of it...

EDIT: I heard that if I switch the MB to LN2 mode the limit goes away..but don't want to test yet..as switching that pin does more than 1 thing...


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I don't think getting a high Cinebench R15 score was @moorehen2 point, more the fact he can run it at @5.3Ghz, very few chips will.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly, the score is irrelevant, passing is what we are looking at here, I did state cache and ram at stock. Thank you sir.
Click to expand...

Oh, if not the score but the ability to run it on 5.3 GHz was the point, then I missed it. Sorry! In that case it's indeed a promising chip!

I managed to run it on 5.3 GHz only on 2 cores because I've hit 1.4 V and too afraid to go above. However I was able to run GPUPI 1b on 5.2 GHz but reached thermal limits so couldn't go higher.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Oh, if not the score but the ability to run it on 5.3 GHz was the point, then I missed it. Sorry! In that case it's indeed a promising chip!
> 
> I managed to run it on 5.3 GHz only on 2 cores because I've hit 1.4 V and too afraid to go above. However I was able to run GPUPI 1b on 5.2 GHz but reached thermal limits so couldn't go higher.


No worries, 1.416v under load for 8 hours, max temp was 80c on one core, so not too alarming.


----------



## Marctraider

Edit: nvm. I'm redoing all my settings, set everything up properly beforehand. Manual voltage and keep them in line as much as possible with stock voltage readouts and used that as baseline.\

I'm now 4.8Ghz at 1.26v stable... I was on 1.36~v earlier and lockups on 4.8ghz...

Something was off.. haha. I suspect ive been running with way too high voltages all this time, believing upping voltage more would get rid of the lockups, but i think i was feeding it way too much.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Its a keeper, not interested in selling anyway.


Not interested in buying but your opinion might change with Kaby-X.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Just replied with what I've read couple of pages back.
> If its true or not I don't know...
> But you are right I should have researched before I replied but don't always have time to do that so I trust people in what they say.
> 
> EDIT: Check post 2555


Trusting Jpm isn't usually wrong, its just this time.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> You people keep saying this, but you don't know how it works. At this point in time, you won't even get $500 for that chip, let alone a $1000+.


all things "PC" degrade over time... including prices.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The new one arrives this morning, but I hope to get similar results. I'll get to play with it tomorrow after this month's FAT ends.
> Good to see all those GPUs well protected. With muscle like that around the house who would dare?


lol - they're corgis.. more likely to try to herd the GPUs than protect them. It's in their genes.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Not interested in buying but your opinion might change with Kaby-X.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trusting Jpm isn't usually wrong, its just this time.


yeah - the time-cost of new tech has the largest down slope of just about anything. And you are right... even $500 is asking a lot this late in KBL life cycle.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> all things "PC" degrade over time... including prices.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol - they're corgis.. more likely to try to herd the GPUs than protect them. It's in their genes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - the time-cost of new tech has the largest down slope of just about anything. And you are right... even $500 is asking a lot this late in KBL life cycle.


That's the problem, Intel know that we enthusiasts will always want the next upgrade, they certainly know how to get me to open my wallet on a regular basis. Lol, just seems to be getting more frequent just lately.


----------



## CH4OAddict

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> The Uncore on this chip is quite strong, bearing in mind the kit I am running at 3866 is a 3200 32 gig kit on 4.8 uncore, so a descent kit I think.


looks okay...

as soon as you start adding cache speed and ram speed you need more cpu volts. this is with 1.36v in bios with 4500mhz+ on ram


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> looks okay...
> 
> as soon as you start adding cache speed and ram speed you need more cpu volts. this is with 1.36v in bios with 4500mhz+ on ram


Very nice, might be easier to get higher uncore on my chip if I drop down to 16 gig, and lower v's, worth a try I suppose.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> That's the problem, Intel know that we enthusiasts will always want the next upgrade, they certainly know how to get me to open my wallet on a regular basis. Lol, just seems to be getting more frequent just lately.


and you run Nvidia? (me too







)


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> and you run Nvidia? (me too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Lol, yeh. and don't I know it.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Lol, yeh. and don't I know it.


It's not about the latest tech...it's about how you push the buttons


@ 5.1


----------



## rt123

NVM.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> @ 5.1


Delidded?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Delidded?


Yes delided

On the matter of my CPU RMA...
Its definitely a different CPU...can do 5.2 with "safe" voltages and can bench at 5.3 ....
My CPU had a hard wall at 5.1 and would need past 1.5 v to do 5.2...

Will have to start the OC from zero it seems...


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Yes delided
> 
> On the matter of my CPU RMA...
> Its definitely a different CPU...can do 5.2 with "safe" voltages and can bench at 5.3 ....
> My CPU had a hard wall at 5.1 and would need past 1.5 v to do 5.2...
> 
> Will have to start the OC from zero it seems...


What are your "safe voltages", ??


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> What are your "safe voltages", ??


Anything that doesn't let the magic smoke out?


----------



## MaKeN

Heh nice fix they did to your cpu


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> What are your "safe voltages", ??


@ 5.2 under 1.405 for CB 15


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> @ 5.2 under 1.405 for CB 15


Not bad, and 5.3 ?


----------



## s0kkiplast

Could someone help me with these values?


I want fixed voltages to prevent microstutters.

I run the cpu at 5ghz.

Thank you!

Edit*
Btw, attached is a hwinfo log under stress test load if that helps

hwinfolog.CSV 288k .CSV file


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s0kkiplast*
> 
> Could someone help me with these values?
> 
> 
> I want fixed voltages to prevent microstutters.
> 
> I run the cpu at 5ghz.
> 
> Thank you!


You can disable BCLK adaptive, IO and SA are chip and ram dependant, so trial and error for these 2, all the others can be left on auto.

Have a look at this link, will help you.

https://www.joomag.com/magazine/gigabyte-z270-overclocking-guide-gigabyte-200-series-overclocking-guide/0767815001483933769


----------



## s0kkiplast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> You can disable BCLK adaptive, IO and SA are chip and ram dependant, so trial and error for these 2, all the others can be left on auto.
> 
> Have a look at this link, will help you.
> 
> https://www.joomag.com/magazine/gigabyte-z270-overclocking-guide-gigabyte-200-series-overclocking-guide/0767815001483933769


Thank you!

I would rather not leave them at auto. Is there any way to read from my attached hwinfo log about what voltages are used?


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s0kkiplast*
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> I would rather not leave them at auto. Is there any way to read from my attached hwinfo log about what voltages are used?


Leaving the mentioned values on "auto" will be fine, I am a Gigabyte user and always leave these settings on auto.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Not bad, and 5.3 ?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Not bad, and 5.3 ?


1.455 ++ depending on the program used to bench / test stability
Still testing, still can't figure out how to make the voltages to work in a negative offset way on this board









0.800 v Idle - 1.372 v Light work - 1.405 v Avx Heavy work - this works well

What I want is...

0.800 v Idle - 1.392 v Light work - 1.386 v Avx Heavy work

These no. are made up..but I think you got the ideea
So the way my Adaptive works now is by adding V....I want it to subtract V (Minus) and kan't seem to be able to figure it out..


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> My chip will boot @ 5.3ghz, slight increase in voltage, stability is of course a different matter, lol.


You just proved having the same batch means nothing about how well it overclocks.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s0kkiplast*
> 
> Could someone help me with these values?
> 
> 
> I want fixed voltages to prevent microstutters.
> 
> I run the cpu at 5ghz.
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> Edit*
> Btw, attached is a hwinfo log under stress test load if that helps
> 
> hwinfolog.CSV 288k .CSV file


did you try selecting "High Performance" mode in windows power settings (before putzing with bios)? If yes and you still see ms, just disable speedstep. (EIST)


----------



## coc_james

Hi, a couple of questions. I just got my new rig up and running and my i7-7700k seems like a dud. It won't do 4.8 without crashing. Also, at factory spec, with an H105 and plenty of fans, and sitting directly under an a/c vent, my idle temps are just at 30, and my p95 temps are in the low to mid 70s. I have the minimum processor state set to 0% for the OS and I have confirmed via he monitor that utilization drops to 0% with a min temp barely below the 30s.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk


----------



## coc_james

Guess I didn't really form a question there. In your experience, how much of an outlier is this processor? Is it a candidate for RMA?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk


----------



## coc_james

Here is a screen for reference.


----------



## MaKeN

Any info on your vcore at 4.8 and crashing?
Also prime 95 is so so hard test to pass.

Try to use cb 15 first to see that minimal voltage for maximum core clock.


----------



## ducegt

My CB15 isn't too bad. 5.2 @ 1.344. And it held 1.344 under load the whole time. This isn't close to stable IME. About 100mv off depending on ambient temperature.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Any info on your vcore at 4.8 and crashing?
> Also prime 95 is so so hard test to pass.
> 
> Try to use cb 15 first to see that minimal voltage for maximum core clock.


1.35

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Any info on your vcore at 4.8 and crashing?
> Also prime 95 is so so hard test to pass.
> 
> Try to use cb 15 first to see that minimal voltage for maximum core clock.


Should have said 1.35 and hit TJ, system shut down for thermal.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk


----------



## s0kkiplast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> did you try selecting "High Performance" mode in windows power settings (before putzing with bios)? If yes and you still see ms, just disable speedstep. (EIST)


High performance plan is one of the things I enable directly after format, and speedstep is disabled


----------



## becks

@Jpmboy any advice if one is playing with VRM switch freq ? 500 + ... worth it ?

Nvm...found my answer, increasing freq only provides cleaner V at the cost of Heat ..
Might help on bench runs when you are on the verge of stability (also reduces V-drop a bit)

Will probably push it around 800-1000 (From default 500) when I push BCLK from 5.2 to 5.3 to help stabilize it


----------



## Hiki

Is the 7700k more efficient than the 6700k? Trying to decide which to get.

Which one lets you run it at 4.6GhzOC with the lowest voltage possible?


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hiki*
> 
> Is the 7700k more efficient than the 6700k? Trying to decide which to get.
> 
> Which one lets you run it at 4.6GhzOC with the lowest voltage possible?


On average, 7700k. Of course a "golden" 6700K might be better than the worst 7700K ever rolled off assembly line...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hiki*
> 
> Is the 7700k more efficient than the 6700k? Trying to decide which to get.
> 
> Which one lets you run it at 4.6GhzOC with the lowest voltage possible?


Go with 7700K clocks much higher on average than 6700K. 7700K in my experience at least tends to run slightly hotter than 6700K even when both have been delided.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Should have said 1.35 and hit TJ, system shut down for thermal.


Maybe lower the Vcore to 1.25-1.28 V and increase LLC level 1 step (try to stay around medium-high, on ASUS at 4-5 on a scale of 1-7).

You did not specify if you're using adaptive or constant voltage. If you have adaptive then there's no reason to use Performance power plan in windows with EIST disabled. Only on constant voltage makes sense. If you use static voltage, disable SVID.

You can try to change VRM switching frequency but don't go maximum if you don't have sufficient cooling for VRM (on water cooling that's pretty possible).

Also make sure RAM is on stock 2133 MHz to eliminate RAM instability.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Should have said 1.35 and hit TJ, system shut down for thermal.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe lower the Vcore to 1.25-1.28 V and increase LLC level 1 step (try to stay around medium-high, on ASUS at 4-5 on a scale of 1-7).
> 
> You did not specify if you're using adaptive or constant voltage. If you have adaptive then there's no reason to use Performance power plan in windows with EIST disabled. Only on constant voltage makes sense. If you use static voltage, disable SVID.
> 
> You can try to change VRM switching frequency but don't go maximum if you don't have sufficient cooling for VRM (on water cooling that's pretty possible).
> 
> Also make sure RAM is on stock 2133 MHz to eliminate RAM instability.
Click to expand...

I was using constant voltage with LLC set at 2. I'll check double check the Ram later.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk


----------



## dirtyred

If using Asus, LLC 2 is really low (on some other manufacturer's boards it's reverse, 1 being the most aggressive, just monitor it under load to see which way it's working or read the manual). Under load you'll have a huge Vdroop. Raise it to 4-5 (or whatever way it's more aggressive), that should give you roughly the same Vcore (maybe a bit lower) than what you've set in BIOS (just don't let it be higher then 0.2-0.3 V).

RAM, especially with XMP can really mess up stability so after you're done with the CPU, I recommend doing manual RAM OC. If you did have XMP enabled, reset your BIOS to defaults and start over.


----------



## sdmf74

anybody know why Super pi 1.9 hangs on "scanning system info" unless I open as admin but then instead of showing calculations it shows symbols?


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> If using Asus, LLC 2 is really low (on some other manufacturer's boards it's reverse, 1 being the most aggressive, just monitor it under load to see which way it's working or read the manual). Under load you'll have a huge Vdroop. Raise it to 4-5 (or whatever way it's more aggressive), that should give you roughly the same Vcore (maybe a bit lower) than what you've set in BIOS (just don't let it be higher then 0.2-0.3 V).
> 
> RAM, especially with XMP can really mess up stability so after you're done with the CPU, I recommend doing manual RAM OC. If you did have XMP enabled, reset your BIOS to defaults and start over.


ASRock sets 1 as the highest and 5 as the lowest. Thanks for the advice. I'll check the ram later and try again. What to do about the temps though? At 1.35 4.8, the processor hit 90.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk


----------



## dirtyred

90 °C is a bit high, would recommend you stay below 85 °C or even 80 °C. Mine runs on 4.8 GHz @ 1.25 V (1.248 - 1.264 V) and reaches 80 °C with custom fan curve, fans around 85-90% under RealBench and Prime95.


----------



## becks

Why the heck are my temperatures 20 C lower average than my previous CPU on same voltages but higher freq...

Have so many thing on my mind right now I can't be buttered with this ...but it bugs the hell out of me..

Eg. :

Now: 5.2 Core (-1 Avx off set) / 4.9 Uncore / 1.376-1.392 v Avx Load OS / 65 C after 30 min RB (With AVX)....and only on 1x 240 mm Rad...
Before: 5.1 Core (0 Avx off set) / 4.9 Uncore / 1.392 v Avx Load OS / 87 C after 30 min RB (With AVX) ...on 2x 240 mm Rad..


----------



## dirtyred

Did you have thermal paste on your previous CPU?









Just be happy this one is much better!


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Did you have thermal paste on your previous CPU?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just be happy this one is much better!


I guess you'r right...just my brain malfunctioning..

Before I had the hunger for 5.2....now that I have 5.2 I want 5.3....what's wrong with us people


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Why the heck are my temperatures 20 C lower average than my previous CPU on same voltages but higher freq...
> 
> Have so many thing on my mind right now I can't be buttered with this ...but it bugs the hell out of me..
> 
> Eg. :
> 
> Now: 5.2 Core (-1 Avx off set) / 4.9 Uncore / 1.376-1.392 v Avx Load OS / 65 C after 30 min RB (With AVX)....and only on 1x 240 mm Rad...
> Before: 5.1 Core (0 Avx off set) / 4.9 Uncore / 1.392 v Avx Load OS / 87 C after 30 min RB (With AVX) ...on 2x 240 mm Rad..


Human factors:
Better job re-applying CLU after delid? (or TIM for waterblock)

More pressure (with relid or with waterblock install)?

Non-human factors

Flatter IHS? (or IHS better matches water block flatness)

Just a "better" core?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Should have said 1.35 and hit TJ, system shut down for thermal.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk


before thinking you ahve a dud cpu, check and remount your cooler. seems like the cpu is banging its head on TJmax quickly which may be the cooler mount, or exceptionally poor die-to-IHS TIM quality.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *s0kkiplast*
> 
> High performance plan is one of the things I enable directly after format, and speedstep is disabled


Okay... so why do you think it is the CPU config and NOT the GPU config that;s causing the stutter? I'd check your driver and driver settings first. AND with EIST off be sure to disable all c-states. core parking will cause serious stutter.


----------



## Aganor

Well, i think i did a really bad job Delliding my 7600k.
My temps are now unstable even at idle, goings from 29ºc to 43ºc spiking and full load is 72ºc (+3 than original TIM) and 6ºc between core temperatures!!
I should have waited for the silicone to cure before moving the cpu but i was in a hurry..

I used CLU but i noticed that when i was socketing the cpu onto the board, the TIM moved a bit and i´ve read that CLU cannot be moved after it is placed, so maybe is that the reason?
Also i only used 1ml of it (got down 1 large line on the tub), is that enough?

I have a custom loop, will be so painful to remove the CPU WC again but will have to do it, temps are pretty horrible.


----------



## Kalpa

LLC is such a mystery to me. After attaining stability I ventured forth to select 'standard' (this is a gigabyte motherboard with less than stellar options for LLC available) for some temperature comfort - Standard should be "follow Intel spec" - under load my Vcore drops by some 80mV (idle VCore ~1.29V, 100% load ~1.21V) - and still this thing seems happy and stable, even though I needed 1.27-1.29V voltage for stability previously on aggressive LLC setting.

On the other hand, I just recently realized my previous round stability testing may have been for nothing, as it seems OpenHardwareMonitor + MSI Afterburner (which I've only kept running for custom GPU fan profile) both utilize kernel-mode drivers which seem to conflict rather nastily at times. I may need to do a whole another round of stability testing and oh boy am I starting to get just a teensy weensy tired of this by now 

For the time being I've disabled Afterburner's kernel-mode driver (there's a checkbox in settings), and am anxiously waiting if I'll still get driver-related bluescreens (going to keep running OpenHWMonitor). I should run a few days of testing without either OHWM or afterburner to eliminate them from the equation really. *sigh*


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> LLC is such a mystery to me. After attaining stability I ventured forth to select 'standard' (this is a gigabyte motherboard with less than stellar options for LLC available) for some temperature comfort - Standard should be "follow Intel spec" - under load my Vcore drops by some 80mV (idle VCore ~1.29V, 100% load ~1.21V) - and still this thing seems happy and stable, even though I needed 1.27-1.29V voltage for stability previously on aggressive LLC setting.
> 
> On the other hand, I just recently realized my previous round stability testing may have been for nothing, as it seems OpenHardwareMonitor + MSI Afterburner (which I've only kept running for custom GPU fan profile) both utilize kernel-mode drivers which seem to conflict rather nastily at times. I may need to do a whole another round of stability testing and oh boy am I starting to get just a teensy weensy tired of this by now
> 
> For the time being I've disabled Afterburner's kernel-mode driver (there's a checkbox in settings), and am anxiously waiting if I'll still get driver-related bluescreens (going to keep running OpenHWMonitor). I should run a few days of testing without either OHWM or afterburner to eliminate them from the equation really. *sigh*


yeah, sensor polling clash can cause issues. Best to always run only one monitor software ..


----------



## CH4OAddict

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Why the heck are my temperatures 20 C lower average than my previous CPU on same voltages but higher freq...
> 
> Have so many thing on my mind right now I can't be buttered with this ...but it bugs the hell out of me..
> 
> Eg. :
> 
> Now: 5.2 Core (-1 Avx off set) / 4.9 Uncore / 1.376-1.392 v Avx Load OS / 65 C after 30 min RB (With AVX)....and only on 1x 240 mm Rad...
> Before: 5.1 Core (0 Avx off set) / 4.9 Uncore / 1.392 v Avx Load OS / 87 C after 30 min RB (With AVX) ...on 2x 240 mm Rad..


It's called leakage.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, sensor polling clash can cause issues. Best to always run only one monitor software ..


Aye, I had completely forgotten about the MSI afterburner autolaunching on startup after I tweaked my GPU fan curves with it. I started on my regular adjust / test / readjust routine over past week (after replacing CPU) and was getting the strangest bluescreens and freezes that did not really match up with usual OC symptoms. Realized the conflicting drivers earlier this week.

That's not to say that the system is necessarily stable still. But after successfully running one full night without the monitoring software on I kinda decided most of the problems were likely driver conflicts, not OC stability. And now I kinda want to fine-tune the system again. It never ends, does it?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> LLC is such a mystery to me. After attaining stability I ventured forth to select 'standard' (this is a gigabyte motherboard with less than stellar options for LLC available) for some temperature comfort - Standard should be "follow Intel spec" - under load my Vcore drops by some 80mV (idle VCore ~1.29V, 100% load ~1.21V) - and still this thing seems happy and stable, even though I needed 1.27-1.29V voltage for stability previously on aggressive LLC setting.
> 
> On the other hand, I just recently realized my previous round stability testing may have been for nothing, as it seems OpenHardwareMonitor + MSI Afterburner (which I've only kept running for custom GPU fan profile) both utilize kernel-mode drivers which seem to conflict rather nastily at times. I may need to do a whole another round of stability testing and oh boy am I starting to get just a teensy weensy tired of this by now
> 
> For the time being I've disabled Afterburner's kernel-mode driver (there's a checkbox in settings), and am anxiously waiting if I'll still get driver-related bluescreens (going to keep running OpenHWMonitor). I should run a few days of testing without either OHWM or afterburner to eliminate them from the equation really. *sigh*


Voltage is never a stable flat line but it's changing rapidly and your sensors can't detect it. For example my board's detection rate is 256 ms. But what happens between 2 refreshes could only be measured with an oscilloscope. The voltage you're seeing in softwares is pretty much an average. A few mV difference is nothing.

Gigabyte's app and Afterburner caused me alot of problems. Took me a week to figure out that was the cause of crashes during stress test. Disabling them fixed the stability issues.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*


I don't always agree with what you say.... If the V you see between 2 cycles is an average...wouldn't this average go up and down if you have a spike in between ?

2+2 = 4
2+(Spike)+2 = 10....

And the V report in OS is reported in 16 bit so it goes 1.300 ...1.316....1.332...1.348...so on so forth
So I agree that between the 2 values that define an average there might be a spike but if the total would be more than 16 it would be reported....in theory...
So spikes exist...but not Tremendous, CPU Life threatening spikes... or I might be completely wrong

@CH4OAddict do you mind elaborating a bit on this leakage ?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I don't always agree with what you say.... If the V you see between 2 cycles is an average...wouldn't this average go up and down if you have a spike in between ?
> 
> 2+2 = 4
> 2+(Spike)+2 = 10....
> 
> And the V report in OS is reported in 16 bit so it goes 1.300 ...1.316....1.332...1.348...so on so forth
> So I agree that between the 2 values that define an average there might be a spike but if the total would be more than 16 it would be reported....in theory...
> So spikes exist...but not Tremendous, CPU Life threatening spikes... or I might be completely wrong
> 
> @CH4OAddict do you mind elaborating a bit on this leakage ?


Not necessarily. If the spike was small and for very short time you wouldn't see it. Also most software monitors have 1 second refresh time but at least in HWiNFO it can be changed. Let's say you're refresh time is 1 second and most of the time the Vcore is 1.3 V. If you have a spike of 1.4 V for 100 ms, that's 1/10th of a second, you're average would be like this: (9 x 1.3 + 1.4) / 10 = 1.31 V. So pretty much the same. If you have a spike for shorter period of time, even if it's 1.5 V you wont detect it. Another example for 50 ms spike up to 1.5 V: (19 x 1.3 + 1.5) / 20 = 1.31 V. The average is the same, but the voltage spike is much bigger.

My motherboard's VRM switching frequency can go up to 500 Hz (2 ms), some can go 800 Hz (1.25 ms) or maybe higher. If there's a really short spike in the voltage (1-2 ms) you definetly wont detect it with regular sensors, only with an oscilloscope.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Voltage is never a stable flat line but it's changing rapidly and your sensors can't detect it. For example my board's detection rate is 256 ms. But what happens between 2 refreshes could only be measured with an oscilloscope. The voltage you're seeing in softwares is pretty much an average.


Average? I always thought it's more a snapshot - although I'll be first to admit I have absolutely no clue how the sensor suites on MB really work.
Quote:


> A few mV difference is nothing.


A few mV, aye, but 80mV 100% load voltage difference for two different (supposedly) "minimum required voltage for stability" configurations still strikes me a bit odd. That said, it's entirely likely that my high LLC configuration was way overvolted due to skewed stability testing - and it's also possible this current standard LLC setup voltage is not guaranteeing stability either (I only ran my regular daytime [email protected] without a proper stress test so far, kinda bad habit, I shouldn't do that) - so the discrepancy between load voltages may be much less than I think right now.

That said, this is now my fourth attempt at posting this message, trying to get my standard LLC configuration stable with even lower voltage, but failing Prime95 benchmarks miserably (try Prime95 benchmark! It's awesome for quick&dirty stress testing as it fluctuates your workload on/off with tiny pauses, finds some problems much quicker than a static 8K FFT burn or similar)

I may abandon this venture and start over from scratch, though, as said there are more variables than ever in the cooking pot right now (cache OC, CPU OC, memory OC... ugh, memory OC stability is always such a pain in the ass...)


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I don't always agree with what you say.... If the V you see between 2 cycles is an average...wouldn't this average go up and down if you have a spike in between ?
> 
> 2+2 = 4
> 2+(Spike)+2 = 10....
> 
> And the V report in OS is reported in 16 bit so it goes 1.300 ...1.316....1.332...1.348...so on so forth
> So I agree that between the 2 values that define an average there might be a spike but if the total would be more than 16 it would be reported....in theory...
> So spikes exist...but not Tremendous, CPU Life threatening spikes... or I might be completely wrong
> 
> @CH4OAddict do you mind elaborating a bit on this leakage ?


High leakage and low leakage silicon, as a rule of thumb they will require more or less juice to achieve the same frequency, or along these lines.


----------



## dirtyred

Call it snapshot, it won't change the fact that you're not seeing the actual voltage the CPU is getting but an average/snapshot that the sensors can detect.

Prime95 is nice but it's a constant load so voltage requirements won't change much during the stress test. Also is unrealistic as it could be with it's huge power usage. But I agree, it can find errors pretty fast, even in seconds. I still prefer RealBench as it's putting a fluctuating load on the CPU thus changing voltage requirements all the time and if the VRM's can't keep up with that, it will crash. That's why it's taking so long to crash in RB compared to Prime95, because everything has to align perfectly in order to provoke a crash but sooner or later it will happen if the system is not stable. Also AVX vs non-AVX workloads have different power usage and voltage requirements.


----------



## CH4OAddict

Will also dictate temperatures outside of other factors like ihs and Tim. Given everything equal a high leakage cpu will be hotter.

Also 1hr of realbench at 5.025ghz with 1.19v in bios Temps maxing near 60c


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Not necessarily. If the spike was small and for very short time you wouldn't see it. Also most software monitors have 1 second refresh time but at least in HWiNFO it can be changed. Let's say you're refresh time is 1 second and most of the time the Vcore is 1.3 V. If you have a spike of 1.4 V for 100 ms, that's 1/10th of a second, you're average would be like this: (9 x 1.3 + 1.4) / 10 = 1.31 V. So pretty much the same. If you have a spike for shorter period of time, even if it's 1.5 V you wont detect it. Another example for 50 ms spike up to 1.5 V: (19 x 1.3 + 1.5) / 20 = 1.31 V. The average is the same, but the voltage spike is much bigger.
> 
> My motherboard's VRM switching frequency can go up to 500 Hz (2 ms), some can go 800 Hz (1.25 ms) or maybe higher. If there's a really short spike in the voltage (1-2 ms) you definetly wont detect it with regular sensors, only with an oscilloscope.


Ok..I give you credit for the theory, I will have to explore it some more...


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> Will also dictate temperatures outside of other factors like ihs and Tim. Given everything equal a high leakage cpu will be hotter.
> 
> Also 1hr of realbench at 5.025ghz with 1.19v in bios Temps maxing near 60c


Isn't that a typo?! 5 GHz @ 1.19 V?! Even considering some aggressive LLC pushing it up to maybe 1.28 V that's insane! Pretty much close to stock voltage. However I don't think you'll pass 8 hours of RB but 1 hours is still impressive. Even booting to Windows.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Ok..I give you credit for the theory, I will have to explore it some more...


I might be wrong, I have only high school electronics knowledge and a bit more but I tried to explain it as detailed as possible. I'd be happy if somebody with much better electronics knowledge would either agree with me or tell me I'm an idiot because I like to learn.


----------



## moorhen2

5ghz at 1.19v, now that is interesting.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Should have said 1.35 and hit TJ, system shut down for thermal.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> before thinking you ahve a dud cpu, check and remount your cooler. seems like the cpu is banging its head on TJmax quickly which may be the cooler mount, or exceptionally poor die-to-IHS TIM quality.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *s0kkiplast*
> 
> High performance plan is one of the things I enable directly after format, and speedstep is disabled
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Okay... so why do you think it is the CPU config and NOT the GPU config that;s causing the stutter? I'd check your driver and driver settings first. AND with EIST off be sure to disable all c-states. core parking will cause serious stutter.
Click to expand...

I'm always worried that I'm going to tighten the screws too much. I have an H105 with Gelid Extreme. I don't mind removing the block and reseating it. Is there a rule for how tight one installs the thumb screws? It makes me nervous.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm always worried that I'm going to tighten the screws too much. I have an H105 with Gelid Extreme. I don't mind removing the block and reseating it. Is there a rule for how tight one installs the thumb screws? It makes me nervous.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk


When you feel a little bit of resistance is normally sufficient.


----------



## dirtyred

Tighten with fingers with medium effort. You shouldn't struggle doing it. Do it until you feel resistance and then tighten a bit more. Or do it with a screwdriver and hold it with 2 fingers only. Rotate screws 1/4th at a time, maximum 1/2nd turns and do it in an X pattern (top left, bottom right, bottom left, top right and back to top left). When 2 fingers are not enough to tighten the screws more with the screwdriver, you can stop.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> It's called leakage.


In GPUs:
It's commonly referred to as 'ASIC quality'. Low quality chips need more power and produce more heat, but when well-cooled can achieve some pretty awesome speeds. Unfortunately, the quality of work accomplished will suffer. Miners like high ASIC quality chips because they are looking to undervolt and work quality is important.

A very high ASIC chip can't take the over-volting a low ASIC quality chip can. You'll overvolt a high ASICQ (92%) chip to dust while its low ASICQ (68%) brother chip just goes faster. I know this from personal experience.









In a CPU:
You'll see that some chips will overclock great with very little additional Voltage. _It's important not to over-volt these chips trying for super-high OCs._ Stop your OC before you hit the big bump on Voltage. _They will burn up._ Other chips with high leakage will play games and work spreadsheets @5.0GHz/1.46V for years without trouble, but may have a hard time running Prime for 5 minutes at stock settings.

My experience. YMMV.


----------



## CH4OAddict

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Isn't that a typo?! 5 GHz @ 1.19 V?! Even considering some aggressive LLC pushing it up to maybe 1.28 V that's insane! Pretty much close to stock voltage. However I don't think you'll pass 8 hours of RB but 1 hours is still impressive. Even booting to Windows.
> I might be wrong, I have only high school electronics knowledge and a bit more but I tried to explain it as detailed as possible. I'd be happy if somebody with much better electronics knowledge would either agree with me or tell me I'm an idiot because I like to learn.


Not a typo. I doubt I run a stress test for 8 hours. If it can pass 1 hr and game until the sun sets that's good enough for me. Llc is auto. Nothing aggressive.


----------



## ducegt

I was 8 hours RB stable 1.28v without delid and Addicts scales higher with less. My most aggressive LLC holds 10mV less than whatever I set in manual mode.


----------



## Kalpa

I'd really like to get a decent dynamic / offset voltage for this rig, but alas the actual BIOS settings for that on this motherboard are limited to say the least. I could get nice dynamic voltages on the now-dead 6700K but for this 7700K the MB tends to overvolt by quite a bit, and there's almost no room for negative offset before low-load stability goes off (I tried a bit with -0.010V, seemed stable enough, but -0.020V already won't even POST). Looks like I'm going to settle for 4.7GHz on a bios set static vcore of 1.320V (or 1.315V if this proves stable) on "Standard" LLC option, this gives me roughly 1.22V during 100% load stress testing, and about 1.30V when idle, with gaming / generic light to medium use vcore jumping somewhere in between.

I cba to re-optimize the whole rig from scratch. It's probable I could run lower VCCIO / VCCSA (maybe even stock), currently they're set up at 1.050 / 1.150V respectively, as most of my RAM OC routine took place while I was confused by the bluescreens and freezes now presumably caused by conflicting monitoring software drivers. DRAM modules themselves are now run at 1.320V (bios set), sensors show 1.308V, RAM stability with the current settings has been tested quite thoroughly although a complete bootable memtest86 run has not yet been made.

For the time being, here's yet another random annotated testing screenshot and a photo of the chip itself if someone gets some meaningful information out of that.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



https://valid.x86.fr/havtcy
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9Eldmk_POV9a183TGZyUGNMVVU


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Call it snapshot, it won't change the fact that you're not seeing the actual voltage the CPU is getting but an average/snapshot that the sensors can detect.
> 
> Prime95 is nice but it's a constant load so voltage requirements won't change much during the stress test. Also is unrealistic as it could be with it's huge power usage. But I agree, it can find errors pretty fast, even in seconds. I still prefer RealBench as it's putting a fluctuating load on the CPU thus changing voltage requirements all the time and if the VRM's can't keep up with that, it will crash. That's why it's taking so long to crash in RB compared to Prime95, because everything has to align perfectly in order to provoke a crash but sooner or later it will happen if the system is not stable. Also AVX vs non-AVX workloads have different power usage and voltage requirements.


Prime95 Blend fluctuates the load more than RealBench when measuring Dynamic Vcore.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Isn't that a typo?! 5 GHz @ 1.19 V?! Even considering some aggressive LLC pushing it up to maybe 1.28 V that's insane! Pretty much close to stock voltage. However I don't think you'll pass 8 hours of RB but 1 hours is still impressive. Even booting to Windows.
> I might be wrong, I have only high school electronics knowledge and a bit more but I tried to explain it as detailed as possible. I'd be happy if somebody with much better electronics knowledge would either agree with me or tell me I'm an idiot because I like to learn.


not necessarily a typo... it is possible:



1.18V under load, 1.216V at idle ("healthy vdroop")









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm always worried that I'm going to tighten the screws too much. I have an H105 with Gelid Extreme. I don't mind removing the block and reseating it. Is there a rule for how tight one installs the thumb screws? It makes me nervous.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk


yeah sorry, with that block it is a "feel" thing. Finger tight is the term but that really tells us nothing. What's very important is that all corners are tightened an equal amount. My rule of thumb is NEVER fully compress the mount springs. Some blocks require tightening all the way so that the springs are the source of final mount pressure (EK).


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Call it snapshot, it won't change the fact that you're not seeing the actual voltage the CPU is getting but an average/snapshot that the sensors can detect.
> 
> Prime95 is nice but it's a constant load so voltage requirements won't change much during the stress test. Also is unrealistic as it could be with it's huge power usage. But I agree, it can find errors pretty fast, even in seconds. I still prefer RealBench as it's putting a fluctuating load on the CPU thus changing voltage requirements all the time and if the VRM's can't keep up with that, it will crash. That's why it's taking so long to crash in RB compared to Prime95, because everything has to align perfectly in order to provoke a crash but sooner or later it will happen if the system is not stable. Also AVX vs non-AVX workloads have different power usage and voltage requirements.
> 
> 
> 
> Prime95 Blend fluctuates the load more than RealBench when measuring Dynamic Vcore.
Click to expand...

I did a short 15 minute test with RealBench and Prime95. RealBench power usage difference between maximum and minimum was 9 W while Prime95 blend difference was barely 5 W. The test was done on 4.5 GHz @ 1.16 V.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I did a short 15 minute test with RealBench and Prime95. RealBench power usage difference between maximum and minimum was 9 W while Prime95 blend difference was barely 5 W. The test was done on 4.5 GHz @ 1.16 V.


RealBench runs the Video card off and on. I can hear the video card fans turning off and on.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I did a short 15 minute test with RealBench and Prime95. RealBench power usage difference between maximum and minimum was 9 W while Prime95 blend difference was barely 5 W. The test was done on 4.5 GHz @ 1.16 V.
> 
> 
> 
> RealBench runs the Video card off and on. I can hear the video card fans turning off and on.
Click to expand...

I was talking only about the CPU package and cores power usage, did not take into account the GPU and wasn't talking about the whole system's power usage.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Call it snapshot, it won't change the fact that you're not seeing the actual voltage the CPU is getting but an average/snapshot that the sensors can detect.
> 
> Prime95 is nice but it's a constant load so voltage requirements won't change much during the stress test. Also is unrealistic as it could be with it's huge power usage. But I agree, it can find errors pretty fast, even in seconds. I still prefer RealBench as it's putting a fluctuating load on the CPU thus changing voltage requirements all the time and if the VRM's can't keep up with that, it will crash. That's why it's taking so long to crash in RB compared to Prime95, because everything has to align perfectly in order to provoke a crash but sooner or later it will happen if the system is not stable. Also AVX vs non-AVX workloads have different power usage and voltage requirements.


I just did a test looking at only the CPU watts minimum and maximum in HWmonitor, not at the wall. Prime95 watts vary by 19 watts and RealBench only varies by 7 watts.


----------



## dirtyred

A bit strange that it's the opposite. I was running Prime95 with non-AVX flag however. That could be one of the biggest reasons. Or because I'm running on low 4.5 GHz clock speed. Or maybe my 7700K handles load a bit differently than your 6600K but don't really believe this, just one of my theories. Would have to test with Prime95 AVX to be sure.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> A bit strange that it's the opposite. I was running Prime95 with non-AVX flag however. That could be one of the biggest reasons. Or because I'm running on low 4.5 GHz clock speed. Or maybe my 7700K handles load a bit differently than your 6600K but don't really believe this, just one of my theories. Would have to test with Prime95 AVX to be sure.


the variation needs to be considered as a % of total since luxmark power use will be much higher than a 7700K. In Realbench, the cycling of both the encoding and luxmark will affect power draw... best to use a watt meter for this, hwi, or any os based power "calc" is affected by cpu power contro lsettings.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> A bit strange that it's the opposite. I was running Prime95 with non-AVX flag however. That could be one of the biggest reasons. Or because I'm running on low 4.5 GHz clock speed. Or maybe my 7700K handles load a bit differently than your 6600K but don't really believe this, just one of my theories. Would have to test with Prime95 AVX to be sure.


It is not the settings you use or the differences of CPUs that cause the varying watts. I use Dynamic DVID for Vcore so subtle watts change with applications is noted with varying watts usage and Vcore.


----------



## CH4OAddict

so far can do cinebench @ 1.17v in bios on auto llc


----------



## becks

Some initial testing here...
Seems I am getting stable....8H RB (With AVX ) 1.435 Bios + LLC4 (or 5 can't remember







) - 1.408 Avx Load OS - 1.392 Non Avx Load OS - 0.768 v Idle







- 5.2 Core / 4.9 Uncore / 1 Avx / Ram default - Temps high 60's Spikes (Average high 50's - low 60's) - 25-26 Idle

I don't know about you guys but I always Pause Luxmark on RB ...is that a bad thing to do ?

Still have to play with ram and add it to the equation so V might go up or down +/- 0.05


----------



## Primithras

Note to self and other overclockers: do play around with LLC. I always assumed level 3 or 4 was sufficiënt but damn was I wrong. No matter what I did, I couldn't get 49x or 50x to work properly without stability or temperature issues. So instead I started playing around with 48x, trying to get it stable with the lowest possible voltage.

I always figured that a higher LLC would mean more voltage to overcompensate for vdroop but this doesn't seem to be the case. Instead I seem to be needing less voltage with a higher LLC level to get everything stable.

48x
LLC3 - 1.305v
LLC4 - 1.280v
LLC5 - 1.250v

For some weird reason, regardless of what I set the LLC, my CPU will always draw 0.04v above the configured voltage. So I setup adaptive mode with a -0.04v offset to get more accurate readings.

Going to play around a bit more with the optimal LLC vs voltage level and then probably try going for 49x/50x again.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Primithras*
> 
> 48x
> LLC3 - 1.305v
> LLC4 - 1.280v
> LLC5 - 1.250v


Is this Bios or OS ? if they are Bios can you provide OS values


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Primithras*
> 
> Note to self and other overclockers: do play around with LLC. I always assumed level 3 or 4 was sufficiënt but damn was I wrong. No matter what I did, I couldn't get 49x or 50x to work properly without stability or temperature issues. So instead I started playing around with 48x, trying to get it stable with the lowest possible voltage.
> 
> I always figured that a higher LLC would mean more voltage to overcompensate for vdroop but this doesn't seem to be the case. Instead I seem to be needing less voltage with a higher LLC level to get everything stable.
> 
> 48x
> LLC3 - 1.305v
> LLC4 - 1.280v
> LLC5 - 1.250v
> 
> For some weird reason, regardless of what I set the LLC, my CPU will always draw 0.04v above the configured voltage. So I setup adaptive mode with a -0.04v offset to get more accurate readings.
> 
> Going to play around a bit more with the optimal LLC vs voltage level and then probably try going for 49x/50x again.


Higher LLC means less Vdroop. You were probably crashing because when the load changed on the CPU the VRM's couldn't catch up fast enough to supply enough voltage and because of that split second low voltage it crashed. That voltage drop could have bigger then the amount of voltage you reduced. I can imagine that it's entirely possible to get it stable with LLC3 or 4, you just have to set a higher target turbo voltage, maybe add some offset or increase the VRM switching frequency.


----------



## Gurkburk

By going from a 4770k to a 7700k, i notice that the 7700k is using all of its frequency much more often to smaller tasks than the 4770k.

My 4770k could be staying low in the clock freq for simple internet'ing etc, and voltage too. But the 7700k really likes to go hard on with bumping up the voltage & freq to the highest.

What's troubling me with this, is that even with no apps running (Chrome and everything closed down, no apps using even 1% cpu), the 7700k still bumps up to max freq & volt.

Does anyone know if this can be changed somehow? I feel like this could bump the electricity bill slightly.


----------



## Primithras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Is this Bios or OS ? if they are Bios can you provide OS values


OS always draws 0.04v more than BIOS settings. So I configured adaptive voltage with a -0.04 offset so those are both BIOS/OS values.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Higher LLC means less Vdroop. You were probably crashing because when the load changed on the CPU the VRM's couldn't catch up fast enough to supply enough voltage and because of that split second low voltage it crashed. That voltage drop could have bigger then the amount of voltage you reduced. I can imagine that it's entirely possible to get it stable with LLC3 or 4, you just have to set a higher target turbo voltage, maybe add some offset or increase the VRM switching frequency.


Thanks I'll play around with it, I noticed I can set the values from 250-500mhz, any recommendations? Also what impacts temperature the most, higher LLC or higher VRM switching frequency?

LLC5 @ 1.25v runs way cooler than LLC3 @ 1.3v so cranking up LLC seems to be the magic trick at the moment. Might play around with LLC6/7 later too but I'm guessing that might be too heavy.


----------



## dirtyred

The frequency means how fast it can react to voltage requirements changes. Higher VRM switching frequency is better for stability but the VRM's will get hotter. Be sure to have good airflow especially if you're using water cooling. I think on ASUS default is 250 Hz, I'd go up to 400 Hz. Maybe I could go 500 Hz without trouble but did not find any tests about this topic so I want to be on the safer side until I know more.

Never use maximum LLC levels, especially paired with high voltage. Could potentially damage your CPU when voltage reguirement changes which always results in a spike. Read this: http://www.masterslair.com/vdroop-and-load-line-calibration-is-vdroop-really-bad

RAM voltage heavily influences CPU temperature. Between 1.2 V and 1.35 V RAM voltage my CPU's temperature difference is around 10 °C.


----------



## SSIV

Hello! My first post on this forum!

Kraken X62, Kryonaut Conductonaut, delidded&relidded, zero AVX offset, fixed frequency, 1.370v fixed voltage.

Doesn't go above 70C









EDIT: http://imgur.com/PC8hp05


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SSIV*
> 
> Hello! My first post on this forum!
> 
> Kraken X62, Kryonaut Conductonaut, delidded&relidded, zero AVX offset, fixed frequency, 1.370v fixed voltage.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't go above 70C
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: http://imgur.com/PC8hp05


nice! Lol - post that in the Ryzen thread... would piss off a lot of people.


----------



## becks

Last time I've done that they banned me from that thread for "trolling" fluffy guys there...


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not necessarily a typo... it is possible:
> 
> 
> 
> 1.18V under load, 1.216V at idle ("healthy vdroop")


I can confirm this.. the " healthy vdroop "

After updating Asus RB from 2.44 to 2.54 my stable OC profile fail within 45m..

was using 5ghz & 4.5ghz cache & 3200mhz memory at fixed voltage 1.30v- 1.328v under load--Auto LLC and the result Instability detect by RB 2.54 after 45m..

Now I just change the LLC to level 5 and the core voltage to 1.29v.. which give me 1.31v IDLE and 1.29v under load.. RB just pass 2h without any problem



I'm just looking for Rock88 delid tool so i can push this to 5.1ghz as that stable at 1.36v but the temp hit 83c while RB stressing


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SSIV*
> 
> Hello! My first post on this forum!
> 
> Kraken X62, Kryonaut Conductonaut, delidded&relidded, zero AVX offset, fixed frequency, 1.370v fixed voltage.
> 
> Doesn't go above 70C
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: http://imgur.com/PC8hp05


Welcome to the OCN forums, very nice first post


----------



## bfe_vern

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> I'm just looking for Rock88 delid tool so i can push this to 5.1ghz as that stable at 1.36v but the temp hit 83c while RB stressing


There's a rockit88 delid tool making it's way around the country in our freebie section thanks to wholeeo. You may be able to get in on that action.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm always worried that I'm going to tighten the screws too much. I have an H105 with Gelid Extreme. I don't mind removing the block and reseating it. Is there a rule for how tight one installs the thumb screws? It makes me nervous.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> When you feel a little bit of resistance is normally sufficient.
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Tighten with fingers with medium effort. You shouldn't struggle doing it. Do it until you feel resistance and then tighten a bit more. Or do it with a screwdriver and hold it with 2 fingers only. Rotate screws 1/4th at a time, maximum 1/2nd turns and do it in an X pattern (top left, bottom right, bottom left, top right and back to top left). When 2 fingers are not enough to tighten the screws more with the screwdriver, you can stop.


Last night I reseated the pump with a fresh coat of Gelid Extreme. Last night after testing my cores were on average 4 degrees cooler. So, yeah, there's that. Today when I got home I did an auto 5.0 run with the ram at 2133. Here are the results. Where do I go now?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Last time I've done that they banned me from that thread for "trolling" fluffy guys there...


lol - it's their safe space! (tho I have been posting up 1600x info there). With the exception of a few very knowledgeable posters, it's snowflakes for sure.


----------



## ducegt

I just did redid my thermal paste for the first time since I delidded. The few hundred hours of stress testing really did a number and/or I must have had a pinch too much. Now sitting a good 13C cooler. It's like having a new chip all over again.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I just did redid my thermal paste for the first time since I delidded. The few hundred hours of stress testing really did a number and/or I must have had a pinch too much. Now sitting a good 13C cooler. It's like having a new chip all over again.


That seems crazy large a gain for just reapplying paste. What stuff do you use?


----------



## becks

Apparently my PC hangs, freezes at the end of every benchmark ... so that's that. Have to diagnose it now....again

Even when I complete CB, it finishes the render, but never gives the score...hangs there... any suggestions where to start ?


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Apparently my PC hangs, freezes at the end of every benchmark ... so that's that. Have to diagnose it now....again
> 
> Even when I complete CB, it finishes the render, but never gives the score...hangs there... any suggestions where to start ?


Does it hang at the end of benchmarks even when you are running at stock clocks/memory timings ?

If so sounds like you have a possible corrupt driver or even the OS image has become corrupted. I would try doing a Win 10 reset and see if that rectifies the problem.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Does it hang at the end of benchmarks even when you are running at stock clocks/memory timings ?
> 
> If so sounds like you have a possible corrupt driver or even the OS image has become corrupted. I would try doing a Win 10 reset and see if that rectifies the problem.


Took 2 days off work (sick) so really not in the mood to do a clean install at the moment









On a more serious note, this chip is a whole new kind of animal....

My previous would do 5.1 Core with 0 Avx just fine at 1.392.. with high Cache / Ram..but it would not do 5.2 ..5.3 for anything, just 5.1 and that's it...
Now this one....I can do 5.2....5.3....even 5.4 at 1.5 + but getting it stable is a hole new freaking story..finding it hard to get it stable at 5.1 with 2 avx offset and 47 Cache...very very sensible at voltages...and avx sucks the hell out of it, at 5.1 Avx the vid shoots up to 1.455


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Last night I reseated the pump with a fresh coat of Gelid Extreme. Last night after testing my cores were on average 4 degrees cooler. So, yeah, there's that. Today when I got home I did an auto 5.0 run with the ram at 2133. Here are the results. Where do I go now?


Go out and party. It's the end of the week.









Joke aside, seems like you're temps are fine. Do an 8 hours RB stress test over night to be sure it's stable but if you can't do of don't want to, at least do a 2 hour run. If still stable, you can start RAM OC.
I see your maximum was 77 °C, which is fine considering RB is a pretty tough test. You should not hit those temperatures during any regular usage, more like 70 °C. You can probably raise the RAM voltage up to 1.3 - 1.35 V and stay below 85 °C average in RB.

Set RAM to 1.3 - 1.35 V and see how high frequency can you go with a 16-16-16-28 1T (or similar) timings. Test it with HCI memtest for 2-3 hours or 500%. Run as many instances as cores (8) you have and divide the available free RAM between those. For 16 GB that's around 1700 MB.


----------



## coc_james

Thanks for all the info and help. Last night I loaded the xmp profile and left the OC exactly where it was and the temps only went up by about 1 degree. That all being said I'm going to start manually tweaking everything and see how much further it can go. Thanks again.


----------



## becks

My new favourite way to nail a quick OC if stable or not is 1h of OCCT ..works like a charm, only if i'm happy with that I leave it running overnight with RB


----------



## becks

Also @dirtyred some findings I want to share with you....

Changing VRM Switch fq from 500 to 800 (Max on my board) only increased my VRM temp from 39-41 (before) to 51-52 (after) measured with HWinfo MB sensor and external 2 pin sensor stuck to it (Took the measurements while playing with OC and made an average - over 6 readings over a 3 day span)
Helped a little with V-Drop switching, when I start a Bench with Real time priority or Drop V to 0.800 when entering idle...

Now LLC, for me it worked the other way round
Example @ 5.2 Core / 2 AVX Offset / 4.8 Uncore / Ram default
1.435V Bios + LLC 5 = 0.800 Idle...1.424 Non AVX (CB 15 etc) 1.408 - 1.424 (Fluctuating) AVX (OCCT 1h, RB 8H) 1.440 OS Boot ( recorded by HwInfo)

1.395v Bios + LLC6 = 0.800 Idle... 1.392 Non AVX (Cb 15 etc) 1.408 AVX (OCCT 1h) 1.408 OS Boot

For some reason on this board if I add LLC 6 -8 it adds volts...If I go LLC 5 - 1 It negatively V-drops...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> My new favourite way to nail a quick OC if stable or not is 1h of OCCT ..works like a charm, only if i'm happy with that I leave it running overnight with RB


Could not agree more


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Also @dirtyred some findings I want to share with you....
> 
> Changing VRM Switch fq from 500 to 800 (Max on my board) only increased my VRM temp from 39-41 (before) to 51-52 (after) measured with HWinfo MB sensor and external 2 pin sensor stuck to it (Took the measurements while playing with OC and made an average - over 6 readings over a 3 day span)
> Helped a little with V-Drop switching, when I start a Bench with Real time priority or Drop V to 0.800 when entering idle...
> 
> Now LLC, for me it worked the other way round
> Example @ 5.2 Core / 2 AVX Offset / 4.8 Uncore / Ram default
> 1.435V Bios + LLC 5 = 0.800 Idle...1.424 Non AVX (CB 15 etc) 1.408 - 1.424 (Fluctuating) AVX (OCCT 1h, RB 8H) 1.440 OS Boot ( recorded by HwInfo)
> 
> 1.395v Bios + LLC6 = 0.800 Idle... 1.392 Non AVX (Cb 15 etc) 1.408 AVX (OCCT 1h) 1.408 OS Boot
> 
> For some reason on this board if I add LLC 6 -8 it adds volts...If I go LLC 5 - 1 It negatively V-drops...


I'm not sure that the Motherboard sensor monitors VRM temperatures. I think it monitors the chipset. You'd have to put the sensor right on the VRM's or do it with an infrared thermometer.

LLC 4-5 (on a scale of 1-7) gives me usually the closest to the set voltage under load. LLC 5 occasionally peaks by 0.016 V, LLC 4 dips by the same amount. What you're experiencing it's typical on ASUS boards, LLC 1 giving biggest vdroop and above 5 giving vboost. That's why I prefer LLC 4-5, it's the most predictable level.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> That seems crazy large a gain for just reapplying paste. What stuff do you use?


gelid extreme. I did some uncommon stuff like bench 1.505v at freezing temperatures. Also I changed how I mounted the H115i. I broke off the pegs from the bracket and inverted them to individually be screwed into. I do think it was mostly the paste my chip preformed fine with the bracket during the first several months.


----------



## bfe_vern

@Mr-Dark
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bfe_vern*
> 
> There's a rockit88 delid tool making it's way around the country in our freebie section thanks to wholeeo. You may be able to get in on that action.


Disregard my post....I didn't take a look at your location when posting from my phone.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> gelid extreme. I did some uncommon stuff like bench 1.505v at freezing temperatures.


What TIM did you use between the IHS and die when you delid'd? I had read someplace that the liquid metal TIM's (CLU, etc) don't do well with freezing temps (or is that only extreme <0 temps?)


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> What TIM did you use between the IHS and die when you delid'd? I had read someplace that the liquid metal TIM's (CLU, etc) don't do well with freezing temps (or is that only extreme <0 temps?)


CLU. I'm not sure myself, but probably safe to assume they refer to LN2. I only used the help of mother nature, and my best guess is I keep it a degree or two above the freezing temp of water for whatever that is worth.


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bfe_vern*
> 
> @Mr-Dark
> Disregard my post....I didn't take a look at your location when posting from my phone.


Thanks for letting me know, that's why i want to buy one


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Last night I reseated the pump with a fresh coat of Gelid Extreme. Last night after testing my cores were on average 4 degrees cooler. So, yeah, there's that. Today when I got home I did an auto 5.0 run with the ram at 2133. Here are the results. Where do I go now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Go out and party. It's the end of the week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joke aside, seems like you're temps are fine. Do an 8 hours RB stress test over night to be sure it's stable but if you can't do of don't want to, at least do a 2 hour run. If still stable, you can start RAM OC.
> I see your maximum was 77 °C, which is fine considering RB is a pretty tough test. You should not hit those temperatures during any regular usage, more like 70 °C. You can probably raise the RAM voltage up to 1.3 - 1.35 V and stay below 85 °C average in RB.
> 
> Set RAM to 1.3 - 1.35 V and see how high frequency can you go with a 16-16-16-28 1T (or similar) timings. Test it with HCI memtest for 2-3 hours or 500%. Run as many instances as cores (8) you have and divide the available free RAM between those. For 16 GB that's around 1700 MB.
Click to expand...



Here's another quick run @51auto w/3466

Should I start increasing my uncore? It's only at 42. Also, should I lower my AVX? It's currently at 3. I'd like to find the maximum for everything and then work my way to stability.

Thanks again.

Ya'll have a great and safe Memorial Day weekend.


----------



## MaKeN

But 15 mins is not really enought as i think.

But anyway the 5.1 at that voltage looks good


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Apparently my PC hangs, freezes at the end of every benchmark ... so that's that. Have to diagnose it now....again
> 
> Even when I complete CB, it finishes the render, but never gives the score...hangs there... any suggestions where to start ?


if the system is hanging or crashing when a high load is terminated (like many benchmarks), reduce vdoop for the benchmark.


----------



## MaKeN

I have a question for you guys...

When i just got the cpu , i had a 3200 stick, i was able to pass OCCT at 5.1 on a 1.41-142 in bios vcore.

Now , i have switched the memory to a 16gb 3400 sticks,im not able anymore to pass occt 1 hour test even at 1.44 voltage. I have downckloked the memory to 3200 increased voltage of it to 1.4 , anyway i get fails in about 1 min of OCCT .

Does it mean cpu downgraded? Or its the ram's fault?
Thx

Edit: it would pass 1 hour of rb 2.43 on 1.41v.
I think something got wrong with occt, not even 1 min before fail.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ..., reduce vdoop for the benchmark.


typo? Where would I find the "vdoop" setting in BIOS?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> 
> 
> Here's another quick run @51auto w/3466
> 
> Should I start increasing my uncore? It's only at 42. Also, should I lower my AVX? It's currently at 3. I'd like to find the maximum for everything and then work my way to stability.
> 
> Thanks again.
> 
> Ya'll have a great and safe Memorial Day weekend.


I'd go for around 46-47 maximum Uncore for 51 multi. Try AVX 0-2 if the temps allow it. I've found that it's harder to stabilize a system with AVX offset, requiring more voltage because messed up voltage table so I prefer not to use any offset.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> typo? Where would I find the "vdoop" setting in BIOS?


Not typo. Vdroop is controlled by the LLC level.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I have a question for you guys...
> 
> When i just got the cpu , i had a 3200 stick, i was able to pass OCCT at 5.1 on a 1.41-142 in bios vcore.
> 
> Now , i have switched the memory to a 16gb 3400 sticks,im not able anymore to pass occt 1 hour test even at 1.44 voltage. I have downckloked the memory to 3200 increased voltage of it to 1.4 , anyway i get fails in about 1 min of OCCT .
> 
> Does it mean cpu downgraded? Or its the ram's fault?
> Thx
> 
> Edit: it would pass 1 hour of rb 2.43 on 1.41v.
> I think something got wrong with occt, not even 1 min before fail.


Always stress test one thing at a time. Do it on stock 2133 MHz RAM to eliminate instability. When you go for RAM OC, stress test it with HCI memtest.


----------



## PeterOC

Hi All,

What is the benefit of LLC? I understand it's like an offset so that VCORE can be lower? But what is the end result for an overclock, what does it help with. Does it help pushing Volts up a little to improve stability?I'm not clear on that and whether I should bother with LLC given below results. I see custom LLC in the spreadsheet so I guess there's something to it?

My current OC in progress, let me know if you see something obviously bad:
Overclock: 51x, 1.41V,
Temperature control: range <65C,75C> , 50x multiplier, 1.36V
AVX offset = 2
Memory: XMP (3600 MHz)
Uncore/Cache: default, TBD
Cooling: Delid, custom loop 240x45mm, 280x30mm. I did overdo on pastel so maybe its holding back on some cooling capacity looking at some temps in others' results.

Stress: RealBench 8hrs, see max temps here. The CPU hovers at 70-80 I think.


Also I see 800 MHz as min clock in some of the results. Shouldn't the stress test be done in High Performance mode? That's what I did as it may improve real performance.

Thanks!


----------



## sdmf74

Anyone ever get code 55 on cold boot? Can it be caused by not enough memory voltage?

I have been getting error 55 occasionally on bootup (when XMP is set) ever since I bought the 32gb g skill rgb kit (upgraded from same 3600mhz 16gb kit)
Also I just noticed something wierd AISUITEIII is reporting XMP timings differently than CPU~Z. Whats up with that?


----------



## cfortney92

Can someone point me in the right direction here? I'm overclocked on my 7700k to 5GHz. In x264, Prime95 and Aida64, my 4 cores won't go past 4.5GHz. Turn the benchmark off, they go back up to 5GHz on all 4 idle. IXT Benchmark and Cinebench, they're running at 5GHz on all 4. What am I missing in my BIOS?

i7-7700k
delidded + CLU + corsair h60
msi z270i itx/ac

+50 multiplier on all 4 cores
1.37v static +.027 offset
XMP = 3200mhz

Cinebench hits it the hardest at ~80C under load, but of course I can't loop it to check for longer stability, and most of my other benchmarks aren't running all 4 cores at 5GHz. I've disabled all of the power management features I could find and set the turbo max wattage to unlimited.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if the system is hanging or crashing when a high load is terminated (like many benchmarks), reduce vdoop for the benchmark.


Yes, found out later that day that my CPU hates with all his soul V-drop and prefers V-boost so I switched to the later
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PeterOC*
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> What is the benefit of LLC? I understand it's like an offset so that VCORE can be lower? But what is the end result for an overclock, what does it help with. Does it help pushing Volts up a little to improve stability?I'm not clear on that and whether I should bother with LLC given below results. I see custom LLC in the spreadsheet so I guess there's something to it?
> 
> My current OC in progress, let me know if you see something obviously bad:
> Overclock: 51x, 1.41V,
> Temperature control: range <65C,75C> , 50x multiplier, 1.36V
> AVX offset = 2
> Memory: XMP (3600 MHz)
> Uncore/Cache: default, TBD
> Cooling: Delid, custom loop 240x45mm, 280x30mm. I did overdo on pastel so maybe its holding back on some cooling capacity looking at some temps in others' results.
> 
> Stress: RealBench 8hrs, see max temps here. The CPU hovers at 70-80 I think.
> 
> 
> Also I see 800 MHz as min clock in some of the results. Shouldn't the stress test be done in High Performance mode? That's what I did as it may improve real performance.
> 
> Thanks!


CPU Dropping to 800 mhz is a good sign, it means that your power saving options in Bios are working well and the CPU is dropping to 800 mhz and 1 v in Idle, when not used.
LLC has different terminologies in Bios depending on the MB manufacturer and what it does it allows the Freq and V to fluctuate accordingly to the load supplied so that the CPU is not staying at max V and Freq all the time and therefore saving its ass in the long term..
For me on a Asus MB LLC does 2 things:
V-Boost - LLC 6 -8 adds V to the set V-core in Bios (EG. 1.375 v in Bios+LLC 6 = 1.392 in OS under heavy load)
V-Drop - LLC 1-5 subtracts V (Minus) from the set V-Core in Bios (EG. 1.435 v in Bios+LLC 4 = 1.408 in OS under heavy load)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Anyone ever get code 55 on cold boot? Can it be caused by not enough memory voltage?
> 
> I have been getting error 55 occasionally on bootup (when XMP is set) ever since I bought the 32gb g skill rgb kit (upgraded from same 3600mhz 16gb kit)
> Also I just noticed something wierd AISUITEIII is reporting XMP timings differently than CPU~Z. Whats up with that?


Q Code 55 definitely caused by mem and usually not enough V on DIMM
CPUz and AISuite is just a software glitch, and usually its not a good idea to keep more than 1 monitoring software open at the same time as they are pooling the same sensors and can bug the system.

EDIT: Also it could be that you use your RGB ram with aura sync...
G.Skill RGB Ram has caused some problems lately cause of the way they manage the led on the modules ...and lead to SPD corruption.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> Can someone point me in the right direction here? I'm overclocked on my 7700k to 5GHz. In x264, Prime95 and Aida64, my 4 cores won't go past 4.5GHz. Turn the benchmark off, they go back up to 5GHz on all 4 idle. IXT Benchmark and Cinebench, they're running at 5GHz on all 4. What am I missing in my BIOS?
> 
> i7-7700k
> delidded + CLU + corsair h60
> msi z270i itx/ac
> 
> +50 multiplier on all 4 cores
> 1.37v static +.027 offset
> XMP = 3200mhz
> 
> Cinebench hits it the hardest at ~80C under load, but of course I can't loop it to check for longer stability, and most of my other benchmarks aren't running all 4 cores at 5GHz. I've disabled all of the power management features I could find and set the turbo max wattage to unlimited.


What you see there is AVX offset.
Meaning that whenever your PC faces an AVX workload (something you wont see in any game, only certain specialised software) your CPU freq drops to 4.5 (You have an AVX offset of 5)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> Can someone point me in the right direction here? I'm overclocked on my 7700k to 5GHz. In x264, Prime95 and Aida64, my 4 cores won't go past 4.5GHz. Turn the benchmark off, they go back up to 5GHz on all 4 idle. IXT Benchmark and Cinebench, they're running at 5GHz on all 4. What am I missing in my BIOS?
> 
> i7-7700k
> delidded + CLU + corsair h60
> msi z270i itx/ac
> 
> +50 multiplier on all 4 cores
> 1.37v static +.027 offset
> XMP = 3200mhz
> 
> Cinebench hits it the hardest at ~80C under load, but of course I can't loop it to check for longer stability, and most of my other benchmarks aren't running all 4 cores at 5GHz. I've disabled all of the power management features I could find and set the turbo max wattage to unlimited.


Can you Increase power limits and lcc Max?


----------



## Gurkburk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> Can someone point me in the right direction here? I'm overclocked on my 7700k to 5GHz. In x264, Prime95 and Aida64, my 4 cores won't go past 4.5GHz. Turn the benchmark off, they go back up to 5GHz on all 4 idle. IXT Benchmark and Cinebench, they're running at 5GHz on all 4. What am I missing in my BIOS?
> 
> i7-7700k
> delidded + CLU + corsair h60
> msi z270i itx/ac
> 
> +50 multiplier on all 4 cores
> 1.37v static +.027 offset
> XMP = 3200mhz
> 
> Cinebench hits it the hardest at ~80C under load, but of course I can't loop it to check for longer stability, and most of my other benchmarks aren't running all 4 cores at 5GHz. I've disabled all of the power management features I could find and set the turbo max wattage to unlimited.


Almost 1.4 to get 5.0ghz is a pretty bad chip


----------



## cfortney92

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> Almost 1.4 to get 5.0ghz is a pretty bad chip


I just started OCing it so I haven't spent much time taking the voltage lower yet. Actually it was running benchmarks stable when I started at 1.35, but HWMonitor wouldn't launch? I creeped the voltage up and it worked. But it was weird, none of the benchmarks were crashing me or even running too hot. Just HWMonitor...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Can you Increase power limits and lcc Max?


What is ICC Max? I think that I did increase power limits already.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> What you see there is AVX offset.
> Meaning that whenever your PC faces an AVX workload (something you wont see in any game, only certain specialised software) your CPU freq drops to 4.5 (You have an AVX offset of 5)


It's not, I have AVX set to 0


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> I just started OCing it so I haven't spent much time taking the voltage lower yet. Actually it was running benchmarks stable when I started at 1.35, but HWMonitor wouldn't launch? I creeped the voltage up and it worked. But it was weird, none of the benchmarks were crashing me or even running too hot. Just HWMonitor...
> What is ICC Max? I think that I did increase power limits already.
> It's not, I have AVX set to 0


Seems strange, as you only see it going down to 4.5 in benchmarks that use avx...but you say your offset is 0..
What MB you have ?..


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Meaning that whenever your PC faces an AVX workload (something you wont see in any game, only certain specialised software)


Something you don't see in *almost* any game. Notably Witcher 3 seems to utilize AVX instructions. I think I saw Hearts of Iron 4 drop my clocks to AVX levels as well, but that I'm not entirely certain was due to AVX.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> Can someone point me in the right direction here? I'm overclocked on my 7700k to 5GHz. In x264, Prime95 and Aida64, my 4 cores won't go past 4.5GHz. Turn the benchmark off, they go back up to 5GHz on all 4 idle. IXT Benchmark and Cinebench, they're running at 5GHz on all 4. What am I missing in my BIOS?
> 
> i7-7700k
> delidded + CLU + corsair h60
> msi z270i itx/ac
> 
> +50 multiplier on all 4 cores
> 1.37v static +.027 offset
> XMP = 3200mhz
> 
> Cinebench hits it the hardest at ~80C under load, but of course I can't loop it to check for longer stability, and most of my other benchmarks aren't running all 4 cores at 5GHz. I've disabled all of the power management features I could find and set the turbo max wattage to unlimited.


I would check if you have any CPU Power limit settings in BIOS, for example my motherboard defaults to 91W (TDP for 7700K), with the beefy overclock you're running you're more than likely hitting that even on high workloads, causing cpu throttling


----------



## cfortney92

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Seems strange, as you only see it going down to 4.5 in benchmarks that use avx...but you say your offset is 0..
> What MB you have ?..


MSI z270i gaming pro carbon ac/itx


----------



## cfortney92

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Something you don't see in *almost* any game. Notably Witcher 3 seems to utilize AVX instructions. I think I saw Hearts of Iron 4 drop my clocks to AVX levels as well, but that I'm not entirely certain was due to AVX.
> I would check if you have any CPU Power limit settings in BIOS, for example my motherboard defaults to 91W (TDP for 7700K), with the beefy overclock you're running you're more than likely hitting that even on high workloads, causing cpu throttling


Thanks I'll poke around and see if I missed a power setting. Ever heard of HWMonitor not launching, even when the rest of my benchmarks will run through stable? I kept bumping my vcore up just to make HWMonitor work


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> Ever heard of HWMonitor not launching, even when the rest of my benchmarks will run through stable? I kept bumping my vcore up just to make HWMonitor work


I haven't, that seems exceedingly strange. What's your VCCSA and VCCIO voltages set at?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> MSI z270i gaming pro carbon ac/itx


Open RB and Aida stress testing tool...
Fire RB and see if its throttle or AVX offset ..simple as that.

Benchmarks run are no-where near stable... my system is stable 5.1 at 1.375 +LLC 6...but I can bench all day at 1.325...

Run RB for 8h or OCCT large for 2h or Prime for 1H...if that passes and hwinfo still does not open, it's not the OC and we can concentrate on software and re-install Hwinfo or the OS and we can start from there
Whenever one plays with OC often the system gets corrupted with no obvious sign and trows random unexplained things at us..

EDIT: Like it happened to me, couple of posts back...where I complete the test or benchmark but it does not give the score....

EG. RB stuck at 7h and 59 mins....on a 8h run...
CB Completed rendering but no score...
XTU stuck at benchmark at 99.9%..so on so forth

That plus I had some other things with Vdrop and Vboost...


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*


I don't play any modern titles... Thanks for the correction


----------



## cfortney92

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> I haven't, that seems exceedingly strange. What's your VCCSA and VCCIO voltages set at?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Open RB and Aida stress testing tool...
> Fire RB and see if its throttle or AVX offset ..simple as that.
> 
> Benchmarks run are no-where near stable... my system is stable 5.1 at 1.375 +LLC 6...but I can bench all day at 1.325...
> 
> Run RB for 8h or OCCT large for 2h or Prime for 1H...if that passes and hwinfo still does not open, it's not the OC and we can concentrate on software and re-install Hwinfo or the OS and we can start from there
> Whenever one plays with OC often the system gets corrupted with no obvious sign and trows random unexplained things at us..


I found some power settings I hadn't touched, seems to have done the trick in AIDA64 so far. Except HWMonitor won't launch, but from what I can tell from Intel XTU I'm running at 5Ghz on all cores doing an AVX load.



I don't have a ton of experience overclocking, so I'm linking what my XTU is showing. I am doing the settings through the BIOS though, not through XTU.
I haven't actually seen any LLC settings as an option through my BIOS...? Can you explain that?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PeterOC*
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> What is the benefit of LLC? I understand it's like an offset so that VCORE can be lower? But what is the end result for an overclock, what does it help with. Does it help pushing Volts up a little to improve stability?I'm not clear on that and whether I should bother with LLC given below results. I see custom LLC in the spreadsheet so I guess there's something to it?
> 
> My current OC in progress, let me know if you see something obviously bad:
> Overclock: 51x, 1.41V,
> Temperature control: range <65C,75C> , 50x multiplier, 1.36V
> AVX offset = 2
> Memory: XMP (3600 MHz)
> Uncore/Cache: default, TBD
> Cooling: Delid, custom loop 240x45mm, 280x30mm. I did overdo on pastel so maybe its holding back on some cooling capacity looking at some temps in others' results.
> 
> Stress: RealBench 8hrs, see max temps here. The CPU hovers at 70-80 I think.
> 
> 
> Also I see 800 MHz as min clock in some of the results. Shouldn't the stress test be done in High Performance mode? That's what I did as it may improve real performance.
> 
> Thanks!


LLC is for regulating voltage drop when the VRM's can't keep up with voltage requirements when load changes on the CPU. It's not an offset. Read the first post: http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics#post_25790462, http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5 and http://www.masterslair.com/vdroop-and-load-line-calibration-is-vdroop-really-bad.

800 MHz is idle clock speed. Probably the stress test pauses or doesn't stress all the cores switching between them so every now and then some core speeds drop to 800 MHz and in the end all of the cores will have 800 MHz min speed. No need to be done in High Performance mode, do it in the environment as you'd be using your computer 24/7. After all you want to know if it's stable for 24/7.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> Can someone point me in the right direction here? I'm overclocked on my 7700k to 5GHz. In x264, Prime95 and Aida64, my 4 cores won't go past 4.5GHz. Turn the benchmark off, they go back up to 5GHz on all 4 idle. IXT Benchmark and Cinebench, they're running at 5GHz on all 4. What am I missing in my BIOS?
> 
> i7-7700k
> delidded + CLU + corsair h60
> msi z270i itx/ac
> 
> +50 multiplier on all 4 cores
> 1.37v static +.027 offset
> XMP = 3200mhz
> 
> Cinebench hits it the hardest at ~80C under load, but of course I can't loop it to check for longer stability, and most of my other benchmarks aren't running all 4 cores at 5GHz. I've disabled all of the power management features I could find and set the turbo max wattage to unlimited.


If the core clock drops under heavy load it's because power limit or temperature limit. Both are the cause to protect the CPU. You can raise the power limit in CPU power management section of BIOS but be sure to understand the risks. If you have temperature control, you can go up to 80 °C (above that it's risky in long term). Prime95, x264 and Aida64 (with FPU) is pretty demanding, especially Prime95 and power usage is over the roof. Cinebench is a walk in the park to pass, not demanding at all.

Also, the CPU current limit is 100 Amps and voltage is 1.52 V. Be sure to not exceed those or you can toast your CPU. Use Ohms law, but to simplify: 100 Amps * the voltage you're using = Maximum power limit. For example 100 A * 1.4 V = 140 W. Take into account voltage instability (can be easily 10% more then the set voltage when load changes and the LLC is too high). That 150 an 160 W is way too high but be sure to monitor it with HWiNFO.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> I found some power settings I hadn't touched, seems to have done the trick in AIDA64 so far. Except HWMonitor won't launch, but from what I can tell from Intel XTU I'm running at 5Ghz on all cores doing an AVX load.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have a ton of experience overclocking, so I'm linking what my XTU is showing. I am doing the settings through the BIOS though, not through XTU.
> I haven't actually seen any LLC settings as an option through my BIOS...? Can you explain that?


I am not a specialist cross boards, and only really know a bit of Asus (still learning every day) maybe someone with more experience in MSI can chin in..
Every Manufacturer has pretty much different naming for same thing, and even when they are the same (Asus - Gigabyte) they do different things....


----------



## ksmb

he he...its quite fun that people STILL messing with the Uncore/(cache)...overclocking Intels CPU has been pretty much the same the last ~4-5 years
....*CORE IS KING & GOOD CPU cooler* (you probably dont need anymore then so)

BUT after all....set the CORE-voltage and stock Uncore(Ring bus) speed. || (also, turn off ALL c-states BUT leave EIST(speedstep) enabled, (you dont want your new expensive Kaby Lake CPU running 100%, 24/7)

pss...for you who is new with Overcloking...ramp up the Uncore speed ex. from 3500Mhz to 4300Mhz makes more harm then good..why ? (because its just not about the L-Cache, etc,...it also because higher Mhz/voltage on some parts gives bad conductivity & creates weird electronic faults inside the chip after some time)

its pretty much the same like the GPU....dont mess with the GPU voltage (sure if you just want the most crazy FPS in games and change GPUs every year..go for it


----------



## Aganor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ksmb*
> 
> he he...its quite fun that people STILL messing with the Uncore/(cache)...overclocking Intels CPU has been pretty much the same the last ~4-5 years
> ....*CORE IS KING & GOOD CPU cooler* (you probably dont need anymore then so)
> 
> BUT after all....set the CORE-voltage and stock Uncore(Ring bus) speed. || (also, turn off ALL c-states BUT leave EIST(speedstep) enabled, (you dont want your new expensive Kaby Lake CPU running 100%, 24/7)


Disabling C-STATE doesnt make more power consuption on IDLE?
I have C-STATES on and EIST and on idle my system only disipates 60w.
Disabling C-STATES wont make it worse on IDLE?


----------



## dirtyred

Yes it will. Disabling C-States while aiming for low power usage makes no sense.

I don't think changing voltage on GPU does much harm. It will become obsolete before it degrades, typically in 2-3 years, then it won't worth much anyways.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> *Q Code 55 definitely caused by mem and usually not enough V on DIMM*
> CPUz and AISuite is just a software glitch, and usually its not a good idea to keep more than 1 monitoring software open at the same time as they are pooling the same sensors and can bug the system.
> 
> EDIT: Also it could be that you use your RGB ram with aura sync...
> G.Skill RGB Ram has caused some problems lately cause of the way they manage the led on the modules ...and lead to SPD corruption.


I hope so my 16gb kit ran fine with XMP enabled but this 32gb kit (both are 3600mhz g skill rgb trident Z kits) keeps occasionally giving ERROR code 55 on cold boot & when I restart it posts normal. I set timings manually instead of using XMP
and bumped dram voltage up to 1.375v and it didnt produce error code 55 for like 7 or 8 consecutive cold boots so I "think" it improved.
Do you think part of the problem could be that the Asus bios is so new that memory stability will be improved in future versions so that the g skill rgb ram will work better with default XMP settings? Or is it more likely that its having trouble with stability
cause its a 32gb kit as opposed to 16gb?

I only opened both monitoring programs to show screenshot of discrepancy, I know that using multiple ones can cause issues.

My first 16gb kit got corrupted cause of Asus Aura software so I returned it & upgraded to a 32gb kit and I made sure to uninstall Aura before I installed the new ram so it wouldnt corrupt my new kit. Now Im concerned & wondering if I should have
just bought a fast 32gb kit withOUT RGB cause it seems this software wont be updated to a safe working version any time soon. They promised working software by February! What a disaster


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Something you don't see in *almost* any game. Notably Witcher 3 seems to utilize AVX instructions. I think I saw Hearts of Iron 4 drop my clocks to AVX levels as well, but that I'm not entirely certain was due to AVX.
> I would check if you have any CPU Power limit settings in BIOS, for example my motherboard defaults to 91W (TDP for 7700K), with the beefy overclock you're running you're more than likely hitting that even on high workloads, causing cpu throttling
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks I'll poke around and see if I missed a power setting. Ever heard of HWMonitor not launching, even when the rest of my benchmarks will run through stable? I kept bumping my vcore up just to make HWMonitor work
Click to expand...

Somestimes HWMonitor is slow to load for me. Also, the newest version of CPUz won't run for me. The Asrock version does work, however. Haven't quite figured out why.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> I hope so my 16gb kit ran fine with XMP enabled but this 32gb kit (both are 3600mhz g skill rgb trident Z kits) keeps occasionally giving ERROR code 55 on cold boot & when I restart it posts normal. I set timings manually instead of using XMP
> and bumped dram voltage up to 1.375v and it didnt produce error code 55 for like 7 or 8 consecutive cold boots so I "think" it improved.
> Do you think part of the problem could be that the Asus bios is so new that memory stability will be improved in future versions so that the g skill rgb ram will work better with default XMP settings? Or is it more likely that its having trouble with stability
> cause its a 32gb kit as opposed to 16gb?
> 
> I only opened both monitoring programs to show screenshot of discrepancy, I know that using multiple ones can cause issues.
> 
> My first 16gb kit got corrupted cause of Asus Aura software so I returned it & upgraded to a 32gb kit and I made sure to uninstall Aura before I installed the new ram so it wouldnt corrupt my new kit. Now Im concerned & wondering if I should have
> just bought a fast 32gb kit withOUT RGB cause it seems this software wont be updated to a safe working version any time soon. They promised working software by February! What a disaster


RAM is very CPU bound....I had 2 CPU's so far...

with the first one, RAM rune fine at 1.395....(I am in 32Gb ram chart in the Dram thread on this forum)
same RAM kit...on same MB ..just with different CPU needs 1.445 now.....


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> RAM is very CPU bound....I had 2 CPU's so far...
> 
> with the first one, RAM rune fine at 1.395....(I am in 32Gb ram chart in the Dram thread on this forum)
> same RAM kit...on same MB ..just with different CPU needs 1.445 now.....


Are you saying it needs 1.395v / 1.445v to run XMP or overclocked? What kit?

Did your first cpu die?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Are you saying it needs 1.395v / 1.445v to run XMP or overclocked? What kit?
> 
> Did your first cpu die?


OC to 3766 16-16-16-28 1t

First CPU dyed ..
Kit is G.Skill F4-3200C15D-32GTZ


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> typo? Where would I find the "vdoop" setting in BIOS?


look for *load line compensation* in bios.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> I hope so my 16gb kit ran fine with XMP enabled but this 32gb kit (both are 3600mhz g skill rgb trident Z kits) keeps occasionally giving ERROR code 55 on cold boot & when I restart it posts normal. I set timings manually instead of using XMP
> and bumped dram voltage up to 1.375v and it didnt produce error code 55 for like 7 or 8 consecutive cold boots so I "think" it improved.
> Do you think part of the problem could be that the Asus bios is so new that memory stability will be improved in future versions so that the g skill rgb ram will work better with default XMP settings? Or is it more likely that its having trouble with stability
> cause its a 32gb kit as opposed to 16gb?
> 
> I only opened both monitoring programs to show screenshot of discrepancy, I know that using multiple ones can cause issues.
> 
> My first 16gb kit got corrupted cause of Asus Aura software so I returned it & upgraded to a 32gb kit and I made sure to uninstall Aura before I installed the new ram so it wouldnt corrupt my new kit. Now Im concerned & wondering if I should have
> just bought a fast 32gb kit withOUT RGB cause it seems this software wont be updated to a safe working version any time soon. They promised working software by February! What a disaster


55 basically means that the system thinks there is no ram installed, or bad ram. before jacking vdimm, tune vsa (stay below 1.35V while tuning). once you get rid of the 55s back down on VSA and slowly increase vdimm for boot (you can run a lower Eventual vdimm - you just need to get the sticks through training).


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> OC to 3766 16-16-16-28 1t
> 
> First CPU dyed ..
> Kit is G.Skill F4-3200C15D-32GTZ


wOW You got 32gb of 3200mhz ram oc'ed to 3766? & with those tight of timings thats some damn good ram

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> look for *load line compensation* in bios.
> 55 basically means that the system thinks there is no ram installed, or bad ram. before jacking vdimm, tune vsa (stay below 1.35V while tuning). once you get rid of the 55s back down on VSA and slowly increase vdimm for boot (you can run a lower Eventual vdimm - you just need to get the sticks through training).


So you think I should increase system agent only not vccio?

Have another question what does DMI voltage do exactly? cant find much info


----------



## ksmb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Yes it will. Disabling C-States while aiming for low power usage makes no sense.
> 
> I don't think changing voltage on GPU does much harm. It will become obsolete before it degrades, typically in 2-3 years, then it won't worth much anyways.


FIRST OF ALL IT MATTER....for ex 7700k
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aganor*
> 
> Disabling C-STATE doesnt make more power consuption on IDLE?
> I have C-STATES on and EIST and on idle my system only disipates 60w.
> Disabling C-STATES wont make it worse on IDLE?


well...............
maybe you should do a crash course "one to one" overclocking first ?
*7700K;* AIDA64, (max overall Temp 88C, which remains under TJmax), @5.0Ghz at 1.37V =



Load Optimized CPU OC Setting: Turbo 5.0 GHz
CPU BCLK: 100.00 MHz
DRAM Frequency: DDR4-3000 MHz
DRAM Timing: 15-15-15-35-2T (XMP Profile #1)
CPU Core Voltage: 1.40v
CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled
CPU Load-line Calibration: Level 2
CPU C States: Disabled


----------



## Aganor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ksmb*
> 
> he he...its quite fun that people STILL messing with the Uncore/(cache)...overclocking Intels CPU has been pretty much the same the last ~4-5 years
> ....*CORE IS KING & GOOD CPU cooler* (you probably dont need anymore then so)
> 
> BUT after all....set the CORE-voltage and stock Uncore(Ring bus) speed. || (also, turn off ALL c-states BUT leave EIST(speedstep) enabled, (you dont want your new expensive Kaby Lake CPU running 100%, 24/7)


Disabling C-STATE doesnt make more power consuption on IDLE?
I have C-STATES on and EIST and on idle my system only disipates 60w.
Disabling C-STATES
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ksmb*
> 
> 
> FIRST OF ALL IT MATTER....for ex 7700k
> well...............
> maybe you should do a crash course "one to one" overclocking first ?
> *7700K;* AIDA64, (max overall Temp 88C, which remains under TJmax), @5.0Ghz at 1.37V =
> 
> 
> 
> Load Optimized CPU OC Setting: Turbo 5.0 GHz
> CPU BCLK: 100.00 MHz
> DRAM Frequency: DDR4-3000 MHz
> DRAM Timing: 15-15-15-35-2T (XMP Profile #1)
> CPU Core Voltage: 1.40v
> CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled
> CPU Load-line Calibration: Level 2
> CPU C States: Disabled


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ksmb*
> 
> 
> FIRST OF ALL IT MATTER....for ex 7700k
> well...............
> maybe you should do a crash course "one to one" overclocking first ?
> *7700K;* AIDA64, (max overall Temp 88C, which remains under TJmax), @5.0Ghz at 1.37V =
> 
> 
> 
> Load Optimized CPU OC Setting: Turbo 5.0 GHz
> CPU BCLK: 100.00 MHz
> DRAM Frequency: DDR4-3000 MHz
> DRAM Timing: 15-15-15-35-2T (XMP Profile #1)
> CPU Core Voltage: 1.40v
> CPU Spread Spectrum: Disabled
> CPU Load-line Calibration: Level 2
> CPU C States: Disabled


Why would i take a course for this? I'm only asking if disabling C-STATES and having EIST ON would make my idle consumption worse than having C-STATE + EIST?

I already OCed my CPU to 5.0Ghz @1.37 LLC 4 stable BUT i need really low IDLE power draw


----------



## becks

@Jpmboy I need you buddy on this one...

Picture this...

1.395+llc 6 = 1.408 OS
5.2 Core / 4.8 Uncore / 2 Avx

I pass OCCT 2h...
I restart, OC ram to 3733...(16-16-16-28 1t my old stable profile...)

I up ram V to 1.425...CPU 1.405+llc 6

I pass 2h Gsat...

I restart...
Now I fail Gsat, or OCCT....
I look at the asrock timings, nothing changed....
I twek some more (V-core, V-DIM, SA, VCCIO)

I get 2h Gsat Stable, without restart....I open OCCT...Error Core 3 or 2....within 2-5 min....***!!
Till now I tweaked everything down and I am almost sure its the fact my pll oc was down to 0.600 (lvl 0)....so I upped it up to 1.152 (lvl 5) now and still testing....but I am so confused...

Any ideas from your experience ?!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> I found some power settings I hadn't touched, seems to have done the trick in AIDA64 so far. Except HWMonitor won't launch, but from what I can tell from Intel XTU I'm running at 5Ghz on all cores doing an AVX load.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have a ton of experience overclocking, so I'm linking what my XTU is showing. I am doing the settings through the BIOS though, not through XTU.
> I haven't actually seen any LLC settings as an option through my BIOS...? Can you explain that?


What were the power settings you hadn't touched?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aganor*
> 
> Disabling C-STATE doesnt make more power consuption on IDLE?
> I have C-STATES on and EIST and on idle my system only disipates 60w.
> Disabling C-STATES wont make it worse on IDLE?


When idle I save 15 watts at the wall with all power saving features on.


----------



## MaKeN

@becks for some reason i fail occt in 2 mins at 1.44 and can pass 8 h rb at 1.41v , that was never before. For me , i wont do occt anymore it made me think cpu degraded


----------



## encrypted11

While C states and other power saving features only save a miniscule amount of power enough for improving notebook battery life, the effects of speedshift/ c/p states + adaptive voltage are pretty substantial in the area of temps.

I was able to run a overclocked 6700K at exactly ambient temps during low load andnidles without factoring small fluctuations. Back when I was using a mediocre H80i V2 + single noctua NF-F12 1500rpm on a Gigabyte Z170MX gaming 5.

When I moved on to the Asus M8I, I was never able to achieve the same idle temps
(BIOS 2202 and earlier at Z170MX G5 + 8-10C) since ASUS completely ommitted HWP support in BIOS. When it was implemented with 3101 or 3201 beta, I was able to get my old idles back.

The DPC latency on speedshift state switching in Skylake and Kabylake are so minimal that they're hardly reflected on LatencyMon. All I get is just mild WiFi driver + small dxgkrnl DPC latency (expected behaviour) in some occassions and are still within 300us.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> While C states and other power saving features only save a miniscule amount of power enough for improving notebook battery life, the effects of speedshift/ c/p states + adaptive voltage are pretty substantial in the area of temps.
> 
> *I was able to run a overclocked 6700K at exactly ambient temps during low load* andnidles without factoring small fluctuations. Back when I was using a mediocre H80i V2 + single noctua NF-F12 1500rpm on a Gigabyte Z170MX gaming 5.
> 
> When I moved on to the Asus M8I, I was never able to achieve the same idle temps
> (BIOS 2202 and earlier at Z170MX G5 + 8-10C) since ASUS completely ommitted HWP support in BIOS. When it was implemented with 3101 or 3201 beta, I was able to get my old idles back.
> 
> The DPC latency on speedshift state switching in Skylake and Kabylake are so minimal that they're hardly reflected on LatencyMon. All I get is just mild WiFi driver + small dxgkrnl DPC latency (expected behaviour) in some occassions and are still within 300us.


I find that very hard to believe


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I find that very hard to believe


These were my last screenies of my 6700K (L548B994) before I sold it for attempt #2 on Kaby Lake (after the issues I had with my last chip).









That's the ambient temp.

Proper enablement of speedshift as per Asus Elmor's recommendation
http://forum.hwbot.org/showpost.php?p=474774&postcount=2

But I'm currently sitting on a L706B693 7700K delid+relid that does 5.1 about 1.38+V LLC5 stable with the same BIOS settings with the exception of vCore, it runs ~+10C hotter on idle.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> These were my last screenies of my 6700K (L548B994) before I sold it for attempt #2 on Kaby Lake (after the issues I had with my last chip).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's the ambient temp.
> 
> Proper enablement of speedshift as per Asus Elmor's recommendation
> http://forum.hwbot.org/showpost.php?p=474774&postcount=2
> 
> But I'm currently sitting on a L706B693 7700K delid+relid that does 5.1 about 1.38+V LLC5 stable with the same BIOS settings with the exception of vCore, it runs ~+10C hotter on idle.


At best your idle temps will be a couple of degrees above ambient, you are making a false claim especially given relatively poor cooling setup you have. I have way more radiator surface area than you have, see time stamp on both pictures above. My ambient temp is 14.7 degrees C my lowest CPU core temp is 17 degrees C neither are 100% accurate but it proves my point.


----------



## encrypted11

Also if the frequency readouts seem confusing, they're a result of multicore enhancement.

In the screenshot the chip was 4.7GHz base turbo multiplier, peaks at 4.9GHz.

When overclocking with Intel turboboost rules (modifying per core multipliers than sync all cores), it is possible to stack the effects with default turboboost or board vendor's multicore enhancement.

I believe someone around said that wasn't possible. It actually works.

http://valid.x86.fr/ev0qcc
Single threaded /low load scores are nearly at 5GHz 7700K levels while heavy multithread scores are at 4.7GHz levels from the automatic underclock.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Also if the frequency readouts seem confusing, they're a result of multicore enhancement.
> 
> In the screenshot the chip was 4.7GHz base turbo multiplier, peaks at 4.9GHz.
> 
> When overclocking with Intel turboboost rules (modifying per core multipliers than sync all cores), it is possible to stack the effects with default turboboost or board vendor's multicore enhancement.
> 
> I believe someone around said that wasn't possible. It actually works.
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/ev0qcc
> Single threaded /low load scores are nearly at 5GHz 7700K levels while heavy multithread scores are at 4.7GHz levels from the automatic underclock.


Bottom line no ambient cooling solution is ever 100% efficient no matter how much radiator surface area or fan speed you have. What you claim is false in regards to temperatures vs ambient


----------



## encrypted11

In the particular screenshot, dual servo gentle typhoon GT2150s were mounted on the H80i V2 radiator.

They're in close proximity of a D15's heat dissipation compared to the poor stock fans.
But you don't have to take my word for it if you feel it is improperly phrased.

Bottom line, *they're sitting within a couple of centigrades from ambient temps on low load depending on when the sensor polls the data. (e.g. web browsing)* if you feel these clarifications are needed (but the hwinfo64 sensor readings are stamped on the screenie).


----------



## CH4OAddict

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> At best your idle temps will be a couple of degrees above ambient, you are making a false claim especially given relatively poor cooling setup you have. I have way more radiator surface area than you have, see time stamp on both pictures above. My ambient temp is 14.7 degrees C my lowest CPU core temp is 17 degrees C neither are 100% accurate but it proves my point.


Nice car. Yours?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CH4OAddict*
> 
> Nice car. Yours?


Nope, mine


----------



## CH4OAddict

Nice.


----------



## dirtyred

I really wanted a Mazda 3 but it's really rare around here especially in good condition. Got a VW Polo instead.


----------



## SLBoy

Hi guys, so quick noob question, my setup currently is a 7700k, maximus ix hero and gskill ripjaws 3000mhz, while trying some stuff in the UEFI, I accidently set 1.7 vcore. Obviously it didnt boot and gave me an overvoltage error.

I've been hearing this is how CPUs get killed, just want to know if it will be getting unstable because of this.

Right now seems to be stable at 4800mhz 1.24v at least for my usage, which is mostly gaming and light video editing.

Thanks in advance


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SLBoy*
> 
> Hi guys, so quick noob question, my setup currently is a 7700k, maximus ix hero and gskill ripjaws 3000mhz, while trying some stuff in the UEFI, I accidently set 1.7 vcore. Obviously it didnt boot and gave me an overvoltage error.
> 
> I've been hearing this is how CPUs get killed, just want to know if it will be getting unstable because of this.
> 
> Right now seems to be stable at 4800mhz 1.24v at least for my usage, which is mostly gaming and light video editing.
> 
> Thanks in advance


Ouch.

While that type of voltage can definitely kill a CPU, you didn't actually place any substantial load on it since you caught it at boot. Chances are it's completely fine. If it runs, don't worry about it.


----------



## dirtyred

And that's how you do extreme overclocking









Your CPU should be fine. The motherboard most probably saved your CPU. Voltage itself shouldn't kill a CPU, amperage does. For example you can use thin wires for high voltage but if you put too much amperage on it, it will get hot or even burn.


----------



## wadec22

i seem to have a decent chip. does 4.9 at 1.3v and 5ghz at 1.328v. i think the lid and/or my cooling is the limiting factor now. 4.9 at 1.3v is no prob. 5ghz at 1.328v maxed out 4hr realbench with a 88C - which seems high given it isn't as stressful as something like prime. at 5ghz idel it sits around 40C and moves to low 60s while gaming.

want to keep going but feel like i need to either de-lid or wait til i'm running a full loop again. any thoughts?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wadec22*
> 
> i seem to have a decent chip. does 4.9 at 1.3v and 5ghz at 1.34v. i think the lid and/or my cooling is the limiting factor now. 4.9 at 1.3v is no prob. 5ghz at 1.34v maxed out 4hr realbench with a 88C - which seems high given it isn't as stressful as something like prime. at 5ghz idel it sits around 40C and moves to low 60s while gaming.
> 
> want to keep going but feel like i need to either de-lid or wait til i'm running a full loop again. any thoughts?


Delid candidate i think


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Delid candidate i think


heh... are there really any 7700k's that are NOT delid candidates?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> heh... are there really any 7700k's that are NOT delid candidates?


Yes, some that don't voltage scale well or ones that require high Vcore for a relatively low frequency etc. Either way they all run hot prior to a delid.


----------



## cfortney92

So thanks to everyone's help on me I've achieved what looks like a stable overclock. My 7700k is delidded on an MSI z270i pro gaming carbon itx in a little silverstone sg13 case with CLU under the IHS and grizzly paste between the IHS and my corsair h60. I added a noctua PF12 (is that right?) to my H60 which dropped me a few more degrees.

Still having an issue though.

50x Multiplier
1.35vcore static with +.001 offset
I've disabled a bunch of different power saving features and XMP is on
I ran x264 for about 8 hours, temperatures maxed at 78-80C

Something is still forcing my vcore up to 1.38 while it's stress testing. What did I leave enabled to cause that? And also I've been playing a bunch of Playerunkown Battlegrounds, and I'm getting sudden restarts on my computing mid-game. I'm not sure if this is related to my OC or not, like I said x264 went for 8 hours straight no issues at all.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> So thanks to everyone's help on me I've achieved what looks like a stable overclock. My 7700k is delidded on an MSI z270i pro gaming carbon itx in a little silverstone sg13 case with CLU under the IHS and grizzly paste between the IHS and my corsair h60. I added a noctua PF12 (is that right?) to my H60 which dropped me a few more degrees.
> 
> Still having an issue though.
> 
> 50x Multiplier
> 1.35vcore static with +.001 offset
> I've disabled a bunch of different power saving features and XMP is on
> I ran x264 for about 8 hours, temperatures maxed at 78-80C
> 
> Something is still forcing my vcore up to 1.38 while it's stress testing. What did I leave enabled to cause that? And also I've been playing a bunch of Playerunkown Battlegrounds, and I'm getting sudden restarts on my computing mid-game. I'm not sure if this is related to my OC or not, like I said x264 went for 8 hours straight no issues at all.


Most likely your LLC is pushing up your Vcore to 1.38V keep in mind different stress tests will push up your Vcore higher than others. Try lowering your LLC if your that concerned about it. When you say sudden restarts mid game do you mean a bluescreen followed by a restart?


----------



## tabletopchair

Just got my 7700k a few days ago, set my multiplier to 48 and did not change the voltage and I ran Aida64 for about an hour without a crash. Then I changed the multiplier to 50 and the voltage to 1.26 and ran Aida64 again for an hour again with no crash. At 5 GHz temps were 70 degrees, I am not delidded. Reading through some of the results here it seems like my voltage is lower than anyone else has been needing to get to 5 GHz so I feel like I'm doing something wrong.

I do see that Aida64 is not very intensive so maybe 5 GHz at 1.26 volts won't be stable with a more stressful test, I'll try one of the others later today.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabletopchair*
> 
> Just got my 7700k a few days ago, set my multiplier to 48 and did not change the voltage and I ran Aida64 for about an hour without a crash. Then I changed the multiplier to 50 and the voltage to 1.26 and ran Aida64 again for an hour again with no crash. At 5 GHz temps were 70 degrees, I am not delidded. Reading through some of the results here it seems like my voltage is lower than anyone else has been needing to get to 5 GHz so I feel like I'm doing something wrong.
> 
> I do see that Aida64 is not very intensive so maybe 5 GHz at 1.26 volts won't be stable with a more stressful test, I'll try one of the others later today.


There are just too many unknowns here to properly comment. What you set the voltage at and what the vcore actually goes to can be very different things, though the lower temp does seem to reflect a lower voltage. It can also just be a nice chip. Keep in mind, however, that AIDA64 isn't the most stressful of tests. Try the newer prime95.









My previous 7700k (may it rest in peace) was 100% stable (including with prime95 and linpack) with 50x and 2.96V actual vcore, so it IS possible to get good overclocks with lower voltage if you happen to win the lottery...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabletopchair*
> 
> Just got my 7700k a few days ago, set my multiplier to 48 and did not change the voltage and I ran Aida64 for about an hour without a crash. Then I changed the multiplier to 50 and the voltage to 1.26 and ran Aida64 again for an hour again with no crash. At 5 GHz temps were 70 degrees, I am not delidded. Reading through some of the results here it seems like my voltage is lower than anyone else has been needing to get to 5 GHz so I feel like I'm doing something wrong.
> 
> I do see that Aida64 is not very intensive so maybe 5 GHz at 1.26 volts won't be stable with a more stressful test, I'll try one of the others later today.


You probably are not doing anything wrong by having a lower Vcore for 5.0Ghz than anyone else. Aida 64 is not a stressful test and as a result requires less Vcore to be able to pass it. Try Realbench or OCCT and see how much Vcore you need to pass those, Im not a betting man but expect to increase your Vcore to pass them.


----------



## tabletopchair

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> There are just too many unknowns here to properly comment. What you set the voltage at and what the vcore actually goes to can be very different things, though the lower temp does seem to reflect a lower voltage. It can also just be a nice chip. Keep in mind, however, that AIDA64 isn't the most stressful of tests. Try the newer prime95.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My previous 7700k (may it rest in peace) was 100% stable (including with prime95 and linpack) with 50x and 2.96V actual vcore, so it IS possible to get good overclocks with lower voltage if you happen to win the lottery...


I believe cpu-z was showing 1.275 about so you are right it was getting more voltage.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> You probably are not doing anything wrong by having a lower Vcore for 5.0Ghz than anyone else. Aida 64 is not a stressful test and as a result requires less Vcore to be able to pass it. Try Realbench or OCCT and see how much Vcore you need to pass those, Im not a betting man but expect to increase your Vcore to pass them.


Yeah now seeing that Aida 64 is an easy test I'm sure I will need more voltage for the more stressful tests. Then because I am not delidded temps will go higher, I'm using the H100i.

I will probably end up settling for 4.8 GHz because I don't want to delid.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> And that's how you do extreme overclocking
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your CPU should be fine. The motherboard most probably saved your CPU. Voltage itself shouldn't kill a CPU, amperage does. For example you can use thin wires for high voltage but if you put too much amperage on it, it will get hot or even burn.


Voltage and amperage go hand in hand. If folks increase voltage subsequently amperage increases.
Ohm's Law calculator, try 91watts with 1.33v then try 1.45v LINK: http://www.rapidtables.com/calc/electric/ohms-law-calculator.htm


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Voltage and amperage go hand in hand. If folks increase voltage subsequently amperage increases.
> Ohm's Law calculator, try 91watts with 1.33v then try 1.45v LINK: http://www.rapidtables.com/calc/electric/ohms-law-calculator.htm


I think everyone gets that. The point was there was no real load, therfore no substantial amount of current running through the chip regardless of the voltage.

I like how @Jpmboy describes it. "Voltage is potential."


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Voltage and amperage go hand in hand. If folks increase voltage subsequently amperage increases.
> Ohm's Law calculator, try 91watts with 1.33v then try 1.45v LINK: http://www.rapidtables.com/calc/electric/ohms-law-calculator.htm


huh? Wattage = Voltage * Amperage. Therefore, Amperage = Wattage/Voltage. If you increase voltage, you DECREASE amperage for the same wattage.

Ohm's law isn't about wattage. Ohm's law is about current (amperage), voltage and resistance (ohms.)

Edit: Sorry, I might have misread your post. For some reason, I read "wattage" in there when it doesn't seem to exist.







For a given RESISTANCE, if you increase voltage you do also increase amperage.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> There are just too many unknowns here to properly comment. What you set the voltage at and what the vcore actually goes to can be very different things, though the lower temp does seem to reflect a lower voltage. It can also just be a nice chip. Keep in mind, however, that AIDA64 isn't the most stressful of tests. Try the newer prime95.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My previous 7700k (may it rest in peace) was 100% stable (including with prime95 and linpack) with 50x and 2.96V actual vcore, so it IS possible to get good overclocks with lower voltage if you happen to win the lottery...


2.96v actual v.core?

you mean 1.296v?


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> 2.96v actual v.core?
> 
> you mean 1.296v?


yes. I'm just full of errors today. Too many beers, perhaps.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I think everyone gets that. The point was there was no real load, therfore no substantial amount of current running through the chip regardless of the voltage.
> 
> I like how @Jpmboy describes it. "Voltage is potential."


For the transistors in the "on" position the are receiving full voltage with amperage. Don't confuses your self with extra power required to switch the transistors on and off.




Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> huh? Wattage = Voltage * Amperage. Therefore, Amperage = Wattage/Voltage. If you increase voltage, you DECREASE amperage for the same wattage.
> 
> Ohm's law isn't about wattage. Ohm's law is about current (amperage), voltage and resistance (ohms.)
> 
> Edit: Sorry, I might have misread your post. For some reason, I read "wattage" in there when it doesn't seem to exist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For a given RESISTANCE, if you increase voltage you do also increase amperage.


Take a look at the link I posted it will explain it self when you try it. LINK: http://www.rapidtables.com/calc/electric/ohms-law-calculator.htm


----------



## SSIV

Hello! Time for second post!

This time [email protected] achievement. Don't ask me how, but it's stable: http://imgur.com/zYWhaLE
Nice side-effect: Samsung 960 Pro's IOPS is scaling with BCLK increase.


EDIT: 1.375vcore in BIOS


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Don't confuses your self


I'm not "confuses" with anything anything, but thanks for the continued linking of information you find elsewhere. It did nothing to change the point. The video actually supports the point.


----------



## Forecast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> These were my last screenies of my 6700K (L548B994) before I sold it for attempt #2 on Kaby Lake (after the issues I had with my last chip).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's the ambient temp.
> 
> Proper enablement of speedshift as per Asus Elmor's recommendation
> http://forum.hwbot.org/showpost.php?p=474774&postcount=2
> 
> But I'm currently sitting on a L706B693 7700K delid+relid that does 5.1 about 1.38+V LLC5 stable with the same BIOS settings with the exception of vCore, it runs ~+10C hotter on idle.


I've seen similar results, but I've never been sure exactly why or if it was inaccurate.

If I have all my c-states enabled + speedshift I've seen my 7700k idle at 20-22c. Ambient temperature was around 21-22c.

I don't know if it is a glitch or not. H100i v2 in push/pull with two GT 2150s & two Corsair ML120 pros.

I've had this occur on both a z270 Taichi & a z270 Fatal1ty. I wasn't sure if it was some type of Asrock glitch or what.

If I disable c-states I see an idle of 25-28c which seems proper for the ambient temperature I listed above.


----------



## Forecast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> 
> 
> Here's another quick run @51auto w/3466
> 
> Should I start increasing my uncore? It's only at 42. Also, should I lower my AVX? It's currently at 3. I'd like to find the maximum for everything and then work my way to stability.
> 
> Thanks again.
> 
> Ya'll have a great and safe Memorial Day weekend.


I think you should look at your case airflow. You are seeing some pretty big swings in your case temps. Particularly noticeable in seeing your drives go up 4-5 degrees celsius while running Realbench.

It looks like from a prior post you are running an NVME drive, and I'm assuming that is your boot drive. No reason for your mechanical drives to see such an increase from Realbench. Your memory temps show a similar increase as do your system temps.

Id argue you need to take a hard look at your overall airflow and case cooling. How many cases fans do you have? Where are they located and which ones are set to exhaust/intake?

I don't think you are getting the full results you could get from your delid because you either have hot air lingering in your case, not enough cool air coming in, or both.

I have the same MB and CPU, with several mechanical drives, two NVME drives, and a similar OC. I never see that kind of increase in disk temps or mobo/sys temps like you are seeing.

Address your case fan setup and airflow and I bet you will see significant improvements.


----------



## Forecast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SSIV*
> 
> Hello! My first post on this forum!
> 
> Kraken X62, Kryonaut Conductonaut, delidded&relidded, zero AVX offset, fixed frequency, 1.370v fixed voltage.
> 
> Doesn't go above 70C
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: http://imgur.com/PC8hp05


Your overall Passmark results are what I would expect of your OC except for your SSE results. A 637 seems low for an OC in excess of 5.1GHZ.

Either you are bumping into some throttling or something else is awry. You said no AVX offset, so you should be hitting more than 637. As an example, I am seeing 682 on SSE results with a 5.0 OC. Which makes sense as all my other CPU sub-scores are below yours to the extent one would expect. Except for SSE.

I have noticed something similar before when I didn't have my voltage high enough and/or didn't have Windows power management set to High Performance. My SSE test was maxing out at... oddly enough 637.

You may see a MUCH higher Passmark if you tweak a bit to see if you need more VCORE or adjust your Windows power plan. You can set Passmark to keep the "best score" instead of the newest score and re-run your SSE test until you get more appropriate results. After all, you should be closer to 700 than 600 with a 5.1GHz OC.

What changes have you had to make with your memory, GPU or other peripherals to use a 125mhz or 133mhz bus speed? Any stability concerns?

I'm with you on the NVME performance increase from a higher bus as I can't run NVME in Raid unless I'm going to switch to using a hardware RAID card for my 2.5 ssds in RAID 0. 2 NVME drives in Raid 0 are going to come close to saturating the PCH. Right now I am using two Samsung 960s on PCI cards and no NVME RAID. But since I have a 1080TI coming, I'm going to have to figure out a solution because my GPU is being forced down to x8 speeds. Not about to drop $1200-$1500 on X299 just to get additional PCI lanes.

Does anyone know what can be pulled off with higher bus speeds to overcome DMI limitations or is just the peripheral itself impacted?

Keep us posted!


----------



## Forecast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cfortney92*
> 
> I found some power settings I hadn't touched, seems to have done the trick in AIDA64 so far. Except HWMonitor won't launch, but from what I can tell from Intel XTU I'm running at 5Ghz on all cores doing an AVX load.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have a ton of experience overclocking, so I'm linking what my XTU is showing. I am doing the settings through the BIOS though, not through XTU.
> I haven't actually seen any LLC settings as an option through my BIOS...? Can you explain that?


If you DON'T have XTU open or running so you have a problem with HWINFO loading? Certain monitoring software and/or tuning software can cause conflicts with each other.

I have noticed this personally with HWMonitor, Asrock A-Tuning, and Corsair Link. I have experienced lagging data, HWMonitor refusing to load or refusing to display sensor data, BSODs, etc.

I can't find the thread right now, but I've seen people reference how certain software addresses the kernel, and two programs with similar methods or that use a certain way to pull info can create a conflict.

What monitor or tuning software do you have running (even as a service), when you try to load HWInfo?

Try to access it without any other monitoring software or tweaking utilities running and see if you can.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Voltage and amperage go hand in hand. If folks increase voltage subsequently amperage increases.
> Ohm's Law calculator, try 91watts with 1.33v then try 1.45v LINK: http://www.rapidtables.com/calc/electric/ohms-law-calculator.htm


Well, I completely agree with you but would phrase it in differently to be accurate. Ohm's law states that the current is equal to the power divided by the voltage: I = P / V. Or The current is equal to the voltage divided by the resistance: I = V / R.

So even if he increased the voltage substantially above "safe" levels, in order to fry the CPU he also needs high power (high CPU usage). His motherboard threw an error and stopped POSTing in order to prevent that. In order to kill a CPU according to Intel's specs you need 1.52 V and 100 A, the amperage being the more important factor and in order to hit that 100 A he needs really high CPU usage that doesn't happen during POST.

In other words if resistance is constant and you increase voltage the result is increased current.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I think everyone gets that. The point was there was no real load, therfore no substantial amount of current running through the chip regardless of the voltage.
> 
> I like how @Jpmboy describes it. "Voltage is potential."


As an electrician and electronics enthusiast this statement is absolutely correct.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> I've seen similar results, but I've never been sure exactly why or if it was inaccurate.
> 
> If I have all my c-states enabled + speedshift I've seen my 7700k idle at 20-22c. Ambient temperature was around 21-22c.
> 
> I don't know if it is a glitch or not. H100i v2 in push/pull with two GT 2150s & two Corsair ML120 pros.
> 
> I've had this occur on both a z270 Taichi & a z270 Fatal1ty. I wasn't sure if it was some type of Asrock glitch or what.
> 
> If I disable c-states I see an idle of 25-28c which seems proper for the ambient temperature I listed above.


Could be CPU PLL Voltage. On my z270 k6 fatality, I can see idle temps at or below ambient temp with 1.1V


----------



## cfortney92

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Most likely your LLC is pushing up your Vcore to 1.38V keep in mind different stress tests will push up your Vcore higher than others. Try lowering your LLC if your that concerned about it. When you say sudden restarts mid game do you mean a bluescreen followed by a restart?


Thanks for the reply - I figured it could be an LLC issue. Unfortunately the one major criticism my board received in reviews (MSI Z270i Pro Gaming Carbon itx) is that it has basically no LLC options in the BIOS.

The issue with Playerunknown Battlegrounds might be completely game-related, the game itself has all sorts of bugs. My brother and I were playing at the same time, but he wasn't experiencing any sudden restarts. So I set everything back to default in the BIOS, and the issue continued in the game. I received a BSOD one time, it said it was some kind of MEMORY_EXCEPTION (I think?). Otherwise, it's just a sudden restart with no errors. I ran Memtest86 last night on my RAM at default speeds (2133) and passed with no errors. I'm at work right now, but I have Memtest running at home with XMP enabled this time (3200MHz). I'll see when I get home if it passes.

I am concerned that my power supply is going, I'm somewhat kicking myself for having a $1600 machine but cheaping out and going for a Rosewill 650W 80+ Bronze PSU. But you'd think it would've hard reset with my OC on running x264 for 8 hours if the PSU were an issue. My plan is to run all of my benchmarks at stock, and then put the OC back on and run them again. If there's no issues, I'll chalk it up to the game. Either way, thinking about ordering a Silverstone SFX 600W 80+Gold anyway just to be safe. Unless someone has a better recommendation for a super reliable SFX PSU.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> 
> 
> Here's another quick run @51auto w/3466
> 
> Should I start increasing my uncore? It's only at 42. Also, should I lower my AVX? It's currently at 3. I'd like to find the maximum for everything and then work my way to stability.
> 
> Thanks again.
> 
> Ya'll have a great and safe Memorial Day weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> I think you should look at your case airflow. You are seeing some pretty big swings in your case temps. Particularly noticeable in seeing your drives go up 4-5 degrees celsius while running Realbench.
> 
> It looks like from a prior post you are running an NVME drive, and I'm assuming that is your boot drive. No reason for your mechanical drives to see such an increase from Realbench. Your memory temps show a similar increase as do your system temps.
> 
> Id argue you need to take a hard look at your overall airflow and case cooling. How many cases fans do you have? Where are they located and which ones are set to exhaust/intake?
> 
> I don't think you are getting the full results you could get from your delid because you either have hot air lingering in your case, not enough cool air coming in, or both.
> 
> I have the same MB and CPU, with several mechanical drives, two NVME drives, and a similar OC. I never see that kind of increase in disk temps or mobo/sys temps like you are seeing.
> 
> Address your case fan setup and airflow and I bet you will see significant improvements.
Click to expand...

Currently the side panel is off so airflow is not optimal. Once I'm sure my mount is good, I'll put it back on. Thanks for the heads up. I'm not stable with Occt, tried an eight hour run and only got through 2. I think I had my volts at 1.38 constant with pll @3. AVX off. Max core temp hit 77. Not sure if I should bump the voltage more or if there is something else I'm missing.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> As an electrician and electronics enthusiast this statement is absolutely correct.


That statement is not correct. Load with a electric motor it would be but not a transistor. A transistor is a on and off switch. When the CPU is at Idle the transistors are on passing current approximately 50% of the time in the on position, however the same voltage passes through the transistor all the time. When the transistors are on 90% of the time with full load the voltage stays the same and there is more current do to the transistors being on more often. The transistors are solid state and when in the on position full voltage and current pass to and through the transistors.

In a FET, the drain-to-source current flows via a conducting channel that connects the source region to the drain region. The conductivity is varied by the electric field that is produced when a voltage is applied between the gate and source terminals; hence the current flowing between the drain and source is controlled by the voltage applied between the gate and source. As the gate-source voltage (VGS) is increased, the drain-source current (IDS) increases exponentially for VGS below threshold, and then at a roughly quadratic rate (IGS ∝ (VGS − VT)2) (where VT is the threshold voltage at which drain current begins)[41] in the "space-charge-limited" region above threshold. A quadratic behavior is not observed in modern devices, for example, at the 65 nm technology node.[42] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor


----------



## scracy

Nevermind not worth it


----------



## nrpeyton

Anyone ever had a CPU from the intel tuning plan?

Are they generally lower grade? (I.E poor overclockers)? Or simply brand new sealed CPU's (I.E. same as playing the lottery again)?


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Anyone ever had a CPU from the intel tuning plan?
> 
> Are they generally lower grade? (I.E poor overclockers)? Or simply brand new sealed CPU's (I.E. same as playing the lottery again)?


I thought the "tuning plan" was just like an extra warranty. You buy the CPU, and then you buy the plan on top of it... (Like... buying a car... and then buying an extended warranty for the car. You don't get a different car just for buying the extended warranty.)


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> I don't think you are getting the full results you could get from your delid because you either have hot air lingering in your case, not enough cool air coming in, or both.
> 
> I have the same MB and CPU, with several mechanical drives, two NVME drives, and a similar OC. I never see that kind of increase in disk temps or mobo/sys temps like you are seeing.
> 
> Address your case fan setup and airflow and I bet you will see significant improvements.


Also, I haven't delided this chip. It's stock.

Just closed the case back up to run some numbers. Running OCCT so I won't be monitoring the drives, but it runs much cooler when it's closed.

Any tips you have with this 7700k/Taichi would be appreciated. There's not a lot of helpful info on the interwebz about it. I haven't had a real build that I was overclocking since the 4790k day one release; so I've missed quite a bit.


----------



## SSIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> Your overall Passmark results are what I would expect of your OC except for your SSE results. A 637 seems low for an OC in excess of 5.1GHZ.
> 
> Either you are bumping into some throttling or something else is awry. You said no AVX offset, so you should be hitting more than 637. As an example, I am seeing 682 on SSE results with a 5.0 OC. Which makes sense as all my other CPU sub-scores are below yours to the extent one would expect. Except for SSE.
> 
> I have noticed something similar before when I didn't have my voltage high enough and/or didn't have Windows power management set to High Performance. My SSE test was maxing out at... oddly enough 637.
> 
> You may see a MUCH higher Passmark if you tweak a bit to see if you need more VCORE or adjust your Windows power plan. You can set Passmark to keep the "best score" instead of the newest score and re-run your SSE test until you get more appropriate results. After all, you should be closer to 700 than 600 with a 5.1GHz OC.
> 
> What changes have you had to make with your memory, GPU or other peripherals to use a 125mhz or 133mhz bus speed? Any stability concerns?
> 
> I'm with you on the NVME performance increase from a higher bus as I can't run NVME in Raid unless I'm going to switch to using a hardware RAID card for my 2.5 ssds in RAID 0. 2 NVME drives in Raid 0 are going to come close to saturating the PCH. Right now I am using two Samsung 960s on PCI cards and no NVME RAID. But since I have a 1080TI coming, I'm going to have to figure out a solution because my GPU is being forced down to x8 speeds. Not about to drop $1200-$1500 on X299 just to get additional PCI lanes.
> 
> Does anyone know what can be pulled off with higher bus speeds to overcome DMI limitations or is just the peripheral itself impacted?
> 
> Keep us posted!


Followed your advice, and: Disabled CFG lock, thermal limits, set some voltage line settings to prefer 'current stability' instead of 'thermal balance', Windows power profile is 'Performance', and bumped vcore to 1.4.
So, now it's 133BCLK * 39 = 5187MHz, and RAM at 133*27=3591MHz with 16-17-17-36-2T timing. Result: CPU-Z 1.79.1 still reports single-thread score of 609~614, but Passmark went http://imgur.com/pn2jAuk. Also did a Time Spy bench: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/1836097

Haven't had to do anything special to retain GPU/NVME stability at 133BCLK, apart from common-sense settings like disabling EIST, Turbo, iGPU etc.
The currently stock clocked EVGA GTX 1080 doesn't benefit much from the extra BCLK anyway, perhaps apart from draw-calls per second http://www.3dmark.com/compare/aot/215106/aot/213880/aot/188993 and an NVME IOPS bump of ~10-14k
Main reason for stability is likely because the MSI motherboard is good, and a minimal amount of connected peripherals i.e. NVME, GPU, and a USB-connected Kraken X62 pump.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Anyone ever had a CPU from the intel tuning plan?
> 
> Are they generally lower grade? (I.E poor overclockers)? Or simply brand new sealed CPU's (I.E. same as playing the lottery again)?


I just replaced a 5960x under the standard warranty and buddy let me tell you that what they send me in return is a beauty!! My old 5960x was no slouch, but I was able to bust out a 2001cb multi / 200cb single at 4.9 GHz with just 1.34v on the core. I'll be running some higher clocks/voltage once I get a little more used to the new chip. For now, I run it at 4.6 core / 4.2 cache daily at 1.23v / 1.11v and she barely warms up.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I just replaced a 5960x under the standard warranty and buddy let me tell you that what they send me in return is a beauty!! My old 5960x was no slouch, but I was able to bust out a 2001cb multi / 200cb single at 4.9 GHz with just 1.34v on the core. I'll be running some higher clocks/voltage once I get a little more used to the new chip. For now, I run it at 4.6 core / 4.2 cache daily at 1.23v / 1.11v and she barely warms up.


What went wrong with the old 5960x?


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I just replaced a 5960x under the standard warranty and buddy let me tell you that what they send me in return is a beauty!! My old 5960x was no slouch, but I was able to bust out a 2001cb multi / 200cb single at 4.9 GHz with just 1.34v on the core. I'll be running some higher clocks/voltage once I get a little more used to the new chip. For now, I run it at 4.6 core / 4.2 cache daily at 1.23v / 1.11v and she barely warms up.


Nice one.

The intel tuning plan is looking better than a de-lid by the day!

I'll have my fun with (and risk taking adventure) when I power mod my new 1080Ti. As it makes sense to do it.

But I don't see the point in de-lidding. When I can just purchase a tuning plan. Run at 1.45v all day long at 5Ghz. With complete peace of mind.

And complete moral freedom. As I've paid the extra premium for the risk. So it's not a freebee and it's not abusing the returns system. It's sponsored and supported by intel.

_(And intel MUST know that people will be running higher voltages to attain 5Ghz on these chips)._

Moreoever my temps won't be brilliant. But as long as I'm not actually temp throttling it *doesn't* really matter.
_I'm also coming from an 8-core AMD chip that I ran 24/7 at 1.5v + and never went over 71c. This chip might not be soldered. But it has half the cores and the voltage will still be a bit lower. So I'm sure I can live with it._


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I just replaced a 5960x under the standard warranty and buddy let me tell you that what they send me in return is a beauty!! My old 5960x was no slouch, but I was able to bust out a 2001cb multi / 200cb single at 4.9 GHz with just 1.34v on the core. I'll be running some higher clocks/voltage once I get a little more used to the new chip. For now, I run it at 4.6 core / 4.2 cache daily at 1.23v / 1.11v and she barely warms up.


Awesome







How good would it be if Intel would honour warranty with tuning plan after a delid to remove the pigeon poop, kinda a fair compromise to appease the enthusiast


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Awesome
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How good would it be if Intel would honour warranty with tuning plan after a delid to remove the pigeon poop, kinda a fair compromise to appease the enthusiast


Over at tech-power up I remember reading a one-liner about intel eventually indeed accepting a few de-lidded chips. (but only when the customer was categorically able to prove that the fault wasn't caused (or expedited) by the de-lid).


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What went wrong with the old 5960x?


The cache started failing. Became unstable at stock clocks.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Nice one.
> 
> The intel tuning plan is looking better than a de-lid by the day!
> 
> I'll have my fun with (and risk taking adventure) when I power mod my new 1080Ti. As it makes sense to do it.
> 
> But I don't see the point in de-lidding. When I can just purchase a tuning plan. Run at 1.45v all day long at 5Ghz. With complete peace of mind.
> 
> And complete moral freedom. As I've paid the extra premium for the risk. So it's not a freebee and it's not abusing the returns system. It's sponsored and supported by intel.
> 
> _(And intel MUST know that people will be running higher voltages to attain 5Ghz on these chips)._
> 
> Moreoever my temps won't be brilliant. But as long as I'm not actually temp throttling it *doesn't* really matter.
> _I'm also coming from an 8-core AMD chip that I ran 24/7 at 1.5v + and never went over 71c. This chip might not be soldered. But it has half the cores and the voltage will still be a bit lower. So I'm sure I can live with it._


Sounds like you have a plan bud! Sucks to hear that you opted not to delid, but I completely understand. I just can't help but wonder what that chip would do delidded with the 1.45v that you are willing to run.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Awesome
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How good would it be if Intel would honour warranty with tuning plan after a delid to remove the pigeon poop, kinda a fair compromise to appease the enthusiast


Pigeon poop.







+1


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The cache started failing. Became unstable at stock clocks.
> Sounds like you have a plan bud! Sucks to hear that you opted not to delid, but I completely understand. I just can't help but wonder what that chip would do delidded with the 1.45v that you are willing to run.
> Pigeon poop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +1


That's whats been making my decision so difficult. I'm not sure 1.45v is safe to run 24/7. If it was, I'd be delidding without hesitation.


----------



## coc_james

I think I've got my system stable with the CPU at 50x, 1.36, AVX 0, LLC 2, all power savers on except speed shift, XMP @3466. OCCT passed 1hr, now going for 6hrs. Max single core temp is 79 with ambient at 25. Most of the time with OCCT running the vcore is around 1.34 but does go up to 1.36.

I'd like to go further, so I tried 51x, 1.38, LLC auto, no xmp, AVX 0, but can't pass 3min of OCCT without a core error.

Any suggestions?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Nevermind not worth it











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Anyone ever had a CPU from the intel tuning plan?
> 
> Are they generally lower grade? (I.E poor overclockers)? Or simply brand new sealed CPU's (I.E. same as playing the lottery again)?


like 'done below, I replaced my 5960x a few months ago (was bought at launch... and basically punished since then, it is an X chip right? made to punish








) and the replacement runs 4.7 at <1.3V. IMC/cache on mine seems a little weaker, but very acceptable.








daily is [email protected] 1.23V. it's folding right now while typing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I just replaced a 5960x under the standard warranty and buddy let me tell you that what they send me in return is a beauty!! My old 5960x was no slouch, but I was able to bust out a 2001cb multi / 200cb single at 4.9 GHz with just 1.34v on the core. I'll be running some higher clocks/voltage once I get a little more used to the new chip. For now, I run it at 4.6 core / 4.2 cache daily at 1.23v / 1.11v and she barely warms up.


Niiiice!!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Nice one.
> 
> The intel tuning plan is looking better than a de-lid by the day!
> 
> I'll have my fun with (and risk taking adventure) when I power mod my new 1080Ti. As it makes sense to do it.
> 
> But I don't see the point in de-lidding. When I can just purchase a tuning plan. Run at 1.45v all day long at 5Ghz. With complete peace of mind.
> 
> And complete moral freedom. As I've paid the extra premium for the risk. So it's not a freebee and it's not abusing the returns system. It's sponsored and supported by intel.
> 
> _(And intel MUST know that people will be running higher voltages to attain 5Ghz on these chips)._
> 
> Moreoever my temps won't be brilliant. But as long as I'm not actually temp throttling it *doesn't* really matter.
> _I'm also coming from an 8-core AMD chip that I ran 24/7 at 1.5v + and never went over 71c. This chip might not be soldered. But it has half the cores and the voltage will still be a bit lower. So I'm sure I can live with it._


It's nice to see good moral standards.


----------



## dirtyred

It would be actually nice if Intel would either sell CPU's with upgraded TIMs (for some extra) so you don't have to delid or they would do it for you if you send it to them. I wouldn't mind paying them a few bucks if that would mean keeping the warranty.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The cache started failing. Became unstable at stock clocks.


Sorry to hear that, hope you have better luck with the processor.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> It would be actually nice if Intel would either sell CPU's with upgraded TIMs (for some extra) so you don't have to delid or they would do it for you if you send it to them. I wouldn't mind paying them a few bucks if that would mean keeping the warranty.


Or, I dunno, do it right from the beginning? It's not as if we're paying AMD prices. This is the same crap that the gaming industry does. They will start selling versions that have better TIM. It'll be an "X" instead of a "K". They'll charge 25% more for it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Or, I dunno, do it right from the beginning? It's not as if we're paying AMD prices. This is the same crap that the gaming industry does. They will start selling versions that have better TIM. It'll be an "X" instead of a "K". They'll charge 25% more for it.


shoulda been a soldered IHS...


----------



## garyd9

If you want a soldered IHS, you basically have to buy an older -E. Based on reports, even the -X chips will be using crud TIM now.


----------



## nrpeyton

Agreed,

They could make two variants.

Charge an extra 10 bux for the soldered version.


----------



## becks

Back in the game









5.2 Core / 4.8 Uncore / 1 Avx /@ 1.424 V OS under Avx / 3733 32Gb Ram Kit 16-16-16-28-1t timings







@ 1.425


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









Really started to get pissed there with the chip but up-ed Voltages and hopping for the best.

Pulling around 110W in bench tests and peaking at 70 Celsius..

Didn't imagined that just by changing the CPU so many things will change, bclk, uncore (cache), ram...was a pain in the arse (especially ram)

Think I have some PSU problems as well @cfortney92 the problem is that most test we do to determine if our CPU is stable or not do not use GPU or use to little, so we don't account for CPU+GPU usage.
Try and run 8h RB and set Luxmark to stress the GPU in the same time..


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> shoulda been a soldered IHS...


Even this new line of X series (X for Xpensive?) doesn't have soldered IHS. *** Intel?! So I'm pretty much losing hope in Coffe Lake having better TIM under the hood.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Back in the game
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Think I have some PSU problems as well @cfortney92 the problem is that most test we do to determine if our CPU is stable or not do not use GPU or use to little, so we don't account for CPU+GPU usage.
> Try and run 8h RB and set Luxmark to stress the GPU in the same time..


Welcome back! Try not to burn down the house









A reputable source of reviews is jonnyGURU. They do some really detailed measurements. Check there if you're PSU has been tested and if yes then how it performs.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Even this new line of X series (X for Xpensive?) doesn't have soldered IHS. *** Intel?! So I'm pretty much losing hope in Coffe Lake having better TIM under the hood.
> Welcome back! Try not to burn down the house
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A reputable source of reviews is jonnyGURU. They do some really detailed measurements. Check there if you're PSU has been tested and if yes then how it performs.


Only had couple of post failures due to temp limit so far, will see as time goes by what happens


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I think I've got my system stable with the CPU at 50x, 1.36, AVX 0, LLC 2, all power savers on except speed shift, XMP @3466. OCCT passed 1hr, now going for 6hrs. Max single core temp is 79 with ambient at 25. Most of the time with OCCT running the vcore is around 1.34 but does go up to 1.36.
> 
> I'd like to go further, so I tried 51x, 1.38, LLC auto, no xmp, AVX 0, but can't pass 3min of OCCT without a core error.
> 
> Any suggestions?


Passed 6hrs, max temp 79 w/25 ambient. Hopefully someone can give me some input on achieving 5.1ghz.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Passed 6hrs, max temp 79 w/25 ambient. Hopefully someone can give me some input on achieving 5.1ghz.


Some CPU's simple hit a wall at a certain freq and that's it..
My first CPU was doing 5.1/0 Avx at 1.365+llc6 but would not do 5.2 even at 1.4 v


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Back in the game
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5.2 Core / 4.8 Uncore / 1 Avx /@ 1.424 V OS under Avx / 3733 32Gb Ram Kit 16-16-16-28-1t timings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @ 1.425
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really started to get pissed there with the chip but up-ed Voltages and hopping for the best.
> 
> Pulling around 110W in bench tests and peaking at 70 Celsius..
> 
> Didn't imagined that just by changing the CPU so many things will change, bclk, uncore (cache), ram...was a pain in the arse (especially ram)
> 
> Think I have some PSU problems as well @cfortney92 the problem is that most test we do to determine if our CPU is stable or not do not use GPU or use to little, so we don't account for CPU+GPU usage.
> Try and run 8h RB and set Luxmark to stress the GPU in the same time..


Nice! I noticed your CPU PLL is less than 1v. Try changing it to 1.2v and observe the temp readings. 70c at 110w might... And I could be wrong... Be too good to be true. The temps could be closer to 90 or above; still stable enough IMO. I had mine setup like yours but a slight increase of 3c ambient changed things. That and I don't have any adaptive voltage and realbench will drop to 1.328v at 5.2 with an offset voltage that's normally around 1.424v load.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Passed 6hrs, max temp 79 w/25 ambient. Hopefully someone can give me some input on achieving 5.1ghz.
> 
> 
> 
> Some CPU's simple hit a wall at a certain freq and that's it..
> My first CPU was doing 5.1/0 Avx at 1.365+llc6 but would not do 5.2 even at 1.4 v
Click to expand...

I ain't tryin to hear that. ?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Nice! I noticed your CPU PLL is less than 1v. Try changing it to 1.2v and observe the temp readings. 70c at 110w might... And I could be wrong... Be too good to be true. The temps could be closer to 90 or above; still stable enough IMO. I had mine setup like yours but a slight increase of 3c ambient changed things. That and I don't have any adaptive voltage and realbench will drop to 1.328v at 5.2 with an offset voltage that's normally around 1.424v load.


PLL does not make a semnificative change in my temps from 0.600 to 1.2 (3-5C difference)
0.600 its what my MB is setting as default at the moment.
If I put 1.25 or up I get post warning (overheating) not even OS


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> PLL does not make a semnificative change in my temps from 0.600 to 1.2 (3-5C difference)
> 0.600 its what my MB is setting as default at the moment.
> If I put 1.25 or up I get post warning (overheating) not even OS


I meant CPU PLL not PLL OC. I can see it's around 1v in Hwinfo


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I meant CPU PLL not PLL OC. I can see it's around 1v in Hwinfo


Also defaults at those values, will increase and see what happens..


----------



## coc_james

Trying for 5.1 w/1.395,45 cache, 3466, AVX 0, LLC 2 w/an hour of OCCT. So far(5min in) hot core is 80 degrees and no crash yet. Keeping my fingers crossed.


----------



## coc_james

No sooner than I posted I got a stopped error detected.


----------



## MaKeN

For some reason new realbench would simply stop sometimes at like 5 or any minute of benching, it kinda runs but minutes wont go up and the load isnt there... it just hangs randomly with no error...
Anyone had that issue?


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> For some reason new realbench would simply stop sometimes at like 5 or any minute of benching, it kinda runs but minutes wont go up and the load isnt there... it just hangs randomly with no error...
> Anyone had that issue?


Realbench has its own low level hardware monitoring embedded that may cause conflicts with any other monitoring software you're also running. Notably msi's afterburner software and gigabyte tool have been named before but I'd refrain from running any monitoring software concurrently with RealBench, including hwmonitor, hwinfo, etc.


----------



## coc_james

Hmm, ran OCCT 6hrs last night on this tune with no problems. Played BF1 for two hours tonight, no problem. I left the computer alone and it rebooted. I checked event viewer and found bccode 0x3b. If my memory serves me, that references RAM, right? Any clues? Running memory diagnostic now.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Hmm, ran OCCT 6hrs last night on this tune with no problems. Played BF1 for two hours tonight, no problem. I left the computer alone and it rebooted. I checked event viewer and found bccode 0x3b. If my memory serves me, that references RAM, right? Any clues? Running memory diagnostic now.


I was wondering what memory diagnostics do you use?


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Hmm, ran OCCT 6hrs last night on this tune with no problems. Played BF1 for two hours tonight, no problem. I left the computer alone and it rebooted. I checked event viewer and found bccode 0x3b. If my memory serves me, that references RAM, right? Any clues? Running memory diagnostic now.
> 
> 
> 
> I was wondering what memory diagnostics do you use?
Click to expand...

Windows Memory Diagnostics


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Windows Memory Diagnostics


I like Memtest86 a little better. http://www.memtest86.com/


----------



## aohus

I'm at 4.8ghz delidded and i get terrible temperatures in prime95. is this normal? i still shoot up to 90+ Celsius. Did i delid incorrectly? using an h80i gt. I'm not even sure if you can even mess up a delid process. I used conductonaut liquid metal yet still get horrific temps. or is prime95 not a good measure? i average around 60-65c during games however.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aohus*
> 
> I'm at 4.8ghz delidded and i get terrible temperatures in prime95. is this normal? i still shoot up to 90+ Celsius. Did i delid incorrectly? using an h80i gt. I'm not even sure if you can even mess up a delid process. I used conductonaut liquid metal yet still get horrific temps. or is prime95 not a good measure? i average around 60-65c during games however.


Are you using Prime95 with AVX on.

In the Prime95 folder look for the local.txt file, add this line:
CpuSupportsAVX=0

But saying that, I'm at 4.8Ghz without deliding and I top out at 65c in gaming, 71c in Realbench, about the same with Prime95 blend (no AVX).


----------



## aohus

with avx off im getting about 80-86c after delid. i get this feeling that maybe my delid wasnt as good or my aio cooler isn't making proper contact with the CPU. i'm starting to guess the latter. so i suppose its normal for prime95 to shoot up to 95c+ even after delid if you keep AVX on ?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aohus*
> 
> with avx off im getting about 80-86c after delid. i get this feeling that maybe my delid wasnt as good or my aio cooler isn't making proper contact with the CPU. i'm starting to guess the latter. so i suppose its normal for prime95 to shoot up to 95c+ even after delid if you keep AVX on ?


Yep, Prime95 with AVX is torture for newer CPU's.
From what I understand you should have much lower temps in everything else though, you're matching my non delieded CPU.
Though I am using a Kraken x61, but it still shouldn't be that high.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Windows Memory Diagnostics
> 
> 
> 
> I like Memtest86 a little better. http://www.memtest86.com/
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I just didn't feel like making a usb drive last night. I'll do it today or tomorrow.


----------



## dirtyred

Prime95 is overkill. You will never put so much load on your CPU under normal usage. The power consumption is 10-15 W higher than with RealBench and that's already a pretty tough torture test. The only reason for using Prime95 is either you want to test your delid and cooling performance or you want to find errors really fast but the price you pay for it is high power usage and temperatures.


----------



## coc_james

Is bccode 0x3b still caused by lack of vcore?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Prime95 is overkill. You will never put so much load on your CPU under normal usage. The power consumption is 10-15 W higher than with RealBench and that's already a pretty tough torture test. The only reason for using Prime95 is either you want to test your delid and cooling performance or you want to find errors really fast but the price you pay for it is high power usage and temperatures.


My Web browser uses more Dynimc DVID thus Vcore then Prime95. Example DVID, LLC AUTO, Prime95 v28.10 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.296v, Web browsing Max 1.344v idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off 1.332v


----------



## encrypted11

Prime95 CPUSupportsAVX=0 is fine for heat torture testing and quick and dirty voltage checking.
(AVX=0 should trigger threads stopped at best on daily use overclocks that are remotely stable than BSODs)


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My Web browser uses more Dynimc DVID thus Vcore then Prime95. Example DVID, LLC AUTO, Prime95 v28.10 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.296v, Web browsing Max 1.344v idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off 1.332v


I wasn't talking about voltage level. I was talking about power usage in Watts and heat generation. The web browser uses higher Vcore because the voltage is not dropping or sagging due to heavy load. Also LLC Auto is probably level 2 (at least most of the times).


----------



## coc_james

I'm confused, AVX drops the core frequency, so how could having AVX set to 0 make it more stable and lower temps? AVX at 0 for me means that when I'm stress testing, my frequency doesn't drop. If my AVX is set to 2, my frequency drops from 5.1to 4.9 under heavy load. AVX at 0, multi at 50, OCCT stays at 5.0. Maybe my board is different or my understanding is way off.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My Web browser uses more Dynimc DVID thus Vcore then Prime95. Example DVID, LLC AUTO, Prime95 v28.10 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.296v, Web browsing Max 1.344v idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off 1.332v


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I wasn't talking about voltage level. I was talking about power usage in Watts and heat generation. The web browser uses higher Vcore because the voltage is not dropping or sagging due to heavy load. Also LLC Auto is probably level 2 (at least most of the times).


I'm using VID voltage demand (DVID). You can see that my web browser is using more voltage than at idle voltage.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm confused, AVX drops the core frequency, so how could having AVX set to 0 make it more stable and lower temps? AVX at 0 for me means that when I'm stress testing, my frequency doesn't drop. If my AVX is set to 2, my frequency drops from 5.1to 4.9 under heavy load. AVX at 0, multi at 50, OCCT stays at 5.0. Maybe my board is different or my understanding is way off.


You might have temperature or VRM power throttling going on.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm confused, AVX drops the core frequency, so how could having AVX set to 0 make it more stable and lower temps? AVX at 0 for me means that when I'm stress testing, my frequency doesn't drop. If my AVX is set to 2, my frequency drops from 5.1to 4.9 under heavy load. AVX at 0, multi at 50, OCCT stays at 5.0. Maybe my board is different or my understanding is way off.
> 
> 
> 
> You might have temperature or VRM power throttling going on.
Click to expand...

If that were the case, do you think I'd be able to pass a 6hr run of OCCT?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> If that were the case, do you think I'd be able to pass a 6hr run of OCCT?


Yes you would pass a 24/7 run with CPU throttling. CPU throttling protects the CPU and prevents hardware crashes when not overclocked.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> If that were the case, do you think I'd be able to pass a 6hr run of OCCT?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes you would pass a 24/7 run with CPU throttling. CPU throttling protects the CPU and prevents hardware crashes when not overclocked.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? This is my understanding of AVX;
"Intel has added a new feature with Kaby Lake that factors into overclocking-or rather, they brought over a feature from Broadwell-E and Xeon processors. AVX instructions can use more power and create some instability with overclocking, so Intel added an AVX offset multiplier. The values start at 0 and go down (negative), and when the CPU runs AVX instructions the multiplier will drop by the specified amount. " source http://www.pcgamer.com/kaby-lake-overclocking-tested-the-quest-for-5ghz/


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Are you sure? This is my understanding of AVX;
> "Intel has added a new feature with Kaby Lake that factors into overclocking-or rather, they brought over a feature from Broadwell-E and Xeon processors. AVX instructions can use more power and create some instability with overclocking, so Intel added an AVX offset multiplier. The values start at 0 and go down (negative), and when the CPU runs AVX instructions the multiplier will drop by the specified amount. " source http://www.pcgamer.com/kaby-lake-overclocking-tested-the-quest-for-5ghz/


I'm glad you brought up that article. Xeon processors have a locked multiple so AVX offset does not work. The article is partly false from what Intel told me when I asked. CPU throttling is different operation compared AVX offset.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I'm using VID voltage demand (DVID). You can see that my web browser is using more voltage than at idle voltage.


Even if using more voltage doesn't mean it's putting more load on the CPU then Prime95. I doubt that your browser consumes 100+ W but if so you should use a different one









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm confused, AVX drops the core frequency, so how could having AVX set to 0 make it more stable and lower temps? AVX at 0 for me means that when I'm stress testing, my frequency doesn't drop. If my AVX is set to 2, my frequency drops from 5.1to 4.9 under heavy load. AVX at 0, multi at 50, OCCT stays at 5.0. Maybe my board is different or my understanding is way off.


AVX is an instruction set. AVX offset kicks in only when AVX code is detected. *The offset is negative so if you use multi 51 and offset 2 then the result should be 49 as you said.* Only a few apps use it (3d rendering, video encoding, web servers) so unless you use any of those there's not much reason to care about it.

If using an offset causes instability it's probably because the voltage tables are not accurate (voltage requirements don't change linearly to frequency) so the only solution is to increase voltage (either the adaptive turbo or the offset). I doubt that using AVX offset reduces temperatures.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I'm using VID voltage demand (DVID). You can see that my web browser is using more voltage than at idle voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> Even if using more voltage doesn't mean it's putting more load on the CPU then Prime95. I doubt that your browser consumes 100+ W but if so you should use a different one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm confused, AVX drops the core frequency, so how could having AVX set to 0 make it more stable and lower temps? AVX at 0 for me means that when I'm stress testing, my frequency doesn't drop. If my AVX is set to 2, my frequency drops from 5.1to 4.9 under heavy load. AVX at 0, multi at 50, OCCT stays at 5.0. Maybe my board is different or my understanding is way off.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> AVX is an instruction set. AVX offset kicks in only when AVX code is detected. *The offset is negative so if you use multi 51 and offset 2 then the result should be 49 as you said.* Only a few apps use it (3d rendering, video encoding, web servers) so unless you use any of those there's not much reason to care about it.
> 
> If using an offset causes instability it's probably because the voltage tables are not accurate (voltage requirements don't change linearly to frequency) so the only solution is to increase voltage (either the adaptive turbo or the offset). I doubt that using AVX offset reduces temperatures.
Click to expand...

Okay, so I'm not losing my mind. Some of the information that came before seemed as though someone was saying that offsetting for AVX should increase temps and voltage. Or at least that's the way I read it. For me, the offset only decreases my frequency, voltage and subsequently the temperatures drop. That's also what I understood from the article I linked. Thanks Red


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Windows Memory Diagnostics


WMD is pretty useless.. .basically says that the settings will boot windows... which means little. Use HCi memtest, or enable developers mode, and turn on the windows 10 feature for Linux, then load bash and run google stressapptest - best way to set your memory. It is wahy google uses for their servers. (just Google "Windows Bash" and you'll find complete instructions). then sudo apt -get stressapptest. check the DDR4 memory stability thead for "how to run" it.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm confused, AVX drops the core frequency, so how could having AVX set to 0 make it more stable and lower temps? AVX at 0 for me means that when I'm stress testing, my frequency doesn't drop. If my AVX is set to 2, my frequency drops from 5.1to 4.9 under heavy load. AVX at 0, multi at 50, OCCT stays at 5.0. Maybe my board is different or my understanding is way off.


If I understand the problem, the system could be unstable when running a heavy non-AVX load (one way to test this is to cycle the Image Editing benmchmark in realbench like 30 times).








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Okay, so I'm not losing my mind. Some of the information that came before seemed as though someone was saying that offsetting for AVX should increase temps and voltage. Or at least that's the way I read it. For me, the offset only decreases my frequency, voltage and subsequently the temperatures drop. That's also what I understood from the article I linked. Thanks Red


AVX offset should not affect the voltage (beyond variable frequency load-based droop.


----------



## coc_james

Yes, if the AVX offset is used, along with LLC, and power management, when the frequency drops to match the offset, the voltage will also go down. That's why I don't understand how someone could have a result of a lower temp with an AVX offset of 0. My system is stable, with the exception of a power saver I need to figure out. AVX o, 50x 1.36 LLC, 3466mhz, 45 cache, 6hr OCCT had a 79 degree peak. I don't care to make my system stable using an AVX offset because it feels like it leaves a question of actual 24/7 stability.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Yes, if the AVX offset is used, along with LLC, and power management, when the frequency drops to match the offset, the voltage will also go down. That's why I don't understand how someone could have a result of a lower temp with an AVX offset of 0. My system is stable, with the exception of a power saver I need to figure out. AVX o, 50x 1.36 LLC, 3466mhz, 45 cache, 6hr OCCT had a 79 degree peak. I don't care to make my system stable using *an AVX offset because it feels like it leaves a question of actual 24/7 stability*.


you kinda have this backwards. AVX will/can require more vcore to run error free at a given frequency so you can deal with this two ways.. either run an unnecessarily high vcore during non-AVX 100% load, or lower the operating frequency when under AVX so that the lower freq is running at the higher voltage and will not fail. Server-class chips have implemented this later strategy for a very long time (eg, drop a clock or two when AVX is in the execution stack).
Where are you seeing lower temps with no AXV offset? If it is another users rig,, check your cooling first, not the AVX feature,


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Yes, if the AVX offset is used, along with LLC, and power management, when the frequency drops to match the offset, the voltage will also go down. That's why I don't understand how someone could have a result of a lower temp with an AVX offset of 0. My system is stable, with the exception of a power saver I need to figure out. AVX o, 50x 1.36 LLC, 3466mhz, 45 cache, 6hr OCCT had a 79 degree peak. I don't care to make my system stable using *an AVX offset because it feels like it leaves a question of actual 24/7 stability*.
> 
> 
> 
> you kinda have this backwards. AVX will/can require more vcore to run error free at a given frequency so you can deal with this two ways.. either run an unnecessarily high vcore during non-AVX 100% load, or lower the operating frequency when under AVX so that the lower freq is running at the higher voltage and will not fail. Server-class chips have implemented this later strategy for a very long time (eg, drop a clock or two when AVX is in the execution stack).
> Where are you seeing lower temps with no AXV offset? If it is another users rig,, check your cooling first, not the AVX feature,
Click to expand...

For the second part of your comment, no, it wasn't my rig with lower temps while AVX offset is 0.

As for your main reply, let me try my point one last time.

I am running with a 50x, 1.36 max vcore, AVX offset is 0. This means when I run OCCT, my frequency doesn't drop. My voltage can reach its max of 1.36, as well. My frequency is 5ghz. Which means my rig is actually 5ghz stable. If a person uses the same settings but with an AVX offset is 3, when they run OCCT, their frequency drops to 4.7ghz. As such, they are not stressing their system for 5ghz stable, they are stressing it for 4.7ghz stable. The AVX offset reduces processor frequency and required voltage, subsequently, when the AVX instruction set is activated, when using the AVX offset.


----------



## ducegt

When you say system, you imply that it's used for AVX workloads. If 5ghz with 10 AVX offset is stable for all non AVX workloads and the system is never used for AVX... It wouldn't matter if the AVX offset was a positive multiplier because user of said system has no reason to give a damn.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> For the second part of your comment, no, it wasn't my rig with lower temps while AVX offset is 0.
> 
> As for your main reply, let me try my point one last time.
> 
> I am running with a 50x, 1.36 max vcore, AVX offset is 0. This means when I run OCCT, my frequency doesn't drop. My voltage can reach its max of 1.36, as well. My frequency is 5ghz. Which means my rig is actually 5ghz stable. If a person uses the same settings but with an AVX offset is 3, when they run OCCT, their frequency drops to 4.7ghz. As such, they are not stressing their system for 5ghz stable, they are stressing it for 4.7ghz stable. The AVX offset reduces processor frequency and required voltage, subsequently, when the AVX instruction set is activated, when using the AVX offset.


5 GHz running AVX code is not the same as running non-AVX code. AVX is much faster (around 1.7x) so even at 4.7 GHz will run the same task faster then if the AVX instructions would be disabled for the same task running on 5 GHz. Because of this in my opinion it's good to stress test the CPU separately for AVX and non-AVX workloads no matter of the frequency.


----------



## coc_james

I'm a gamer. DX12 fully supports AVX. There are titles available and many more titles coming that use AVX. 7zip and most other compression software use AVX. Photoshop uses it Handbrake uses it. I really could go on and on. So, if you do anything besides overclocking or surfing the web, offsetting AVX is not beneficial. I understand that this is a very extreme statement, but if we are computing enthusiasts, we ARE using AVX.

And BTW, if I'm using power savers in Bios and in Windows, my power usage and frequency go down, just the same.

This is my last post on this topic. I'm lacking the ability to communicate my point so that it can be understood.


----------



## ducegt

So if your AVX stable at 5, use offset and run 5.1 or more for other tasks... Or carry on with the silent offset witch hunt. Real enthusiasts and laddies push their stuff until it melts.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> So if your AVX stable at 5, use offset and run 5.1 or more for other tasks... Or carry on with the silent offset witch hunt. Real enthusiasts and laddies push their stuff until it melts.


I'm still here because of statements like this. You dont make any sense.

"real enthusiasts and laddies push their stuff until it melts."

If your using an offset while AVX kicks in, your not pushing it to its limits. Sorry. It's true. You run your system at 5.0 with an offset of 2, your processor drops to 4.8. This literally means your processor can only handle 4.8. So I am trying to push it to the limits by not using an offset. How can I really check stability if all of the programs we use UTILIZE AVX? How much more clear can I be? My system is 100% stable at 5ghz, EVEN WHEN USING AVX. That's why I don't understand the point of it. How can you truly check stability if your using AVX when all of our testing utilizes AVX? It's like having a fast car that you can't drive fast because the engine will blow if you do. So it never really was as fast as you thought it was.

Do you understand? If I bump up to 5.3 and use an offset of 3, how can I ensure I'm stable at 5.3? I can't, because the testing methods will cause the offset to kick in. Therefore, imo it makes no sense.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm still here because of statements like this. You dont make any sense.
> 
> "real enthusiasts and laddies push their stuff until it melts."
> 
> If your using an offset while AVX kicks in, your not pushing it to its limits. Sorry. It's true. You run your system at 5.0 with an offset of 2, your processor drops to 4.8. This literally means your processor can only handle 4.8. So I am trying to push it to the limits by not using an offset. How can I really check stability if all of the programs we use UTILIZE AVX? How much more clear can I be? My system is 100% stable at 5ghz, EVEN WHEN USING AVX. That's why I don't understand the point of it. How can you truly check stability if your using AVX when all of our testing utilizes AVX? It's like having a fast car that you can't drive fast because the engine will blow if you do. So it never really was as fast as you thought it was.
> 
> Do you understand? If I bump up to 5.3 and use an offset of 3, how can I ensure I'm stable at 5.3? I can't, because the testing methods will cause the offset to kick in. Therefore, imo it makes no sense.


You can test non AVX workloads the old fashion way. Trial and error laddie. Play a game for a few hours and retune if you ever have problems.

Any true enthusiast and Scotsman knows this. Realbench hardly kicks in the offset. You might want to google no true Scotsman fallacy wee lad.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm a gamer. DX12 fully supports AVX. There are titles available and many more titles coming that use AVX. 7zip and most other compression software use AVX. Photoshop uses it Handbrake uses it. I really could go on and on. So, if you do anything besides overclocking or surfing the web, offsetting AVX is not beneficial. I understand that this is a very extreme statement, but if we are computing enthusiasts, we ARE using AVX.
> 
> And BTW, if I'm using power savers in Bios and in Windows, my power usage and frequency go down, just the same.
> 
> This is my last post on this topic. I'm lacking the ability to communicate my point so that it can be understood.


DirectX has nothing to do with AVX. DirectX is for 2d and 3d graphics, AVX is an instruction set that developers have to specificly use in order to benefit from it. Also, AVX is for CPU, DirectX is for GPU. As I said, most daily used apps don't use AVX, only dedicated for work (2d/3d graphics editors, video encoding, servers and some others). Most users won't benefit from AVX. Also, not Handbrake is using AVX but the libraries that it relies on (x264 / x265), Handbrake is only a GUI. Games don't use AVX (I heard that Grid might do but not sure) so for gaming it has no benefits.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm still here because of statements like this. You dont make any sense.


I tend to agree with you. However, some people in the overclocking community have given up on reaching for the highest possibly stability, and now only reach for "good enough." I think the OP in this thread touches on it, suggesting ROG Bench as "good enough" and that stability under linpack or prime95 isn't really a big deal.

Personally, I disagree with "good enough." To me, "good enough" is when my machine can handle anything I can throw at it today, AND anything I might throw at it tomorrow. That includes something that might make use of AVX. That's why _my_ heat and stability testing uses linpack and prime95 (with AVX enabled) respectively. Linpack tends to get my processor the hottest and prime95 usually detects errors far quicker than anything else. For ME, this prepares my machine for any new programs that might come up. No, it's not perfect, but it's the best I can do today.

To be fair, though, I can understand the "good enough" mentality. If you only drive your car on streets that have speed limits of 45 MPH, why bother testing how long it can maintain 90 MPH? (Then again, I wouldn't be "overclocking" a car if I only intended to drive it 45MPH, but that's another story.)


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm still here because of statements like this. You dont make any sense.
> 
> "real enthusiasts and laddies push their stuff until it melts."
> 
> If your using an offset while AVX kicks in, your not pushing it to its limits. Sorry. It's true. You run your system at 5.0 with an offset of 2, your processor drops to 4.8. This literally means your processor can only handle 4.8. So I am trying to push it to the limits by not using an offset. How can I really check stability if all of the programs we use UTILIZE AVX? How much more clear can I be? My system is 100% stable at 5ghz, EVEN WHEN USING AVX. That's why I don't understand the point of it. How can you truly check stability if your using AVX when all of our testing utilizes AVX? It's like having a fast car that you can't drive fast because the engine will blow if you do. So it never really was as fast as you thought it was.
> 
> Do you understand? If I bump up to 5.3 and use an offset of 3, how can I ensure I'm stable at 5.3? I can't, because *the testing methods will cause the offset to kick in*. Therefore, imo it makes no sense.


Prime95 26.6 is a pretty brutal non-AVX test.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm still here because of statements like this. You dont make any sense.
> 
> 
> 
> I tend to agree with you. However, some people in the overclocking community have given up on reaching for the highest possibly stability, and now only reach for "good enough." I think the OP in this thread touches on it, suggesting ROG Bench as "good enough" and that stability under linpack or prime95 isn't really a big deal.
> 
> Personally, I disagree with "good enough." To me, "good enough" is when my machine can handle anything I can throw at it today, AND anything I might throw at it tomorrow. That includes something that might make use of AVX. That's why _my_ heat and stability testing uses linpack and prime95 (with AVX enabled) respectively. Linpack tends to get my processor the hottest and prime95 usually detects errors far quicker than anything else. For ME, this prepares my machine for any new programs that might come up. No, it's not perfect, but it's the best I can do today.
> 
> To be fair, though, I can understand the "good enough" mentality. If you only drive your car on streets that have speed limits of 45 MPH, why bother testing how long it can maintain 90 MPH? (Then again, I wouldn't be "overclocking" a car if I only intended to drive it 45MPH, but that's another story.)
Click to expand...

Finally, someone who gets my point.


----------



## coc_james

I
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm still here because of statements like this. You dont make any sense.
> 
> "real enthusiasts and laddies push their stuff until it melts."
> 
> If your using an offset while AVX kicks in, your not pushing it to its limits. Sorry. It's true. You run your system at 5.0 with an offset of 2, your processor drops to 4.8. This literally means your processor can only handle 4.8. So I am trying to push it to the limits by not using an offset. How can I really check stability if all of the programs we use UTILIZE AVX? How much more clear can I be? My system is 100% stable at 5ghz, EVEN WHEN USING AVX. That's why I don't understand the point of it. How can you truly check stability if your using AVX when all of our testing utilizes AVX? It's like having a fast car that you can't drive fast because the engine will blow if you do. So it never really was as fast as you thought it was.
> 
> Do you understand? If I bump up to 5.3 and use an offset of 3, how can I ensure I'm stable at 5.3? I can't, because *the testing methods will cause the offset to kick in*. Therefore, imo it makes no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> Prime95 26.6 is a pretty brutal non-AVX test.
Click to expand...

Is this the older version that plays nice with the newer processors? I haven't had a machine I was tweaking since devil's Canyon. I remember having to use an older version for that processor as well.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I
> Is this the older version that plays nice with the newer processors? I haven't had a machine I was tweaking since devil's Canyon. I remember having to use an older version for that processor as well.


Yes. You can also use the latest version of P95 with "cpusupportsavx=0" typed in the local.txt file. That way it will run too without AVX.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm still here because of statements like this. You dont make any sense.
> 
> "real enthusiasts and laddies push their stuff until it melts."
> 
> If your using an offset while AVX kicks in, your not pushing it to its limits. Sorry. It's true. You run your system at 5.0 with an offset of 2, your processor drops to 4.8. This literally means your processor can only handle 4.8. So I am trying to push it to the limits by not using an offset. How can I really check stability if all of the programs we use UTILIZE AVX? How much more clear can I be? My system is 100% stable at 5ghz, EVEN WHEN USING AVX. That's why I don't understand the point of it. How can you truly check stability if your using AVX when all of our testing utilizes AVX? It's like having a fast car that you can't drive fast because the engine will blow if you do. So it never really was as fast as you thought it was.
> 
> Do you understand? If I bump up to 5.3 and use an offset of 3, how can I ensure I'm stable at 5.3? I can't, because the testing methods will cause the offset to kick in. Therefore, imo it makes no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> You can test non AVX workloads the old fashion way. Trial and error laddie. Play a game for a few hours and retune if you ever have problems.
> 
> Any true enthusiast and Scotsman knows this. Realbench hardly kicks in the offset. You might want to google no true Scotsman fallacy wee lad.
Click to expand...

Oh, so you don't mind ruining your OS, mbr, programs, etc, etc?

I do mind. I like to test it and be as certain as possible, so I can enjoy my computer instead of constantly running sfc /scannow, because my rig is acting up, only to find I need to do a clean install.

Thats why we do synthetic testing, and overkill synthetic testing. So we don't have to fix stuff. We can enjoy the fruits of our labor. But hey, you keep doing you, laddie.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Oh, so you don't mind ruining your OS, mbr, programs, etc, etc?
> 
> I do mind. I like to test it and be as certain as possible, so I can enjoy my computer instead of constantly running sfc /scannow, because my rig is acting up, only to find I need to do a clean install.
> 
> Thats why we do synthetic testing, and overkill synthetic testing. So we don't have to fix stuff. We can enjoy the fruits of our labor. But hey, you keep doing you, laddie.


I haven't done a fresh install of Windows in more than 5 years... I make sure my RAM is always stable foremost. I don't even use the offset post delid. My point is your logic is flawed. Your missing out on extra performance, however little it may be. You can make sure your system is stable under all workloads with an offset. You state a false dichotomy.

I'm pretty certain your initial intention was just to cut down people who may be at 5ghz with 2 offset as to gloat that yours is 5 stable with no offset. Lesser coolers can really benefit from the offset. You could too if you could see the forrest amongst the trees.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm a gamer. DX12 fully supports AVX. There are titles available and many more titles coming that use AVX. 7zip and most other compression software use AVX. Photoshop uses it Handbrake uses it. I really could go on and on. So, if you do anything besides overclocking or surfing the web, offsetting AVX is not beneficial. I understand that this is a very extreme statement, but if we are computing enthusiasts, we ARE using AVX.
> 
> And BTW, if I'm using power savers in Bios and in Windows, my power usage and frequency go down, just the same.
> 
> This is my last post on this topic. I'm lacking the ability to communicate my point so that it can be understood.
> 
> 
> 
> DirectX has nothing to do with AVX. DirectX is for 2d and 3d graphics, AVX is an instruction set that developers have to specificly use in order to benefit from it. Also, AVX is for CPU, DirectX is for GPU. As I said, most daily used apps don't use AVX, only dedicated for work (2d/3d graphics editors, video encoding, servers and some others). Most users won't benefit from AVX. Also, not Handbrake is using AVX but the libraries that it relies on (x264 / x265), Handbrake is only a GUI. Games don't use AVX (I heard that Grid might do but not sure) so for gaming it has no benefits.
Click to expand...

I'll be honest here, I'm out of my depth when it comes to code and how instructions interact with others. I do know that I was told that previous version of DirectX required games to have a separate .exe to launch a game if you wanted to take advantage of the AVX features in said game. DirectX12 supposedly can "work with it". Maybe the person telling me didn't actually know what he was talking about.

I do process 1440 video and very large RAW image files. Photoshop, Premiere Pro, Lightroom, GIMP, I use them. It is my understanding that these programs utilize AVX instruction sets. But my further point was that, we are stress testing our rigs to ensure that they have the highest level of stability. So for me, I don't understand how we can be 100% sure of stability of we are limiting our potential, due to a heavy feature, regardless of how niche it is.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Oh, so you don't mind ruining your OS, mbr, programs, etc, etc?
> 
> I do mind. I like to test it and be as certain as possible, so I can enjoy my computer instead of constantly running sfc /scannow, because my rig is acting up, only to find I need to do a clean install.
> 
> Thats why we do synthetic testing, and overkill synthetic testing. So we don't have to fix stuff. We can enjoy the fruits of our labor. But hey, you keep doing you, laddie.
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't done a fresh install of Windows in more than 5 years... I make sure my RAM is always stable foremost. I don't even use the offset post delid. My point is your logic is flawed. Your missing out on extra performance, however little it may be. You can make sure your system is stable under all workloads with an offset. You state a false dichotomy.
> 
> I'm pretty certain your initial intention was just to cut down people who may be at 5ghz with 2 offset as to gloat that yours is 5 stable with no offset. Lesser coolers can really benefit from the offset. You could too if you could see the forrest amongst the trees.
Click to expand...

Wait, I thought you hardcore Scotties did your benching by the seat of your pants? Now you're saying you make sure your RAM is always stable? RAM stability and OC stability work hand in hand, right? I mean, how can you get the best CPU OC and RAM OC if you're working backwards?

Right now my minimum voltage is .063 and my minimum temp is 29 degrees and I have and h105, without delid. I'm happy with my OC, I wish it were better, but gloating? No. That's cute though. Considering the current 7700k record is well past 7ghz, my meager 5ghz is not "gloat" worthy. So you can take your projection and keep it to yourself

Sorry if my post comes off as a little snide. Unfortunately, your lack of the word "laddie" and the fact that this conversation is happening via keystroke, makes it difficult to tell whether your trying to be a prick or you just come off that way. Most of the other's that I have had a back and forth with about this topic remained informative and proper, you haven't. I hope that my honesty about your verbiage and candor helps you structure your criticism more effectively in the future. Have a great night.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you kinda have this backwards. AVX will/can require more vcore to run error free at a given frequency so you can deal with this two ways.. either run an unnecessarily high vcore during non-AVX 100% load, or lower the operating frequency when under AVX so that the lower freq is running at the higher voltage and will not fail. Server-class chips have implemented this later strategy for a very long time (eg, drop a clock or two when AVX is in the execution stack).
> Where are you seeing lower temps with no AXV offset? If it is another users rig,, check your cooling first, not the AVX feature,


I contacted Intel and Server-class chips have a locked multiplier, So AVX offset is not allowed.


----------



## coc_james

So I just set my voltage to offset +100 with my 50x and llc at 1, ram at 3466. Max temp went down by 2 degrees. Ran OCCT and p95 an hour each- stable.

Took my same setting and bumped my multi to 51x, set AVX offset to 2 and bumped my offset to +120. OCCT would only run for about 5 minutes and p95 caused BSOD. I verified that OCCT and p95 were operating at 4.9 instead of 5.1. This would mean that, at least for me, an AVX offset is not beneficial.

Any thoughts?


----------



## MaKeN

Reading about that avx stuff in this thread made me also try it .
Currently stable at 5.1 1.39v in windows
5.2 at 1.42v Avx -1 would only run rb for like 11 mins till fail.

But thats my chip, it simply hates 5.2 or even 5.150, even avx wont help it









But in the end a question:

Is it better to have a cpu running 5.2 at 1.42v avx -1
Instead of running 5.1 at 1.39v with 0 avx?

Btw, any of you tried RB 2.54? Any thoughts?


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Reading about that avx stuff in this thread made me also try it .
> Currently stable at 5.1 1.39v in windows
> 5.2 at 1.42v Avx -1 would only run rb for like 11 mins till fail.
> 
> But thats my chip, it simply hates 5.2 or even 5.150, even avx wont help it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But in the end a question:
> 
> Is it better to have a cpu running 5.2 at 1.42v avx -1
> Instead of running 5.1 at 1.39v with 0 avx?
> 
> Btw, any of you tried RB 2.54? Any thoughts?


I guess it depends on your preferences and system ability. For me, it seems AVX offset is not at all beneficial. I would say run it how it's fastest and most stable with safe temps. Beyond that, however you have to set it up is subjective. For me, my wall won't be temps, it's voltage. I just need too much to go any further. If it were temps I would delid, and keep pushing, maybe then the AVX offset would be useful for me.

I'm using the latest RB, I find it okay. OCCT pushes much harder and I trust my OC more than I did with just RB.


----------



## MaKeN

Temps for me arent a issue also... im in a safe range...

But anyway voltage /wats / amp is important.

Latest rb woul crash soon or would just stop , if cpuz/hwinfo/real temp is opened also, its so sensitive. I can only pass it with just rb oppened and no other, mah it be because now rb also reports the temps?


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Temps for me arent a issue also... im in a safe range...
> 
> But anyway voltage /wats / amp is important.
> 
> Latest rb woul crash soon or would just stop , if cpuz/hwinfo/real temp is opened also, its so sensitive. I can only pass it with just rb oppened and no other, mah it be because now rb also reports the temps?


If you're failing RB you're not stable, not even close. I would back it down to 5.1 and run OCCT to see if you're stable.


----------



## MaKeN

Im failing rb only if i open onother monitoring software... as i told i could pass 8 h test with rb only , or fail in minutes with any other temps reporting software.. this is on new rb ....


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Im failing rb only if i open onother monitoring software... as i told i could pass 8 h test with rb only , or fail in minutes with any other temps reporting software.. this is on new rb ....


I haven't had the same issue with RB. I can run CPUs, HWmonitor and RB all together. Have you tried OCCT or p95 yet?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Im failing rb only if i open onother monitoring software... as i told i could pass 8 h test with rb only , or fail in minutes with any other temps reporting software.. this is on new rb ....


I can confirm that. In my case MSI Afterburner and Gigabyte's OC tool was giving me instability issues even when the GPU wasn't overclocked. Closing those apps let me pass RB when previously would crash after 5-10 minutes.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I can confirm that. In my case MSI Afterburner and Gigabyte's OC tool was giving me instability issues even when the GPU wasn't overclocked. Closing those apps let me pass RB when previously would crash after 5-10 minutes.


I had the same thing on my 6900k rig, strangely enough I haven't had it on the 7700k.
I generally set my GPU's OC to stock and quit the app before running RB.


----------



## coc_james

Can anyone educate me about CPU PLL voltage? I've read that it being too low can cause huge temp swings across cores, but being too high can increase overall temps. What's your experience?

At idle and normal use my cores are all within 4 degrees. When I stress test I can see as much as 15 degrees difference between cores.

Currently my settings for CPU PLL are set to auto. There are two sections, one is CPU PLL and Eventual CPU PLL. The CPU PLL, when set to auto runs at 1.2. The Eventual when set to auto runs at 1.960.

Anyone have any insight here? Should I leave them alone? Is this just down to poor TIM and something only a delid can address?


----------



## syrinks

Hello,

I have a small question about my i7 7700k delid.

I still have the same core that has peaks of time 4 to 6 degrees higher than the other cores.

Is this normal or I missed my delid?


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *syrinks*
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have a small question about my i7 7700k delid.
> 
> I still have the same core that has peaks of time 4 to 6 degrees higher than the other cores.
> 
> Is this normal or I missed my delid?


This is perfectly normal, there will always be temp differences on all the cores, delided or not.


----------



## sdmf74

What is the dram command rate "N:1" on Asus motherboards?


----------



## Dude970

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> What is the dram command rate "N:1" on Asus motherboards?


It is the same as 1T


----------



## sdmf74

I am unable to achieve 1T on my G Skill 3600mhz cas16 rgb's even at 3600mhz. Any suggestions?

Also tried to boot using N:1 command rate and got bsod but it brings up another option in bios called N to 1 ratio (default is 4), not sure what it means:



cant get 4000mhz to boot either, only went up to 1.420v though, kinda worried to push more dram voltage even though 1.45v would probably be ok but for 24/7 use who knows?
Funny thing is I ran my G skill DDR3 for years @ 1.65v actual voltage was a little higher, with no issues.

After some testing looks like I will be settling for 3866mhz @1.395v 16-16-16 36 2N, further testing may be required


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> I am unable to achieve 1T on my G Skill 3600mhz cas16 rgb's even at 3600mhz. Any suggestions?
> 
> Also tried to boot using N:1 command rate and got bsod but it brings up another option in bios called N to 1 ratio (default is 4), not sure what it means:
> 
> cant get 4000mhz to boot either, only went up to 1.420v though, kinda worried to push more dram voltage even though 1.45v would probably be ok but for 24/7 use who knows?
> Funny thing is I ran my G skill DDR3 for years @ 1.65v actual voltage was a little higher, with no issues.
> 
> After some testing looks like I will be settling for 3866mhz @1.395v 16-16-16 36 2N, further testing may be required


With a lot of Z270 boards, especially 4 DIMM boards, it can be difficult achieving a Command Rate of 1T at high memory speeds. This is also true with Z170 boards that have had a Kabylake bios update, where prior to the update they could achieve 1T at speeds of 3600mhz and higher and then after the update, it does not successfully train 1T above 3200mhz.

With regards to running at 4000mhz, you will need a lot more voltage than 1.42 volts, if you are trying to run at c16 with 4 DIMM Modules. You will need to either increase your voltages or relax your timings to C18 or C19 for example, if you want to run at below 1.45 volts.

You are running Samsung B-DIe IC's on your Trident Kit, and they are able to withstand high voltages upto as high as 2.0 volts. These high voltages are used when benching memory at high speeds and at very tight timings like C12, so therefore running at between 1.4-1.45 volts for 24/7 use with B-die, is no problem whatsoever.

Here are a few things you can try :

1) With all 4 modules installed, set your memory frequency to 3200mhz,CR to 1 and your timings to 16-16-16-36 and see if that boots up successfully. If it does then try increasing your frequency to the next speed up, leaving all other settings as is and see if it boots up.

2) Remove 2 of the 4 modules and then try booting up at 3600mhz, CR to 1 and timings at C16 and see if that successfully passes. If that passes which it most likely will, then try 3866mhz at 1T and so on.

Hope that helps.


----------



## tknight

Double Post


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *gammagoat*





> Originally Posted by *Spectryx*





> Originally Posted by *slightly mad*


Charted



> Originally Posted by *ssdaytona*


I can't accept a result that not only doesn't have picture verification, it doesn't even have stress test duration on the list.



> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Watch out for your Vcore as it seems that your LLC setting might be a bit too aggressive. What you don't see in the monitoring tools in realtime is how much voltage does spike when it changes. It might shoot over 1.4 V easily. Would try just a bit more Vcore with LLC 4 instead of 5.
> 
> That's a really nice temperature gain. If I wouldn't be a chicken I'd do it as well.
> 
> If your RAM is not stable with tighter timings try adding just a bit more RAM voltage (low as 0.01), VCCIO and SA voltage.
> I suspect crashes happen mostly when CPU load changes and the VRM's don't switch voltage fast enough to the required amount. It could also be that the voltage tables are not perfect so while it's stable under heavy load and idle, during low/medium load the voltage might not be calibrated. The voltage requirement from idle to full load is not linear especially when using high multipliers. A voltage offset might just solve that issue as it applies it all the time.


Still find it confusing.

1.4v LLC 5 vs 1.38v LLC 4... which would be more strenuous on a chip? Suppose it would vary mobo to mobo.



> Originally Posted by *Rhoms*


Keep in mind that Vcore submission should be the average under the stress test being used for the submission, not maximum.



> Originally Posted by *Gurkburk*
> 
> I cant find any info if it's really Aluminium.. But considering the weight, it might not be anything else than normal steel?
> I've got the Noctua dh15, just shortened the name


D15? Don't high end coolers just use copper at the end?



> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*


You covered the vcore reading with Realbench.








I'll let it slide.


Sample Size52  Average OC5.04Median OC5.00Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.38


==

Are you guys interested in a extreme stability chart? This would require 24 hours of stress testing on a very tough test and have a much higher standard of evidence required for entry. It will not affect the stats of the regular chart.


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> I am unable to achieve 1T on my G Skill 3600mhz cas16 rgb's even at 3600mhz. Any suggestions?
> 
> Also tried to boot using N:1 command rate and got bsod but it brings up another option in bios called N to 1 ratio (default is 4), not sure what it means:
> 
> cant get 4000mhz to boot either, only went up to 1.420v though, kinda worried to push more dram voltage even though 1.45v would probably be ok but for 24/7 use who knows?
> Funny thing is I ran my G skill DDR3 for years @ 1.65v actual voltage was a little higher, with no issues.
> 
> After some testing looks like I will be settling for 3866mhz @1.395v 16-16-16 36 2N, further testing may be required
> 
> 
> 
> With a lot of Z270 boards, especially 4 DIMM boards, it can be difficult achieving a Command Rate of 1T at high memory speeds. This is also true with Z170 boards that have had a Kabylake bios update, where prior to the update they could achieve 1T at speeds of 3600mhz and higher and then after the update, it does not successfully train 1T above 3200mhz.
> 
> With regards to running at 4000mhz, you will need a lot more voltage than 1.42 volts, if you are trying to run at c16 with 4 DIMM Modules. You will need to either increase your voltages or relax your timings to C18 or C19 for example, if you want to run at below 1.45 volts.
> 
> You are running Samsung B-DIe IC's on your Trident Kit, and they are able to withstand high voltages upto as high as 2.0 volts. These high voltages are used when benching memory at high speeds and at very tight timings like C12, so therefore running at between 1.4-1.45 volts for 24/7 use with B-die, is no problem whatsoever.
> 
> Here are a few things you can try :
> 
> 1) With all 4 modules installed, set your memory frequency to 3200mhz,CR to 1 and your timings to 16-16-16-36 and see if that boots up successfully. If it does then try increasing your frequency to the next speed up, leaving all other settings as is and see if it boots up.
> 
> 2) Remove 2 of the 4 modules and then try booting up at 3600mhz, CR to 1 and timings at C16 and see if that successfully passes. If that passes which it most likely will, then try 3866mhz at 1T and so on.
> 
> Hope that helps.
Click to expand...

Nice advice/post ... +R









Curious why you didn't bring up IO/SA voltages though? Especially if they are on "auto" which can significantly overvolt those settings causing instability


----------



## nrpeyton

Thinking of temporarily re-connecting my *Water Chiller* into my loop.

And using it to roughly *duplicate the temp drop* I'd get from *delidding*. To find out if it's worth it-- or not.

(Current coolant temp is probably around 26c). _So if I set the Chiller to make the coolant temperature 10-13c I should see the same temp drop I would see from delidding. Then I can see if 5Ghz becomes achievable at under 1.4v.
_
Anyone see any problems with that theory?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Thinking of temporarily re-connecting my *Water Chiller* into my loop.
> 
> And using it to roughly *duplicate the temp drop* I'd get from *delidding*. To find out if it's worth it-- or not.
> 
> (Current coolant temp is probably around 26c). _So if I set the Chiller to make the coolant temperature 10-13c I should see the same temp drop I would see from delidding. Then I can see if 5Ghz becomes achievable at under 1.4v.
> _
> Anyone see any problems with that theory?


No problems. I did the same thing with the help of outdoor temps in the winter.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Thinking of temporarily re-connecting my *Water Chiller* into my loop.
> 
> And using it to roughly *duplicate the temp drop* I'd get from *delidding*. To find out if it's worth it-- or not.
> 
> (Current coolant temp is probably around 26c). _So if I set the Chiller to make the coolant temperature 10-13c I should see the same temp drop I would see from delidding. Then I can see if 5Ghz becomes achievable at under 1.4v.
> _
> Anyone see any problems with that theory?


I'm completely ignorant about this subject. Delidding can affect how much voltage you need for clocks? I thought that delidding only lowered temps because of the poor TIM application.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> @Darkwizzie
> 
> I'm completely ignorant about this subject. Delidding can affect how much voltage you need for clocks? I thought that delidding only lowered temps because of the poor TIM application.


Deliding can also allow you to decrease Vcore and gain frequency. For example I purchased a 4790K from Silicon Lottery a few years ago, prior to delid it needed 1.275V for 4.9Ghz stable Realbench for 1 hour, after delid I was able to achieve [email protected] stable Realbench for 1 hour, Silicon Lottery could not achieve 5Ghz prior to delid and certainly not at 1.285V, if they could have obviously they would have sold it as a 5Ghz chip at a higher price







that same chip only needed 1.26V to achieve 4.9Ghz stable for 1 hour Realbench a drop of 15mV in core voltage. A delid is always worthwhile on a known good CPU in my opinion.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> @Darkwizzie
> 
> I'm completely ignorant about this subject. Delidding can affect how much voltage you need for clocks? I thought that delidding only lowered temps because of the poor TIM application.
> 
> 
> 
> Deliding can also allow you to decrease Vcore and gain frequency. For example I purchased a 4790K from Silicon Lottery a few years ago, prior to delid it needed 1.275V for 4.9Ghz stable Realbench for 1 hour, after delid I was able to achieve [email protected] stable Realbench for 1 hour, Silicon Lottery could not achieve 5Ghz prior to delid and certainly not at 1.285V, if they could have obviously they would have sold it as a 5Ghz chip at a higher price
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that same chip only needed 1.26V to achieve 4.9Ghz stable for 1 hour Realbench a drop of 15mV in core voltage. A delid is always worthwhile on a known good CPU in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Wow, that's great! Maybe I'll delid this chip after all. Is it worth investing in the stuff to do it if you've never done it? Or find someone to pay to do it?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Wow, that's great! Maybe I'll delid this chip after all. Is it worth investing in the stuff to do it if you've never done it? Or find someone to pay to do it?


First CPU that I bought from Silicon Lottery was the 4790K I just mentioned which I got them to delid for me, at that time you couldn't buy the various delid tools available today, mind you back then Silicon Lottery used to bin their chips much tighter than they do now eg: [email protected] or [email protected] etc with the lower voltage ones obviously costing more. If it were me given the availability of the tools to delid yourself that's the way I would go since it is pretty hard to mess it up unlike back in the days of Ivy Bridge. That being said since in my case Silicon Lottery were supplying the CPU I felt it was best for them to do it for me given they also offer warranty on the CPU after being delided for 30 days from memory. Cant find a screenshot of Realbench run but did find this screenshot of my 4790K


----------



## TheADLA

Deliding tool ordered.. Gelid GC Extreme ordered (Hail no, I ain't gonna put CLU on the Die lol). And then lets go. Still use CLU between the IHS and my AIO








I have 5 Ghz stable but also due to summer here and environment temps etc, I am looking forward to some improvement and push it a bit more


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Wow, that's great! Maybe I'll delid this chip after all. Is it worth investing in the stuff to do it if you've never done it? Or find someone to pay to do it?
> 
> 
> 
> First CPU that I bought from Silicon Lottery was the 4790K I just mentioned which I got them to delid for me, at that time you couldn't buy the various delid tools available today, mind you back then Silicon Lottery used to bin their chips much tighter than they do now eg: [email protected] or [email protected] etc with the lower voltage ones obviously costing more. If it were me given the availability of the tools to delid yourself that's the way I would go since it is pretty hard to mess it up unlike back in the days of Ivy Bridge. That being said since in my case Silicon Lottery were supplying the CPU I felt it was best for them to do it for me given they also offer warranty on the CPU after being delided for 30 days from memory. Cant find a screenshot of Realbench run but did find this screenshot of my 4790K
Click to expand...

Is there a chance that it won't make a difference in voltage requirements? I'm sure that it will definitely help with temps, even though that's not currently my limit.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> Deliding tool ordered.. Gelid GC Extreme ordered (Hail no, I ain't gonna put CLU on the Die lol). And then lets go. Still use CLU between the IHS and my AIO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have 5 Ghz stable but also due to summer here and environment temps etc, I am looking forward to some improvement and push it a bit more


You recommend Gelid for the die? I use it for my ihs to aio. What should one use to put the ihs back on? Is there a proven "best practice"? There is so many opinions on what should be used to replace the TIM. Also, should I lap the ihs before reinstalling it?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> Deliding tool ordered.. Gelid GC Extreme ordered (Hail no, I ain't gonna put CLU on the Die lol). And then lets go. Still use CLU between the IHS and my AIO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have 5 Ghz stable but also due to summer here and environment temps etc, I am looking forward to some improvement and push it a bit more


CLU on the die isn't really a big deal if you already have it. I went just opposite of you - CLU on the die and Gelid Extreme on the top of the IHS. It was my first time with de-lidding and CLU, worked just like the pics/vids said it would.


----------



## TheADLA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> CLU on the die isn't really a big deal if you already have it. I went just opposite of you - CLU on the die and Gelid Extreme on the top of the IHS. It was my first time with de-lidding and CLU, worked just like the pics/vids said it would.


Damn lol. I try that. I am just afraid of the CLU Liquid Metal stuff to dissolve my CPU lol. But yeah. If its cool I do it that way


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> Damn lol. I try that. Iam just afraid of the CLU Liquid Metal stuff to dissolve my CPU lol. But yeah. If its cool I do it that way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :thumb:


It won't dissolve your die, that thing is like a little piece of glass when you see it in person.


----------



## TheADLA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Is there a chance that it won't make a difference in voltage requirements? I'm sure that it will definitely help with temps, even though that's not currently my limit.
> You recommend Gelid for the die? I use it for my ihs to aio. What should one use to put the ihs back on? Is there a proven "best practice"? There is so many opinions on what should be used to replace the TIM. Also, should I lap the ihs before reinstalling it?


Hard to answer. People have their personal opinions. Usually, good Thermal pastes are all within a margin. Whether its Gelid, Arctic, Noctua etc. The reason why I used Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra aka CLU is because its Liquid Metal which conducts heat very good. Problem is it should not be applied on any aluminum plated coolers (corrosion) and it is conductive. But applying it is not science either if you are careful. Main point is I think that every quality TIM is better than the standard used by Intel on their CPU's


----------



## TheADLA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> It won't dissolve your die, that thing is like a little piece of glass when you see it in person.


How were the results in temp drops? So far I have 5 Ghz at around 1.34 ish volatge with LLC that pushes it up. Since environmental temps are high now because summer, I had a core reaching 90 although I have a Corsair H110i GTX AIO put at full speed via Corsair Link. Using CLU between IHS and the AIO. My room temps now are around 26 to 28 degrees Celsius. I know deliding will give you
around real 10 degrees maybe. So I wonder.









This is my CPU at stock speed (4 cores at turbo), my AIO is set to quiet mode so the fans do squad, but due to the environmental temperature, I am not happy at all. Thats why I am going to delid. In winter, no problem. But summer is like whatever. I also have 2 Noctua PWM case fans as well as 1 Fractal Design DC fan. No obstacles since I have no mechanical Hard Drive anymore blocking the airflow. All is SSD (the SATA ones on the back of the MoBo Tray).


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheADLA*
> 
> How were the results in temp drops?


Can't really say. I decided to de-lid pretty early on in the build. I only ran it on air @ 4.8 long enough to make sure all the components were operating then tore it down, de-lidded it, and went to a full water loop. My CPU is no gem, it requires ~1.38v to run @ 5GHz, and even under water it'll reach 80C during RB stress test. But in normal operation it never gets above 70~72. I don't really remember what the temps were at 4.8/air, just that de-lidding was a lot easier than I had imagined it would be.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm completely ignorant about this subject. Delidding can affect how much voltage you need for clocks? I thought that delidding only lowered temps because of the poor TIM application.


The way I like to imagine the temperature / voltage relationship (I.E as a result of delidding) is like this:

The reason lower temps allows lower voltage is because silicon conducts electricity better the colder it is. (_And is a worse conductor the hotter it is).
_
If you think of a CPU (microchip) as millions of 'conductive pathways' and 'non-conductive walls'. Then imagine that when colder the conductive pathways become more conductive...


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> I am unable to achieve 1T on my G Skill 3600mhz cas16 rgb's even at 3600mhz. Any suggestions?
> 
> Also tried to boot using N:1 command rate and got bsod but it brings up another option in bios called N to 1 ratio (default is 4), not sure what it means:
> 
> 
> 
> cant get 4000mhz to boot either, only went up to 1.420v though, kinda worried to push more dram voltage even though 1.45v would probably be ok but for 24/7 use who knows?
> Funny thing is I ran my G skill DDR3 for years @ 1.65v actual voltage was a little higher, with no issues.
> 
> After some testing looks like I will be settling for 3866mhz @1.395v 16-16-16 36 2N, further testing may be required
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I have the exact same kit. (3600Mhz G.Skill)

And the best I'm able to with VCCIO under 1.3v is this:



I got it running without the command rate of 1T to begin with
.... then changed to 1T. First attempt at 1T failed.
I hit the retry button and it failed again.
3rd time I was lucky.
Then thereafter it ran flawlessly at 1T without changing anything else. And passed mem-test without issue. And worked every time thereafter perfectly.

I couldn't do 4000 at C16 (even at 2T).

VCCIO (IMC) seemed to help me a lot.

I'm also running the DRAM at 1.4v 24/7. _(G.Skill actually have a kit that runs at that voltage in it's XMP profile)._ Also 1.5v is the maximum for a DDR4 XMP certification. Therefore I'd assume it's quite safe.

There's also another setting I disabled/enabled.. can't remember the name of it off-hand but from memory it forces the motherboard to completely re-train the memory without skipping anything or taking any shortcuts. It adds a little to your boot time. I think once the board had the 2ndary and tertiary timings dialled in you can re-enable.

You're lucky-- I need 1.344-1.392v for 4.9Ghz on a full custom loop _(no delid)._

Also regarding delidding:

*Why are people still using CLU?*

Liquid Metals:
Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut - 73 W/mk
Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra - 38.4 W/mk
Coollaboratory Liquid Pro - 32.6 W/mk

As seen above /\
...new Conductonaut has nearly 2x the conductivity number compared to 'good old' CLU.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Also regarding delidding:
> 
> *Why are people still using CLU?*
> 
> Liquid Metals:
> Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut - 73 W/mk
> Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra - 38.4 W/mk
> Coollaboratory Liquid Pro - 32.6 W/mk
> 
> As seen above /\
> ...new Conductonaut has nearly 2x the conductivity number compared to good old CLU.


My understanding from seeing various tests, etc, was that the number for TG was inaccurate or mis-placed advertising or something. I don't remember exactly, but I'd take the 73 W/mk without seeing actual tests comparing TG Conductonaut with CLU and CLP...

Take care
Gary


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> My understanding from seeing various tests, etc, was that the number for TG was inaccurate or mis-placed advertising or something. I don't remember exactly, but I'd take the 73 W/mk without seeing actual tests comparing TG Conductonaut with CLU and CLP...
> 
> Take care
> Gary


Even if that's true -- we don't get much of an uplift from 4.9Ghz to 5Ghz. But it still "feels" better having that 5Ghz 24/7 !

I'd argue the same true here. If I was going as far _(and as extreme)_ as delidding my CPU I'd at least want the peace of mind that I had the best rated Liquid Metal there is.
Moreover-- the general consensus on the internet is that Thermal Grizzly's Chemical Engineers made Kryonaut is the BEST performing paste. So it's easy to believe they also synthesised the best performing Liquid Metal.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Even if that's true -- we don't get much of an uplift from 4.9Ghz to 5Ghz. But it still "feels" better having that 5Ghz 24/7 !
> 
> I'd argue the same true here. If I was going as far _(and as extreme)_ as delidding my CPU I'd at least want the peace of mind that I had the best rated Liquid Metal there is.
> Moreover-- the general consensus on the internet is that Thermal Grizzly's Chemical Engineers made Kryonaut is the BEST performing paste. So it's easy to believe they also synthesised the best performing Liquid Metal.


Here's a post here where someone actually compares CLU to conductonaut in actual usage: http://www.overclock.net/t/1313179/official-delidded-club-guide/29810#post_24869257

Spoiler: *yawn* No significant difference (and the insignificant difference was in favor of the CLU.)


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Here's a post here where someone actually compares CLU to conductonaut in actual usage: http://www.overclock.net/t/1313179/official-delidded-club-guide/29810#post_24869257
> 
> Spoiler: *yawn* No significant difference (and the insignificant difference was in favor of the CLU.)


I hear what you're saying ;-)

But:

Or another way I'd look at it is like this:

Liquid Metal.............Performance...........***Claimed*** Performance

Conductonaut..........100%.......................100%

CLU..........................99%........................50%

Conductonaut just "feels" right!









Link claiming Conductonaut always beats CLU by 3c.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/liquid-metal-showdown-thermal-grizzly-conductonaut-vs-cool-laboratory-liquid-ultra-pro.791489/


----------



## MaKeN

3c but wont last as long?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I contacted Intel and Server-class chips have a locked multiplier, So AVX offset is not allowed.


WRONG. All 8+ core E-class server chips down clock with AVX in the stack (and have been for at least 3 generations).. Your Intel contacts don't know squat... and you obviously do not either. The tech was dragged into consumer pdts with Broadwell. My 6950x has the option, it's identical (and lower clocked) server cousin does not, but will lower the multi when AVX is in the stack. read any 6950X thread. You got a lot of catching up to do.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GnarlyCharlie*
> 
> It won't dissolve your die, that thing is like a little piece of glass when you see it in person.


you are a man of great patience.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> The way I like to imagine the temperature / voltage relationship (I.E as a result of delidding) is like this:
> 
> The reason lower temps allows lower voltage is because silic*on conducts electricity better the colder it is.* (_And is a worse conductor the hotter it is).
> _
> If you think of a CPU (microchip) as millions of 'conductive pathways' and 'non-conductive walls'. Then imagine that when colder the conductive pathways become more conductive...


not with the temperatures a chiller will bring... e-resistance begins to fall at ~ -50C and continues down to a few Kelvin. In the temp range we;'re working at, the effect is mainly related to the chip's leakage, e-scattering (tunneling as the transitor size continues to shrink) leading to electron "wandering" around doing nothing but dissipating energy as heat. (this is not a cryogenic "superconductor" effect.)
With a 7700K, if you can lower peak temps 10-20C you'll likely gain 100+ MHz to the frequency ceiling operating in the 0C to 30C range from 50C and higher. delidding mine early, stock was able to run 5.0 as a 24/7, delid is 5.3 as a 24/7 with 1.328V.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I contacted Intel and Server-class chips have a locked multiplier, So AVX offset is not allowed.
> 
> 
> 
> WRONG. All 8+ core E-class server chips down clock with AVX in the stack (and have been for at least 3 generations).. Your Intel contacts don't know squat... and you obviously do not either. The tech was dragged into consumer pdts with Broadwell. My 6950x has the option, it's identical (and lower clocked) server cousin does not, but will lower the multi when AVX is in the stack. read any 6950X thread. You got a lot of catching up to do.
Click to expand...

6950X is not a Xeon chip with no multiplier AVX offset. I've seen some not all 6950X throttle with load, not just AVX loads depending on the motherboard VRM. I belong to the Intel sever forum and the don't sell a Xeon processor that down clocks with AVX stack, they don't know what your talking about, they said Turbo Boost requirements not met are what the CPU will do to reduce clock speed.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I contacted Intel and Server-class chips have a locked multiplier, So AVX offset is not allowed
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> WRONG. All 8+ core E-class server chips down clock with AVX in the stack (and have been for at least 3 generations).. Your Intel contacts don't know squat... and you obviously do not either. The tech was dragged into consumer pdts with Broadwell. My 6950x has the option, it's identical (and lower clocked) server cousin does not, but will lower the multi when AVX is in the stack. read any 6950X thread. You got a lot of catching up to do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> 6950X is not a Xeon chip with no multiplier AVX offset. I've seen some not all 6950X throttle with load, not just AVX loads depending on the motherboard VRM. I belong to the Intel sever forum and the don't sell a Xeon processor that down clocks with AVX stack, they don't know what your talking about, they said Turbo Boost requirements not met are what the CPU will do to reduce clock speed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Jpmboy is correct, Xeon processors do downclock the turbo frequency, based on avx instructions. In fact with Intel's AVX2 instructions that came out in about 2013 on the Xeon processors, they can result in the processor lowering its frequency, depending on how intensive the avx workload and how much power consumed..

I don't know who you speak to on the Intel forums, but they clearly don't know what they are talking about as Xeons have had this feature for the last 4 years, as this information is clearly documented on Intel's forums and the rest of the web,as per the links below :

http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/white-papers/performance-xeon-e5-v3-advanced-vector-extensions-paper.pdf

https://communities.intel.com/thread/87851

https://www.microway.com/knowledge-center-articles/detailed-specifications-of-the-intel-xeon-e5-2600v4-broadwell-ep-processors/


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> With a lot of Z270 boards, especially 4 DIMM boards, it can be difficult achieving a Command Rate of 1T at high memory speeds. This is also true with Z170 boards that have had a Kabylake bios update, where prior to the update they could achieve 1T at speeds of 3600mhz and higher and then after the update, it does not successfully train 1T above 3200mhz.
> 
> With regards to running at 4000mhz, you will need a lot more voltage than 1.42 volts, if you are trying to run at c16 with 4 DIMM Modules. You will need to either increase your voltages or relax your timings to C18 or C19 for example, if you want to run at below 1.45 volts.
> 
> You are running Samsung B-DIe IC's on your Trident Kit, and they are able to withstand high voltages upto as high as 2.0 volts. These high voltages are used when benching memory at high speeds and at very tight timings like C12, so therefore running at between 1.4-1.45 volts for 24/7 use with B-die, is no problem whatsoever.
> 
> Here are a few things you can try :
> 
> 1) With all 4 modules installed, set your memory frequency to 3200mhz,CR to 1 and your timings to 16-16-16-36 and see if that boots up successfully. If it does then try increasing your frequency to the next speed up, leaving all other settings as is and see if it boots up.
> 
> 2) Remove 2 of the 4 modules and then try booting up at 3600mhz, CR to 1 and timings at C16 and see if that successfully passes. If that passes which it most likely will, then try 3866mhz at 1T and so on.
> 
> Hope that helps.


After a little more testing it errored on HCI memtest however 3866mhz 1.40v 16-17-17-38 2T is stable. I know the Samsung memory can handle more voltage with tighter timings (just like the memory in the K|INGP|N) I think I was just being a little paranoid cause I read a where a couple
people fryed either their motherboard or cpu's posting with as little as 1.5v dram but Im sure in both instances other things came into play (like early bios', faulty boards & using AUTO voltages). I have also seen reviewers testing Hynix ic's at 1.70v+ so Im sure 1.5v is nothing for the Samsung, the cpu's IMC im not so sure.
I will try some of the things you mentioned and report back, thanks!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> Nice advice/post ... +R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Curious why you didn't bring up IO/SA voltages though? Especially if they are on "auto" which can significantly overvolt those settings causing instability


Not using AUTO VCCIO or SA. My kit seems happy at around 1.2125-1.2250v & 1.2375v. May need a little more to post above 3866mhz but since I havent been able to post at 4000mhz or above im not sure yet.

I have been leaving DMI voltage on auto though and Im wondering if increasing it might help? Not sure what it does exactly?

I think @nr-peyton was referring to MRC fast boot in an earlier post, this setting seemed to make no difference in getting to post but once an overclock was dialed in it did cut my boot time down.
Another setting MCH full check I havent messed with too much but I heard its not wise to disable it. Asus sets both of these settings to AUTO which sucks cause you cant always tell if auto is enable or disable (very annoying!)


----------



## ducegt

My 4 dimm ASRock z270 k6 won't do 1T no matter what with my 2 dimm kit 3600CL15. 3600CL14 with very tight sec and third timings takes 1.456v hwinfo reading and I was recently surprised that vccio 1v and vccsa 1.05v is perfectly stable.


----------



## sdmf74

Well 3200mhz CR1 booted but it must have been on the edge of stability, 3333mhz sadly would not boot. Maybe when Asus gets off their..... 4 month vacation and releases a proper bios for the whole ROG IX series line of motherboards we will get better results. Working Aura software that doesnt corrupt my dimms would be nice too.
Oh and AISUITEIII that recognizes my pwm pump on the PWM water pump+ header, and while im at it RamCache II software that doesnt spew "incorrect function" errors and well you get the idea. Thanks Assus









So glad I upgraded my Asus motherboard that Popped loudly through my speakers every time I powered down.


----------



## encrypted11

AVX offset was a Xeon feature. Except that the values aren't user-adjustable unlike the variant on consumer platforms.

More references.

https://edgeup.asus.com/2016/05/31/get-best-performance-broadwell-e-processors-asus-thermal-control-tool/2/


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Well 3200mhz CR1 booted but it must have been on the edge of stability, 3333mhz sadly would not boot


I should have said I can get 1T to boot..even at 3600, but it will give errors every second when tested. some benches score more while others are lower because of the errors.


----------



## TomcatV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> With a lot of Z270 boards, especially 4 DIMM boards, it can be difficult achieving a Command Rate of 1T at high memory speeds. This is also true with Z170 boards that have had a Kabylake bios update, where prior to the update they could achieve 1T at speeds of 3600mhz and higher and then after the update, it does not successfully train 1T above 3200mhz.
> 
> With regards to running at 4000mhz, you will need a lot more voltage than 1.42 volts, if you are trying to run at c16 with 4 DIMM Modules. You will need to either increase your voltages or relax your timings to C18 or C19 for example, if you want to run at below 1.45 volts.
> 
> You are running Samsung B-DIe IC's on your Trident Kit, and they are able to withstand high voltages upto as high as 2.0 volts. These high voltages are used when benching memory at high speeds and at very tight timings like C12, so therefore running at between 1.4-1.45 volts for 24/7 use with B-die, is no problem whatsoever.
> 
> Here are a few things you can try :
> 
> 1) With all 4 modules installed, set your memory frequency to 3200mhz,CR to 1 and your timings to 16-16-16-36 and see if that boots up successfully. If it does then try increasing your frequency to the next speed up, leaving all other settings as is and see if it boots up.
> 
> 2) Remove 2 of the 4 modules and then try booting up at 3600mhz, CR to 1 and timings at C16 and see if that successfully passes. If that passes which it most likely will, then try 3866mhz at 1T and so on.
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> 
> 
> After a little more testing it errored on HCI memtest however 3866mhz 1.40v 16-17-17-38 2T is stable. I know the Samsung memory can handle more voltage with tighter timings (just like the memory in the K|INGP|N) I think I was just being a little paranoid cause I read a where a couple
> people fryed either their motherboard or cpu's posting with as little as 1.5v dram but Im sure in both instances other things came into play (like early bios', faulty boards & using AUTO voltages). I have also seen reviewers testing Hynix ic's at 1.70v+ so Im sure 1.5v is nothing for the Samsung, the cpu's IMC im not so sure.
> I will try some of the things you mentioned and report back, thanks!
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> Nice advice/post ... +R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Curious why you didn't bring up IO/SA voltages though? Especially if they are on "auto" which can significantly overvolt those settings causing instability
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not using AUTO VCCIO or SA. My kit seems happy at around 1.2125-1.2250v & 1.2375v. May need a little more to post above 3866mhz but since I havent been able to post at 4000mhz or above im not sure yet.
> 
> I have been leaving DMI voltage on auto though and Im wondering if increasing it might help? Not sure what it does exactly?
> 
> I think @nr-peyton was referring to MRC fast boot in an earlier post, this setting seemed to make no difference in getting to post but once an overclock was dialed in it did cut my boot time down.
> Another setting MCH full check I havent messed with too much but I heard its not wise to disable it. Asus sets both of these settings to AUTO which sucks cause you cant always tell if auto is enable or disable (very annoying!)
Click to expand...

Your IO/SA voltages look very reasonable ... in the scramble of overclocking ram, I would occasionally forget to re-set those voltages manually when re-loading Optimized Defaults and the Auto settings were crazy high causing more instability









Asus says MRC Fast Boot (enabled) will allow re-training of the ram when a timing is changed. But I don't trust it and disable it when finding new optimal clocks/timings, once more closely dialed in I re-enable it for the benefits you describe









I've always left DMI voltage on AUTO and have seen a lot of mis-info regarding it's real function in relation to OC'ing ram ... maybe JP could expand on it







... Maybe someday Asus will write the definitive definition guide for their boards, but I wouldn't hold my breath ... your on the right track but finding the sometimes elusive 1T stability can be quite an adventure. Maybe head over to *THIS THREAD* and get some more advice from Scone and Praz! Praz has his 64GB Trident kit finely tuned and I bet a lot of what he did would correlate nicely with your 32GB kit


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not with the temperatures a chiller will bring... e-resistance begins to fall at ~ -50C and continues down to a few Kelvin. In the temp range we;'re working at, the effect is mainly related to the chip's leakage, e-scattering (tunneling as the transitor size continues to shrink) leading to electron "wandering" around doing nothing but dissipating energy as heat. (this is not a cryogenic "superconductor" effect.)
> With a 7700K, if you can lower peak temps 10-20C you'll likely gain 100+ MHz to the frequency ceiling operating in the 0C to 30C range from 50C and higher. delidding mine early, stock was able to run 5.0 as a 24/7, delid is 5.3 as a 24/7 with 1.328V.


interesting...









I'm going to hit you with some more questions on this soon. (i like to be able to visualise everything-- I'm "hungry" that way)

But not today, my new GPU block just arrived so my excitement is already reserved for tonight lol

But thanks for reply. i'll definitely be coming back to this one-- I've even noted the post number lol


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Maybe when Asus gets off their..... 4 month vacation and releases a proper bios for the whole ROG IX series line of motherboards we will get better results. Working Aura software that doesnt corrupt my dimms would be nice too.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomcatV*
> 
> Maybe someday Asus will write the definitive definition guide for their boards, but I wouldn't hold my breath ... your on the right track but finding the sometimes elusive 1T stability can be quite an adventure.


I'm not so sure. No clue what's happening on the ROG forums but it seems like nobody from Asus is reading it or at least not reacting to it. See:
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?93082-PRIME-Z270-K-BIOS-Features-request
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?93639-VRM-Switching-Frequency-amp-Power-Phase-for-overclocking&p=653454#post653454
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?90663-Kaby-Lake-overclocking-guide&p=653565&viewfull=1#post653565

That's not a great support forum where you don't get any answer after weeks. So I don't really expect anything from them and they are probably not going to support older platforms as X299 came out already.


----------



## sdmf74

My maximus VII Formula was not like this, we had frequent bios/software updates for it.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I imagine with Ryzen boards hitting just before the X299 rollout, Asus is probably ear deep in things to do other than Z270 stuff.


----------



## mamuf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Charting Form to Submit Your Overclock to the Chart
> 
> 
> 
> _To be charted in the main chart, you must fulfill one of the following requirements:_
> 
> Prime v28.7 1 hour
> 
> OCCT 4.4.1 1 hour
> 
> Linpack from the Linpack Package download run at max settings (not recommended) 2 hours
> 
> Prime v27.9 3 hours
> 
> IBT 3 hours
> 
> x264 16T 8 hours
> 
> Realbench 8 hours
> 
> Aida64 and XTU do not count no matter the length of the test. When running tests it is assumed you are using the most amount of ram you can when prompted to choose. It is also assumed that you did not touch AVX voltage settings in the BIOS.
> 
> You must submit a picture showing that the stress test has been completed as you claimed (both the test and the duration). You also must have HWinfo open, showing both the frequency and Vcore. (Many people forget to make sure the Vcore reading is showing.) Failure to comply with every step results in being charted into the secondary chart at the bottom of the spreadsheet and your data will not be counted in statistics.


Is it required to pass ROG Realbench including Luxmark?

I managed to pass 8 hour stress test (just CPU, RAM and Cache coming next), but Luxmark driver crashed after cca 5 hours. Of course I can try the x264 custom loop but I thought it might be better to use Realbench since my primary use case is gaming, i.e. stress CPU along with GPU to generate power load and heat.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Also regarding delidding:
> 
> *Why are people still using CLU?*
> 
> Liquid Metals:
> Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut - 73 W/mk
> Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra - 38.4 W/mk
> Coollaboratory Liquid Pro - 32.6 W/mk
> 
> As seen above /\
> ...new Conductonaut has nearly 2x the conductivity number compared to 'good old' CLU.


I mean, we don't look at a fan's static pressure rating on the box and rate fans based on their rating. I don't know of any serious delidding CLU vs Conductonaut tests.


----------



## Jpmboy

lol - I prefer to use CLP on the die... seems to perform better in the long run. But, bottom line is ANY liquid metal is infinitely better that the peanut butter Intel used on these chips.


----------



## EDK-TheONE

Which motherboard Z270 Hero or Z270 M7 need less vcore for stability?


----------



## PeterOC

51x with Adaptive 1.365v/0.015v and LLC 4 seems stable for me. However if I set Cache higher than 42x the vCore stays around 1.4v regardless of the runtime core frequency. Is that normal?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PeterOC*
> 
> 51x with Adaptive 1.365v/0.015v and LLC 4 seems stable for me. However if I set Cache higher than 42x the vCore stays around 1.4v regardless of the runtime core frequency. Is that normal?


what do you mean Adaptive 1.365/0.015V? 0.015 offset on the VID + 1.365V Additional turbo?
... check windows advanced power settings and make sure min proc state is 0%. Sometimes windows will change this value if the event log records a 101 or 124... sometimes, not all the time a 101 or 124 is recorded.


----------



## dirtyred

ASUS Z270-K and 7700K running on 4.8 GHz @ 1.24 V, LLC 4, VRM switching frequency 400 Hz, CPU Power Phase on Extreme (full phase mode), Power Duty on T.Probe.

RealBench passed 8 hours however Prime95 v28.10 in AVX mode instantly gives rounding error on a few cores (SUM error and Round off checking enabled). If I run Prime95 with AVX disabled then it passed 30 minutes without any problems.

What do you think? Would you consider the system stable enough for daily browsing / gaming / 3d rendering?


----------



## BoredErica

Honestly I feel like passing 8-12hr Realbench or x264, if you crash later it's probably degradation. Then you go back and do the same test and you'll fail... which doesn't mean the test was invalid, in fact the opposite was true.


----------



## dirtyred

Degradation on 4.8 GHz @ 1.24 V? That's not even close to the CPU's limit of 1.52 V and 100 A. Occasionally I do some 5-5.2 GHz @ 1.32-1.38 V but only for few minutes, maximum an hour for OC benchmarks. But that's still below Intel's specs so it's really hard to believe that it's degradation.

Probably the voltage was just too low for 4.8 GHz @ 1.24 V with AVX, but I'm aiming for the lowest possible Vcore and temperatures to keep the PC silent. Fans are spinning around 900-1000 RPM and temperatures around 75-80 °C in RealBench and in 3DS Max rendering with Corona temperatures are around 70-75 °C. I did a render test for an hour and did not crash so I think I'll use it for a few days and see how it behaves.

So if I understand you correctly, you'd consider it stable for daily usage and dismiss Prime95 because it's way too unrealistic load?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Degradation on 4.8 GHz @ 1.24 V? That's not even close to the CPU's limit of 1.52 V and 100 A. Occasionally I do some 5-5.2 GHz @ 1.32-1.38 V but only for few minutes, maximum an hour for OC benchmarks. But that's still below Intel's specs so it's really hard to believe that it's degradation.


Right, I keep assuming people do similar voltages I do which is not always the case. It's hard to imagine any degradation in any decent timeframe at 1.24v.

Quote:


> So if I understand you correctly, you'd consider it stable for daily usage and dismiss Prime95 because it's way too unrealistic load?


I think Prime v27.9 is fine. With later versions if FMA3 is enabled yes, it's unrealistic. My opinion (and not everyone agrees) is that the hardest minimum requirement to be charted in the main chart in this thread is the 1 hour Prime v28 or latest OCCT.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> ASUS Z270-K and 7700K running on 4.8 GHz @ 1.24 V, LLC 4, VRM switching frequency 400 Hz, CPU Power Phase on Extreme (full phase mode), Power Duty on T.Probe.
> 
> RealBench passed 8 hours however Prime95 v28.10 in AVX mode instantly gives rounding error on a few cores (SUM error and Round off checking enabled). If I run Prime95 with AVX disabled then it passed 30 minutes without any problems.
> 
> What do you think? Would you consider the system stable enough for daily browsing / gaming / 3d rendering?


yes... I would. If you want to eliminate the p95 rounding errors (which is a failure to match checksums) a bit more vcore shouild do it. If that does not, lower the cache multiplier one notch.


----------



## dirtyred

Cache multiplier is on default 42. I don't want to raise the Vcore as I'm aiming for the lowest usable amount of voltage so I can keep my fans running silent. AVX is not that important for me anyways as I'm not going to run anything as demanding (not even close) as Prime95. Will check with v27.9 but I'm thinking to apply a power limit of 95 W because most of my apps are consuming around 85-92 W like Corona Renderer in 3DS Max.


----------



## Scotty99

If anyone in here is running their 7700k at stock could you run the built in cpu-z benchmark? Just tryin to do a bit of comparing, thanks.


----------



## dirtyred

In CPU-Z there's a reference option so you can compare your score with other CPU's as well. Mine did 507.5 / 2636.9. Not sure if memory speed is influencing it, mine is on 3200 16-16-16-28 1T.

BTW I dropped the voltage from 1.24 V to 1.23 V (1.2 adaptive + 0.03 offset) on 4.8 GHz and passed 8 hours RealBench. Next try will be 1.22 V but during light load like browsing the Firefox content region went black on every tab so I had to close it and reopen. That fixed the issue but I might have to try 1.18 + 0.05 V. I'm guessing intermediate voltages are not as high as needed for light load on around 2-2.5 GHz. Too bad you can't control voltages in a graph mode like in Afterburner.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> In CPU-Z there's a reference option so you can compare your score with other CPU's as well. Mine did 507.5 / 2636.9. Not sure if memory speed is influencing it, mine is on 3200 16-16-16-28 1T.
> 
> BTW I dropped the voltage from 1.24 V to 1.23 V (1.2 adaptive + 0.03 offset) on 4.8 GHz and passed 8 hours RealBench. Next try will be 1.22 V but during light load like browsing the Firefox content region went black on every tab so I had to close it and reopen. That fixed the issue but I might have to try 1.18 + 0.05 V. I'm guessing intermediate voltages are not as high as needed for light load on around 2-2.5 GHz. Too bad you can't control voltages in a graph mode like in Afterburner.


Ya i saw that but it looked a little low, in cpu-z it says the 7700k scores 492. My 3.8ghz ryzen scored a 433 i figured there would be more of a delta than that.


----------



## dirtyred

I'm not sure that single threaded performance is relevant anymore. Can't really think of a popular app that's using only 1 core. I think 4 cores is bare minimum nowadays but for the average user / gamer that's pretty much enough. Don't worry too much about your score in CPU-Z, in real world scenarios it should perform similarly and be better in heavy multi-threaded workloads.


----------



## bfe_vern

Maybe I'm doing something wrong but my CPU-Z bench gave me this @4800 2396/10541 (s/m).


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Cache multiplier is on default 42. I don't want to raise the Vcore as I'm aiming for the lowest usable amount of voltage so I can keep my fans running silent. AVX is not that important for me anyways as I'm not going to run anything as demanding (not even close) as Prime95. Will check with v27.9 but I'm thinking to apply a power limit of 95 W because most of my apps are consuming around 85-92 W like Corona Renderer in 3DS Max.


I was reading, either on here or HWBot that that increasing the cache multi doesn't really seem to help with performance. I didn't see anything about it affecting stability for an overclock. With my core multi at 50 and my cache at 45, could I possibly drop my cache and maybe hit 5.1?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bfe_vern*
> 
> Maybe I'm doing something wrong but my CPU-Z bench gave me this @4800 2396/10541 (s/m).


He asked for stock 7700K.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I was reading, either on here or HWBot that that increasing the cache multi doesn't really seem to help with performance. I didn't see anything about it affecting stability for an overclock. With my core multi at 50 and my cache at 45, could I possibly drop my cache and maybe hit 5.1?


It helps in memory intensive situations and benchmarks up to around 5%. When you OC always go with core first, find out if it's stable then raise cache until you crash. You might be able to hit 5.1 GHz with cache up to 4.5-4.7 GHz.


----------



## Nebulous

Got my 7700K, board and ram on Wed and managed to get 5.0Ghz with 1.31v









https://valid.x86.fr/vwspsb


----------



## dirtyred

1.31 V is not spectacular, it's more or less average. What LLC levels were in use? Because that's what matters. You could set 1.28 V if you set LLC to the highest, it will still go up to 1.31-1.34 V so the BIOS voltage setting is not that relevant. What's relevant is Vcore + LLC = Voltage under load.

Btw, it's possible that with 1.31 V is not stable so do a stress test first. CPU-Z validation is not enough.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> 1.31 V is not spectacular, it's more or less average. What LLC levels were in use? Because that's what matters. You could set 1.28 V if you set LLC to the highest, it will still go up to 1.31-1.34 V so the BIOS voltage setting is not that relevant. What's relevant is Vcore + LLC = Voltage under load.
> 
> Btw, it's possible that with 1.31 V is not stable so do a stress test first. CPU-Z validation is not enough.


This is so true. Lower benches I can run 50x all day around 1.31 but OCCT and P95 pulls 1.36 to be stable.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *bfe_vern*
> 
> Maybe I'm doing something wrong but my CPU-Z bench gave me this @4800 2396/10541 (s/m).
> 
> 
> 
> He asked for stock 7700K.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I was reading, either on here or HWBot that that increasing the cache multi doesn't really seem to help with performance. I didn't see anything about it affecting stability for an overclock. With my core multi at 50 and my cache at 45, could I possibly drop my cache and maybe hit 5.1?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It helps in memory intensive situations and benchmarks up to around 5%. When you OC always go with core first, find out if it's stable then raise cache until you crash. You might be able to hit 5.1 GHz with cache up to 4.5-4.7 GHz.
Click to expand...

I think I'm going to try and drop it back to 42 and push core to 51 and see. If not, I'll delid soon anyway to see what improvements that makes.

Thanks Red


----------



## Nebulous

My LLC is set to 1, vcore @ 1.3v. Uncore @ 4.2. Overnight stress with XTU/OCCT resulted in hottest core @ 72c. No crashes/BSOD or Lock. Several hours of gaming (FC4, Silent Hunter) cpu temps hover in the mid/high 40's. I call that rock steady stable for my needs.

Not my first rodeo benching for stable clocks.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I'm not sure that single threaded performance is relevant anymore. Can't really think of a popular app that's using only 1 core. I think 4 cores is bare minimum nowadays but for the average user / gamer that's pretty much enough. Don't worry too much about your score in CPU-Z, in real world scenarios it should perform similarly and be better in heavy multi-threaded workloads.


Well there is some looseness with the language. Skyrim's not really single threaded... Maybe some parts are, but I believe 2 cores would help performance compared to a single core. When I talk about single threaded performance I often mean that given an application can only benefit from up to 4 cores and 4 core has been mainstream for a long time, what really ends up being limiting when it comes to being CPU bound is the speed of each core.

But that is pretty convoluted so I'm not typing that every time instead of saying single threaded performance.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nebulous*
> 
> My LLC is set to 1, vcore @ 1.3v. Uncore @ 4.2. Overnight stress with XTU/OCCT resulted in hottest core @ 72c. No crashes/BSOD or Lock. Several hours of gaming (FC4, Silent Hunter) cpu temps hover in the mid/high 40's. I call that rock steady stable for my needs.
> 
> Not my first rodeo benching for stable clocks.


Is your CPU delidded? I know that lower temperatures allow for less Vcore, ASUS managed to get down to 1.28 V and similar temperatures with their delidded 7700K.
With LLC on 1 what was the Vcore under load?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Well there is some looseness with the language. Skyrim's not really single threaded... Maybe some parts are, but I believe 2 cores would help performance compared to a single core. When I talk about single threaded performance I often mean that given an application can only benefit from up to 4 cores and 4 core has been mainstream for a long time, what really ends up being limiting when it comes to being CPU bound is the speed of each core.
> 
> But that is pretty convoluted so I'm not typing that every time instead of saying single threaded performance.


I meant that single threaded performance is not as important as multi-core performance. It's true that some games are still using only 2-4 cores but most games nowadays scale well with the number of cores.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I meant that single threaded performance is not as important as multi-core performance. It's true that some games are still using only 2-4 cores but most games nowadays scale well with the number of cores.


Yeah. But I still spend most of my time with things that require the highest single threaded performance.









Don't see that changing in the near future either. People have to think about what their use case is.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Nebulous*
> 
> My LLC is set to 1, vcore @ 1.3v. Uncore @ 4.2. Overnight stress with XTU/OCCT resulted in hottest core @ 72c. No crashes/BSOD or Lock. Several hours of gaming (FC4, Silent Hunter) cpu temps hover in the mid/high 40's. I call that rock steady stable for my needs.
> 
> Not my first rodeo benching for stable clocks.
> 
> 
> 
> Is your CPU delidded? I know that lower temperatures allow for less Vcore, ASUS managed to get down to 1.28 V and similar temperatures with their delidded 7700K.
> With LLC on 1 what was the Vcore under load?
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Well there is some looseness with the language. Skyrim's not really single threaded... Maybe some parts are, but I believe 2 cores would help performance compared to a single core. When I talk about single threaded performance I often mean that given an application can only benefit from up to 4 cores and 4 core has been mainstream for a long time, what really ends up being limiting when it comes to being CPU bound is the speed of each core.
> 
> But that is pretty convoluted so I'm not typing that every time instead of saying single threaded performance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I meant that single threaded performance is not as important as multi-core performance. It's true that some games are still using only 2-4 cores but most games nowadays scale well with the number of cores.
Click to expand...

Even with gaming there is one leader core that relies on single thread performance.

Take a look here.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> People have to think about what their use case is.


Couldn't agree more.

I'm still thinking if switching to 1700X is worth it over 7700K. In 2D editing and 3D rendering AMD has the core count advantage, in games Intel. Pricing is similar here in Hungary ($380 for 7700K, $396 for 1700X). It would also solve the issue of overheating, I heard AMD is soldered.


----------



## Nebulous

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Is your CPU delidded? I know that lower temperatures allow for less Vcore, ASUS managed to get down to 1.28 V and similar temperatures with their delidded 7700K.
> With LLC on 1 what was the Vcore under load?


No, chip is NOT delidded. Vcore in bios is set to 1.31v. With LLC set to 1, under XTU/OCCT using HWinfo, HWM & Coretemp, vcore bounces around from 1.315 to 1.317.

I have a friend who was going to lend me his delidding/relidding tool, but it seems like I don't need it with this chip.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I'm still thinking if switching to 1700X is worth it over 7700K. In 2D editing and 3D rendering AMD has the core count advantage, in games Intel. Pricing is similar here in Hungary ($380 for 7700K, $396 for 1700X). It would also solve the issue of overheating, I heard AMD is soldered.


It is soldered, and they do run cooler. However, I'd still be uncomfortable using the platform as a daily driver. It still feels like things are still changing with it. Big platform updates for memory compatibility, patches to various games/programs for compatibility, etc.

Don't take this the wrong way: I'm not at all saying ryzen is bad. In fact, I think it has the potential to REALLY give Intel some problems. I just think it needs more time to "settle in" before I'd feel safe depending on it.

Put another way (more closely related to the topic of this thread): I think using Ryzen today is like running a bleeding edge overclock, while using the z270 platform is more like using safe XMP memory settings and stock clocks.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nebulous*
> 
> No, chip is NOT delidded. Vcore in bios is set to 1.31v. With LLC set to 1, under XTU/OCCT using HWinfo, HWM & Coretemp, vcore bounces around from 1.315 to 1.317.
> 
> I have a friend who was going to lend me his delidding/relidding tool, but it seems like I don't need it with this chip.


I don't know anything about ASRock boards (no clue how similar they are to ASUS) but it's a bit strange that LLC 1 is already giving the same Vcore as you've set. Seems like you have a damn good chip especially the TIM as it's not overheating. Mine reaches 85-90 °C under RealBench when using 1.3-1.32 Vcore. I wonder how far could you push it delidded.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> It is soldered, and they do run cooler. However, I'd still be uncomfortable using the platform as a daily driver. It still feels like things are still changing with it. Big platform updates for memory compatibility, patches to various games/programs for compatibility, etc.
> 
> Don't take this the wrong way: I'm not at all saying ryzen is bad. In fact, I think it has the potential to REALLY give Intel some problems. I just think it needs more time to "settle in" before I'd feel safe depending on it.
> 
> Put another way (more closely related to the topic of this thread): I think using Ryzen today is like running a bleeding edge overclock, while using the z270 platform is more like using safe XMP memory settings and stock clocks.


Benchmarks are showing 5-15 FPS less in games compared to 7700K paired with a GTX 1080 but in 3D rendering it beats the crap out of even the 6900K and even the 6950X (especially when considering the price). For the price of one 6950X CPU you could get 3 complete 1700X systems and do distributed rendering.









Probably will skip this Ryzen lineup but I'm betting the next generation will be much improved. I wonder what Intel's response will be.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> ... but in 3D rendering it beats the crap out of even the 6900K and even the 6950X (especially when considering the price). For the price of one 6950X CPU you could get 3 complete 1700X systems and do distributed rendering.


No dispute from me whatsoever. In fact, after 3 bad 7700k's in a row that I had to return, I VERY seriously considered replacing the motherboard and CPU with a Ryzen configuration. On paper, it should be a MUCH better platform for my use....

Then I found that there were issues with my DDR4 (4x 8GB samsung E-die) and Ryzen that would cap me at 2400 (and Ryzen is very dependent on memory speeds.) Even if those issues were to get resolved, there were further issues with running 4 sticks of memory that might still cap me at 2400 (if it even worked at all.) So, I'd have to add the cost of a "ryzen compatible" 2x16GB DDR4 kit. Those are pretty overpriced at the moment, so suddenly the price of the Ryzen platform went much higher. (Some of those memory issues might be resolved by now, but most people who had e-die memory have either abandoned ryzen or purchased different memory, so it's hard to tell.)

Add to that the fact that, at least as of a couple weeks ago, there were still random issues with apps. I don't know how many of those issues are resolved and how many aren't. Reading the OCN forums doesn't help at all, because so many people are extremely biased, and it becomes difficult separating the real information from the zealots (either for or against.) I do know that the last time I was able to make a purchase, the platform wasn't stable enough for me.

I'm really cheering for AMD here, as it can only help the consumers even if a person is anti-AMD. Personally, I think AMD has the potential to create some wonderful chips and once they get the lingering issues resolved (or patched), I'm really looking forward to owning the platform.


----------



## coc_james

@dirtyred
If he is using an ASRock board, LLC 1 is the highest setting, so it does seem weird. My ASRock Z270 Taichi flexes approximately .050 with LLC 1 and .100 offset, with a max of 1.36 under OCCT.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> ... but in 3D rendering it beats the crap out of even the 6900K and even the 6950X (especially when considering the price). For the price of one 6950X CPU you could get 3 complete 1700X systems and do distributed rendering.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No dispute from me whatsoever. In fact, after 3 bad 7700k's in a row that I had to return, I VERY seriously considered replacing the motherboard and CPU with a Ryzen configuration. On paper, it should be a MUCH better platform for my use....
> 
> Then I found that there were issues with my DDR4 (4x 8GB samsung E-die) and Ryzen that would cap me at 2400 (and Ryzen is very dependent on memory speeds.) Even if those issues were to get resolved, there were further issues with running 4 sticks of memory that might still cap me at 2400 (if it even worked at all.) So, I'd have to add the cost of a "ryzen compatible" 2x16GB DDR4 kit. Those are pretty overpriced at the moment, so suddenly the price of the Ryzen platform went much higher. (Some of those memory issues might be resolved by now, but most people who had e-die memory have either abandoned ryzen or purchased different memory, so it's hard to tell.)
> 
> Add to that the fact that, at least as of a couple weeks ago, there were still random issues with apps. I don't know how many of those issues are resolved and how many aren't. Reading the OCN forums doesn't help at all, because so many people are extremely biased, and it becomes difficult separating the real information from the zealots (either for or against.) I do know that the last time I was able to make a purchase, the platform wasn't stable enough for me.
> 
> I'm really cheering for AMD here, as it can only help the consumers even if a person is anti-AMD. Personally, I think AMD has the potential to create some wonderful chips and once they get the lingering issues resolved (or patched), I'm really looking forward to owning the platform.
Click to expand...

The Ryzen platform isn't the only AMD line that has stability issues with RAM. RAM stability/compatibility has, for as long I can remember, been an issue for AMD in general.


----------



## Nebulous

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> @dirtyred
> If he is using an ASRock board, LLC 1 is the highest setting, so it does seem weird. My ASRock Z270 Taichi flexes approximately .050 with LLC 1 and .100 offset, with a max of 1.36 under OCCT.


Yeah it is weird. Just to be sure it wasn't a fluke, I checked several times since Wed when I received it. Came with the bios ver 1.40. I flashed to the latest 2.00 and rechecked and sure enough it's still the same. Vcore in bios is set to 1.31v and under load it fluctuates between 1.315 and 1.317. Maybe I got lucky?


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nebulous*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> @dirtyred
> If he is using an ASRock board, LLC 1 is the highest setting, so it does seem weird. My ASRock Z270 Taichi flexes approximately .050 with LLC 1 and .100 offset, with a max of 1.36 under OCCT.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah it is weird. Just to be sure it wasn't a fluke, I checked several times since Wed when I received it. Came with the bios ver 1.40. I flashed to the latest 2.00 and rechecked and sure enough it's still the same. Vcore in bios is set to 1.31v and under load it fluctuates between 1.315 and 1.317. Maybe I got lucky?
Click to expand...

It's very possible you just have a great chip. What board do you have? I think 2.10 is the current Bios. Also, what memory/speed are you running? Also, what's your batch number? Mine is L708B014, Malay.


----------



## mamuf

My primary use case is gaming so I was not trying to maximize things, although I went up to 5.2 GHz @ 1.344 Vcore and passed RB 15 minutes. So the 5 GHz is very nice (delidded) OC I think. But the noise to cool it down to those temps is still a bit high. I am new to OC so I don't really know if letting the CPU to higher temps could shorten its lifespan. I would like it to be nice and quiet but the humming produced by the fans at 900-1000 rpm is still OK (NF-S12A in front and back), so I could go a little bit down on fan speed curves and probably lower the clocks and voltage a bit, too.

I don't know why this happens, but obviously when running AVX loads (RB), the VID goes up another +0.02 V automatically (regular VID is +0.005 above Vcore set in UEFI).

Username: mamuf
CPU Model: i5-7600K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4700
Vcore in UEFI: 1.290
Vcore: 1.264
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-D15S, delidded
Stability Test: Realbench 8 hours

Batch Number: Malaysia L644H081
Ram Speed: XMP 2800 14-16-16-39
Ram Voltage: 1.35
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: Auto
Motherboard: Z270 Asus Prime
LLC Setting: LLC Level 3
Misc Comments: Ambient temp 21.5 C, IA AC Load Line .01, IA DC Load Line .01

https://valid.x86.fr/klbtte


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nebulous*
> 
> Yeah it is weird. Just to be sure it wasn't a fluke, I checked several times since Wed when I received it. Came with the bios ver 1.40. I flashed to the latest 2.00 and rechecked and sure enough it's still the same. Vcore in bios is set to 1.31v and under load it fluctuates between 1.315 and 1.317. Maybe I got lucky?


Asrock Z270 K6 here. With LLC1, my reading will hold .1v less and it does not fluctuate. BIOS 1.29v was 1.28 actual and was 8 RB stable before delid.


----------



## dirtyred

Well, if LLC 1 give just a tiny bit more Vcore than you've set, that's all you need.
Batch numbers are meaningless, quality spread can be big even if cut from the same silicone board.


----------



## PeterOC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nebulous*
> 
> No, chip is NOT delidded. Vcore in bios is set to 1.31v. With LLC set to 1, under XTU/OCCT using HWinfo, HWM & Coretemp, vcore bounces around from 1.315 to 1.317.
> 
> I have a friend who was going to lend me his delidding/relidding tool, but it seems like I don't need it with this chip.


By setting Vcore to 1.31, you mean as Manual or Adaptive?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mamuf*
> 
> My primary use case is gaming so I was not trying to maximize things, although I went up to 5.2 GHz @ 1.344 Vcore and passed RB 15 minutes. So the 5 GHz is very nice (delidded) OC I think. But the noise to cool it down to those temps is still a bit high. I am new to OC so I don't really know if letting the CPU to higher temps could shorten its lifespan. I would like it to be nice and quiet but the humming produced by the fans at 900-1000 rpm is still OK (NF-S12A in front and back), so I could go a little bit down on fan speed curves and probably lower the clocks and voltage a bit, too.
> 
> I don't know why this happens, but obviously when running AVX loads (RB), the VID goes up another +0.02 V automatically (regular VID is +0.005 above Vcore set in UEFI).
> 
> Username: mamuf
> CPU Model: i5-7600K
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4700
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.290
> Vcore: 1.264
> FCLK: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-D15S, delidded
> Stability Test: Realbench 8 hours
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L644H081
> Ram Speed: XMP 2800 14-16-16-39
> Ram Voltage: 1.35
> VCCIO: Auto
> VCCSA: Auto
> Motherboard: Z270 Asus Prime
> LLC Setting: LLC Level 3
> Misc Comments: Ambient temp 21.5 C, IA AC Load Line .01, IA DC Load Line .01
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/klbtte


When folks set adaptive the VID varies according to CPU load. This is my Vcore with DVID, LLC AUTO, Prime95 v28.10 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.296v, Web browsing Max 1.344v idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off 1.332v


----------



## Nebulous

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PeterOC*
> 
> By setting Vcore to 1.31, you mean as Manual or Adaptive?


Never used Adaptive. I always manual.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nebulous*
> 
> Got my 7700K, board and ram on Wed and managed to get 5.0Ghz with 1.31v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/vwspsb


looks like a decent chip. IF cooling can handle it, 1.4+V is not off limits. [email protected] look promising. figure 100mV per 100MHz per core on this (or most any) architecture. Temps can really affect stability tho


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nebulous*
> 
> Got my 7700K, board and ram on Wed and managed to get 5.0Ghz with 1.31v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/vwspsb


By siliconlottery stats, a chip that does 1.376V or less for 5ghz(by their test methodology) falls within the 59 percentile.

That's decent at the very least. There are chips out there that don't do 5GHz even after a delid. I had one of those.If it doesn't hit a wall at probably 1.4V, you'll likely be able to run 5.1GHz daily with decent cooling, 5.2GHz for benchmarks are a possibility.


----------



## PeterOC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what do you mean Adaptive 1.365/0.015V? 0.015 offset on the VID + 1.365V Additional turbo?
> ... check windows advanced power settings and make sure min proc state is 0%. Sometimes windows will change this value if the event log records a 101 or 124... sometimes, not all the time a 101 or 124 is recorded.


The issue was I set both min and max Cache to 47. Leaving min at Auto gets VCore & VID to change with CPU ratio


----------



## Kalpa

My "rock stable" configuration had crashed last night, after some two weeks of folding without a hiccup (and passing very thorough stress testing beforehand). Windows logs claimed stopcode 50, which likely points towards a memory OC issue. I increased VCCIO & VCCSA by 10mV each as a precaution (they're now set to 1.060 / 1.160 V respectively in bios), since I'm pretty sure I was more on edge with the IMC voltage rather than DRAM voltage.

I'm letting it go for the time being, but if I get another crash within another few weeks I'll probably have to adjust the OC more thoroughly.

I'm very unwilling to believe I'm experiencing CPU degradation after only a few weeks, even though I run my machine at high temps (core temps ~85C average when folding), the core voltage is still fairly low during folding load, about 1.23V and CPU package drains ~80W (all numbers as reported by software)


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> My "rock stable" configuration had crashed last night, after some two weeks of folding without a hiccup (and passing very thorough stress testing beforehand). Windows logs claimed stopcode 50, which likely points towards a memory OC issue. I increased VCCIO & VCCSA by 10mV each as a precaution (they're now set to 1.060 / 1.160 V respectively in bios), since I'm pretty sure I was more on edge with the IMC voltage rather than DRAM voltage.
> 
> I'm letting it go for the time being, but if I get another crash within another few weeks I'll probably have to adjust the OC more thoroughly.
> 
> I'm very unwilling to believe I'm experiencing CPU degradation after only a few weeks, even though I run my machine at high temps (core temps ~85C average when folding), the core voltage is still fairly low during folding load, about 1.23V and CPU package drains ~80W (all numbers as reported by software)


High temperatures play a pretty big role in electromigration induced instability. I agree its unlikely to be degradation but your CPU is pretty heavily used.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> My "rock stable" configuration had crashed last night, after some two weeks of folding without a hiccup (and passing very thorough stress testing beforehand). Windows logs claimed stopcode 50, which likely points towards a memory OC issue. I increased VCCIO & VCCSA by 10mV each as a precaution (they're now set to 1.060 / 1.160 V respectively in bios), since I'm pretty sure I was more on edge with the IMC voltage rather than DRAM voltage.
> 
> I'm letting it go for the time being, but if I get another crash within another few weeks I'll probably have to adjust the OC more thoroughly.
> 
> I'm very unwilling to believe I'm experiencing CPU degradation after only a few weeks, even though I run my machine at high temps (core temps ~85C average when folding), the core voltage is still fairly low during folding load, about 1.23V and CPU package drains ~80W (all numbers as reported by software)


The Intel processor should last 3 years 24/7 at 99c so you should be just fine. You probably have a unstable overclock I would check that.


----------



## mamuf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When folks set adaptive the VID varies according to CPU load. This is my Vcore with DVID, LLC AUTO, Prime95 v28.10 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.296v, Web browsing Max 1.344v idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off 1.332v


OK, got it. Another thing is that reported Vcore values always differ in multiples of 16 mV, i.e. it's 1.248 or 1.264, couldn't get anything between. Perhaps it's just what the Asus DIGI+ VRM does.

I didn't try manual at all though since I really don't plan to use/bench it that way.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> I'm very unwilling to believe I'm experiencing CPU degradation after only a few weeks, even though I run my machine at high temps (core temps ~85C average when folding), the core voltage is still fairly low during folding load, about 1.23V and CPU package drains ~80W (all numbers as reported by software)


CPU degradation should be out of the question since on 1.23 V I'm pretty sure you're running it on max 4.8 GHz (that's the lowest I could go). But 85 °C is pretty damn hot for only 1.23 V and 80 W. Do you have at least a semi-decent cooler and airflow in the case?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mamuf*
> 
> OK, got it. Another thing is that reported Vcore values always differ in multiples of 16 mV, i.e. it's 1.248 or 1.264, couldn't get anything between. Perhaps it's just what the Asus DIGI+ VRM does.
> 
> I didn't try manual at all though since I really don't plan to use/bench it that way.


I noticed those jumps as well but software voltage meters are inaccurate. Don't trust those numbers, it's just a rough indication. Those jumps are probably because the voltage sensors are inaccurate and on ASUS boards as far as I know the refresh time is 256 ms. What happens between 2 refresh cycles can only be measured by an oscilloscope. The VRM's should be supplying much more accurate voltage to the CPU and that's not linear voltage as software monitors would indicate.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The Intel processor should last 3 years 24/7 at 99c so you should be just fine. You probably have a unstable overclock I would check that.


I'm quite confident in the stability of my CPU overclock - memory overclock on the other hand may very well have been on the edge of stability, hence why I upped the IMC voltages a tad.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> CPU degradation should be out of the question since on 1.23 V I'm pretty sure you're running it on max 4.8 GHz (that's the lowest I could go). But 85 °C is pretty damn hot for only 1.23 V and 80 W. Do you have at least a semi-decent cooler and airflow in the case?


Close enough, I'm running 4.7GHz with uncore at 4.4GHz. BIOS set voltage is 1.315V if memory serves, with LLC set to 'Standard' resulting in ~1.23V during full load.

I have a decent tower cooler, Thermalright's Macho (Rev B). Do realize that while running folding I have both my GPU and CPU stressed at 100%, increasing local temps even more (GPU cooling solution being dual axial fans doesn't help here) - I guess you can argue about poor case ventilation, but I prefer my (relatively) silent cooling and this is the compromise I'm running with.

And just like wingman99, I'm not really worried about high temps. I ran my i7 920 from 2009 to 2014 at 90C+ (at stock frequencies) with poorly installed Intel's less than stellar stock cooler (replaced by a proper aftermarket cooler in 2014, after which I overclocked the thing to 3600MHz), and it's still quite functional. Granted it was 45nm tech, and this new stuff is 14nm tech, which in theory should be so much more vulnerable to degradation, but then again there's hoping 10 years of process development has been worth something


----------



## dirtyred

That's a pretty big Vdroop, I think you could lower that voltage a bit to around 1.25 V and play a bit with LLC settings. My ASUS board on LLC 4 (goes up to 7) gives the same amount of turbo voltage as I entered but in the end it doesn't matter what voltage and LLC you set, the result is what matters. I still prefer to have more control and predictable voltages.

Even if CPU and GPU are stressed at the same time those temps are a bit too high for my taste. I can run my case and CPU fans around 900 RPM, good balance between performance and noise (almost silent with a bit of wind noise) and the GPU's small fans around 1400-1800 RPM while stress testing and stay around 80 °C on both CPU and GPU. Higher fan speeds won't bring temps that much down to justify the noise, I only allow them to run faster if temperatures are getting critical, like 85-90 °C. I think if you'd set at least one front fan to a bit higher RPM, that cool air could get out easier from the case.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> That's a pretty big Vdroop, I think you could lower that voltage a bit to around 1.25 V and play a bit with LLC settings. My ASUS board on LLC 4 (goes up to 7) gives the same amount of turbo voltage as I entered but in the end it doesn't matter what voltage and LLC you set, the result is what matters. I still prefer to have more control and predictable voltages.


Been there done that. Funnily enough following Intel spec has given me the lowest stable load voltage at this frequency on this motherboard. This is not the best motherboard for LLC options, though - there are only three 'auto', 'high' and 'standard', with 'high' being pretty much almost zero vdroop, and auto being something in between the two (go figure, I don't understand it either). I really don't care that core voltage is ~1.3V during gaming or other light load situations, what I really want is the lowest possible stable 100% utilization voltage (and consequently power use and temperature)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> That's a pretty big Vdroop, I think you could lower that voltage a bit to around 1.25 V and play a bit with LLC settings. My ASUS board on LLC 4 (goes up to 7) gives the same amount of turbo voltage as I entered but in the end it doesn't matter what voltage and LLC you set, the result is what matters. I still prefer to have more control and predictable voltages.
> 
> 
> 
> Been there done that. Funnily enough following Intel spec has given me the lowest stable load voltage at this frequency on this motherboard. This is not the best motherboard for LLC options, though - there are only three 'auto', 'high' and 'standard', with 'high' being pretty much almost zero vdroop, and auto being something in between the two (go figure, I don't understand it either). I really don't care that core voltage is ~1.3V during gaming or other light load situations, what I really want is the lowest possible stable 100% utilization voltage (and consequently power use and temperature)
Click to expand...

I leave LLC on AUTO for Intel specification also and use DVID and all powersaving features so the Idle voltage drops with low load and Idle on the CPU.


----------



## dirtyred

If a 7700K is limited to 2 cores what's the maximum Vcore you'd go up to? Currently I'm on 1.4 V for 5.4 GHz but I'm not sure if I should push it much further. Would not want to damage the CPU or the motherboard. Temperatures are fine, around 65 °C under load.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> If a 7700K is limited to 2 cores what's the maximum Vcore you'd go up to? Currently I'm on 1.4 V for 5.4 GHz but I'm not sure if I should push it much further. Would not want to damage the CPU or the motherboard. Temperatures are fine, around 65 °C under load.


ASUS says the safe 24/7 limit is 1.44v.


----------



## dirtyred

Not 24/7 as only 2 cores are enabled without HT. Only for SuperPi short runs (currently 1M so around 6-7 seconds, maybe some 32M later). Their voltage recommendation is probably for 4 cores with HT.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Not 24/7 as only 2 cores are enabled without HT. Only for SuperPi short runs (currently 1M so around 6-7 seconds, maybe some 32M later). Their voltage recommendation is probably for 4 cores with HT.


Cores disabled does not make a difference in voltage to the the transistors only total transistors used. Whether only 100 transistors are being used or 30 billion transistors are being used in kaby lake it's the same voltage running to and through the transistor in the on position.


----------



## dirtyred

So basically I'm still voltage limited for safety? I really don't want to go much higher than 1.4 V. In theory I'd still be way below the 100 A Intel's limit but if something happens to my rig, won't have money to replace it. Not sure how good my motherboard's components are for high voltages.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> So basically I'm still voltage limited for safety? I really don't want to go much higher than 1.4 V. In theory I'd still be way below the 100 A Intel's limit but if something happens to my rig, won't have money to replace it. Not sure how good my motherboard's components are for high voltages.


I have had my voltage up to 1.56v on air for benchtesting.







I would not risk it the processor, could just give way at anytime.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Not 24/7 as only 2 cores are enabled without HT. Only for SuperPi short runs (currently 1M so around 6-7 seconds, maybe some 32M later). Their voltage recommendation is probably for 4 cores with HT.


2 cores or 4 cores? HT is 4 cores, 8 threads. With HT disabled, you have 4 cores and 4 threads. (basically, you have an i5)

The voltage would be the same regardless of the number of cores. In theory, with half the number of cores pulling power, the amperage draw (and therefore wattage) would decrease, but the voltage is the same. (a parallel circuit doesn't drop voltage.)

Disabling HT is a different thing and _might_ reduce the required voltage for stability (in a similar way that disabling AVX might lower the voltage requirement.) Collective experience (or perhaps just collective myth?) is that disabling HT makes overclocking easier (and that would imply less voltage required.) I've never tried it myself.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> 2 cores or 4 cores? HT is 4 cores, 8 threads. With HT disabled, you have 4 cores and 4 threads. (basically, you have an i5)
> 
> The voltage would be the same regardless of the number of cores. In theory, with half the number of cores pulling power, the amperage draw (and therefore wattage) would decrease, but the voltage is the same. (a parallel circuit doesn't drop voltage.)
> 
> Disabling HT is a different thing and _might_ reduce the required voltage for stability (in a similar way that disabling AVX might lower the voltage requirement.) Collective experience (or perhaps just collective myth?) is that disabling HT makes overclocking easier (and that would imply less voltage required.) I've never tried it myself.


Its quite easy to picture why disabling HT increases core stability. It is almost exactly the same as why AVX requires more voltage for a given clock. HT forces the core to be more stressed + active, plus there are more active transistors (i.e. the scheduler), more chances for something to disagree with the operating clock. Its kind of hard to quantify its exact impact because theoretically, this should mean the i5s universally overclock better than the i7s. In practice, this doesn't seem to be the case, I suspect its because a significant number of i5s are worse binned + leaky chips that didn't quite make the cut for an i7.


----------



## blazarbot

I'll post my results in the next few days.

I've had my new gear (Apex board + 7700k + FTW3 Ti) for over a week now but haven't felt the passion to build the system up yet. I haven't even tried anything yet. Mainly because I got to gut my x99 system for the case, PSU and drives. I wanted a test bench for it but have no more space in the room, unless i stick it under the bed. Which is not ideal because my dog sleeps under there often.

I know, 1st world problems.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have had my voltage up to 1.56v on air for benchtesting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would not risk it the processor, could just give way at anytime.


I wouldn't go that high. Even 1.45 V is a bit scary as I don't know what voltage spike would the CPU get when load changes as I don't know the quality of the VRM's on the PRIME 270-K (cheap Z270 from ASUS).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> 2 cores or 4 cores? HT is 4 cores, 8 threads. With HT disabled, you have 4 cores and 4 threads. (basically, you have an i5)
> 
> The voltage would be the same regardless of the number of cores. In theory, with half the number of cores pulling power, the amperage draw (and therefore wattage) would decrease, but the voltage is the same. (a parallel circuit doesn't drop voltage.)
> 
> Disabling HT is a different thing and _might_ reduce the required voltage for stability (in a similar way that disabling AVX might lower the voltage requirement.) Collective experience (or perhaps just collective myth?) is that disabling HT makes overclocking easier (and that would imply less voltage required.) I've never tried it myself.


2 cores and not HT on 7700K. You can disable cores in BIOS when not needed. It does increase stability. For 5.3 GHz I can get away with 1.36 V, for 5.4 GHz with 1.4 V and run SuperPi 1 M.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Its quite easy to picture why disabling HT increases core stability. It is almost exactly the same as why AVX requires more voltage for a given clock. HT forces the core to be more stressed + active, plus there are more active transistors (i.e. the scheduler), more chances for something to disagree with the operating clock. Its kind of hard to quantify its exact impact because theoretically, this should mean the i5s universally overclock better than the i7s. In practice, this doesn't seem to be the case, I suspect its because a significant number of i5s are worse binned + leaky chips that didn't quite make the cut for an i7.


I don't really care about long term stability, just need it to run for a few seconds then take a screenshot. CPU and MB safety concerns me more.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I don't really care about long term stability, just need it to run for a few seconds then take a screenshot. CPU and MB safety concerns me more.


I would say the weak link is the motherboard here. I'm quite certain the CPU can handle the voltage for a few seconds, but not sure how your Caps and VRMs will handle it. I would look for some others experience with extreme benching using your motherboard and see what their experience is. What mobo are you running?


----------



## coc_james

So I've given up hope for post 50x, at least until I delid. Now I'm trying to get the coolest stable 50x 24/7 I can achieve. I ran 8hrs OCCT with 50x, 42x, 3466mhz, LLC1, with a voltage offset of 90. I tried 1hr runs with the same settings to see what my minimum offset would be and this is it. My high core was 86 degrees, and vcore peaked at 1.36. So while not terrible, considering AVX offset is set to null, I would like to bring it down as low as possible.

Currently I am running a one hour OCCT w/ 50x, 42x, 3466mhz, LLC2, with a voltage offset of 120. Thirty minutes in my peak vcore is 1.36 with a max core of 79 degrees.

I noticed with the cache multi turned up, it was requiring more vcore and my temps were higher. So I turned it back down to 42. Is there something else I can change to offset the increased vcore and temps to increase the cache multi?


----------



## Mr-Dark

Hello all

I just Delided my 7700k today, and need some opinion









here is some pic



after applying the Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra



Basic test, everything at default expect 50X Multi and 1.300v

Before the delid



after Delid



10C drop.. is that enough or ? any comment on this ?

The cooler is Corsair H110i and the ambient around + 25c

Thanks


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I would say the weak link is the motherboard here. I'm quite certain the CPU can handle the voltage for a few seconds, but not sure how your Caps and VRMs will handle it. I would look for some others experience with extreme benching using your motherboard and see what their experience is. What mobo are you running?


Not sure if any serious overclocker would use the same motherboard. It's in my signature, ASUS Prime Z270-K.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I noticed with the cache multi turned up, it was requiring more vcore and my temps were higher. So I turned it back down to 42. Is there something else I can change to offset the increased vcore and temps to increase the cache multi?


Higher cache requires higher Vcore. You can get away with the same Vcore up until a certain point, I'd say 45-46 from my experience. You could lower RAM voltage, that influences CPU temperatures. In my case between 1.2-1.35 V RAM voltage there's around 8-10 °C difference in CPU temperatures. But that would require you to set lower RAM frequency or looser timings but that doesn't worth it for the cache. Increasing cache multi would gain you maybe 1-3% performance but you'd lose more because of the RAM. 86 °C during stress test is not terrible, you wouldn't reach that under normal circumstances.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I would say the weak link is the motherboard here. I'm quite certain the CPU can handle the voltage for a few seconds, but not sure how your Caps and VRMs will handle it. I would look for some others experience with extreme benching using your motherboard and see what their experience is. What mobo are you running?
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure if any serious overclocker would use the same motherboard. It's in my signature, ASUS Prime Z270-K.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I noticed with the cache multi turned up, it was requiring more vcore and my temps were higher. So I turned it back down to 42. Is there something else I can change to offset the increased vcore and temps to increase the cache multi?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Higher cache requires higher Vcore. You can get away with the same Vcore up until a certain point, I'd say 45-46 from my experience. You could lower RAM voltage, that influences CPU temperatures. In my case between 1.2-1.35 V RAM voltage there's around 8-10 °C difference in CPU temperatures. But that would require you to set lower RAM frequency or looser timings but that doesn't worth it for the cache. Increasing cache multi would gain you maybe 1-3% performance but you'd lose more because of the RAM. 86 °C during stress test is not terrible, you wouldn't reach that under normal circumstances.
Click to expand...

I thought that the availability of info on my motherboard was bad. There's not much info out there on yours, at all. I'd go with my gut on this one, BUT, here's this; https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html page 114 shows the max voltage as 1.52, same as Skylake. Obviously you aren't going to run this or anything close to it 24/7 so I'd be okay with it for "testing" purposes. Motherboard manufacturers make the available current higher than the supported CPU max because of spikes. The percentage over max is dependant of the motherboard and its intended purposes. A motherboard designed first for Overclocking is going to have a much higher available sustained current, but that doesn't mean a lower grade board can't overvolt at all.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I thought that the availability of info on my motherboard was bad. There's not much info out there on yours, at all. I'd go with my gut on this one, BUT, here's this; https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html page 114 shows the max voltage as 1.52, same as Skylake. Obviously you aren't going to run this or anything close to it 24/7 so I'd be okay with it for "testing" purposes. Motherboard manufacturers make the available current higher than the supported CPU max because of spikes. The percentage over max is dependant of the motherboard and its intended purposes. A motherboard designed first for Overclocking is going to have a much higher available sustained current, but that doesn't mean a lower grade board can't overvolt at all.


I checked the datasheet many times. I know about the 1.52 V and 100 A limit. The voltage probably wouldn't kill the CPU but the current would. 1.4 V and around 40 W on package and cores should be pretty safe. The thing that worries me more is the VRM's quality. Wouldn't want anything to blow off on my motherboard.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I thought that the availability of info on my motherboard was bad. There's not much info out there on yours, at all. I'd go with my gut on this one, BUT, here's this; https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html page 114 shows the max voltage as 1.52, same as Skylake. Obviously you aren't going to run this or anything close to it 24/7 so I'd be okay with it for "testing" purposes. Motherboard manufacturers make the available current higher than the supported CPU max because of spikes. The percentage over max is dependant of the motherboard and its intended purposes. A motherboard designed first for Overclocking is going to have a much higher available sustained current, but that doesn't mean a lower grade board can't overvolt at all.
> 
> 
> 
> I checked the datasheet many times. I know about the 1.52 V and 100 A limit. The voltage probably wouldn't kill the CPU but the current would. The thing that worries me more is the VRM's quality. Wouldn't want anything to blow off on my motherboard.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I was looking for; the type of VRM and capacitors used. No luck, at all.


----------



## coc_james

I managed 79 degrees max core with 50x, 44x, AVX null, 120 offset, 3466mhz XMP on 1hr OCCT, with a peak vcore @1.36. I think this is definitely my ceiling for core and cache without delidding.

With XMP enabled, can I lower the voltage on the RAM? Or will I have to turn off XMP and manually set all of the timings? I was reading a review of my RAM where 4133mhz was reached at stock voltage, with pretty loose timings. I'd like to see what it can do, but not at the expense of stable clocks. I have never even attempted to overclock my RAM before, therefore I'm a little gun-shy.


----------



## dirtyred

XMP is just a profile. Usually you can lower the voltage. My G.SKILL 3200 16-16-16-36 XMP profile is setting 1.35 V but I can go 16-16-16-28 1T with 1.26 V and pass HCI Memtest 500%. I used this http://hw-db.com/memory/2768/g-skill-f4-3200c16d-8gvk-review/2 as a guide but couldn't copy every setting even though I have exactly the same kit, had to tweak RAM voltage, VCCIO and SA a bit. RAM tweaking is pretty time consuming as you have too many variables.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> XMP is just a profile. Usually you can lower the voltage. My G.SKILL 3200 16-16-16-36 XMP profile is setting 1.35 V but I can go 16-16-16-28 1T with 1.26 V and pass HCI Memtest 500%. I used this http://hw-db.com/memory/2768/g-skill-f4-3200c16d-8gvk-review/2 as a guide but couldn't copy every setting even though I have exactly the same kit, had to tweak RAM voltage, VCCIO and SA a bit. RAM tweaking is pretty time consuming as you have too many variables.


I'm wondering about the last setting; 1t. My motherboard says "2n" for the last one.


----------



## dirtyred

Just different naming. 2T and 2N is the same. Keep in mind that going from 2T to 1T might require a bit of extra voltage but in many cases it works with the same voltage. Speed gain is a few percentage.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> Hello all
> 
> I just Delided my 7700k today, and need some opinion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> here is some pic
> 
> 
> 
> after applying the Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra
> 
> 
> 
> Basic test, everything at default expect 50X Multi and 1.300v
> 
> Before the delid
> 
> 
> 
> after Delid
> 
> 
> 
> 10C drop.. is that enough or ? any comment on this ?
> 
> The cooler is Corsair H110i and the ambient around + 25c
> 
> Thanks


10 degrees C is still a reasonable drop in temps, keep in mind not every CPU will drop 20 degrees C or more as it depends on if there is a gap between the IHS and die was in the first place, given you have dropped "only" 10 degrees C that would suggest that there may not have been a gap there at all in the first place, your improvement in temps is most likely as a result of better TIM


----------



## ducegt

That's a lot of CLU. Just a guess but I probably used 1/5th of that. I only had a few visible clumps/bumps. I have no idea if less is better, but that could be the case.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> That's a lot of CLU. Just a guess but I probably used 1/5th of that. I only had a few visible clumps/bumps. I have no idea if less is better, but that could be the case.


less is better.. and it is really important to "prime" the under side of the IHS with LM. So, best to paint a thin layer on both the die and under the IHS.


----------



## mamuf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> You could lower RAM voltage, that influences CPU temperatures. In my case between 1.2-1.35 V RAM voltage there's around 8-10 °C difference in CPU temperatures.


My CPU temp definitely went up after I turned on XMP, same voltage as yours (only I have 2800 MHz instead of 3200), but I think it was just few degrees, 3-4 max, not 10 C. I do have a delid, though, if that might affect the temp rise as well?


----------



## Mr-Dark

Thanks all, i will reapply the CLU again..

as first time doing this the result reasonable


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mamuf*
> 
> My CPU temp definitely went up after I turned on XMP, same voltage as yours (only I have 2800 MHz instead of 3200), but I think it was just few degrees, 3-4 max, not 10 C. I do have a delid, though, if that might affect the temp rise as well?


With delid the temperature rise is less because of better heat transfer. But don't worry about temperatures if the cores are below 80 °C on average. Random peaks above that are fine.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mamuf*
> 
> My CPU temp definitely went up after I turned on XMP, same voltage as yours (only I have 2800 MHz instead of 3200), but I think it was just few degrees, 3-4 max, not 10 C. I do have a delid, though, if that might affect the temp rise as well?
> 
> 
> 
> With delid the temperature rise is less because of better heat transfer. But don't worry about temperatures if the cores are below 80 °C on average. Random peaks above that are fine.
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> XMP is just a profile. Usually you can lower the voltage. My G.SKILL 3200 16-16-16-36 XMP profile is setting 1.35 V but I can go 16-16-16-28 1T with 1.26 V and pass HCI Memtest 500%. I used this http://hw-db.com/memory/2768/g-skill-f4-3200c16d-8gvk-review/2 as a guide but couldn't copy every setting even though I have exactly the same kit, had to tweak RAM voltage, VCCIO and SA a bit. RAM tweaking is pretty time consuming as you have too many variables.


Went and saw Wonder Woman, then came back and lowered the voltage for the RAM to 1.3, from 1.35 and started up OCCT. One hour in, my max temp is down 9 degrees and the cores are much closer to each other. Before temp spread was 15 degrees, now it's only 9. Will the large test run enough RAM to test it's stability?


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Went and saw Wonder Woman, then came back and lowered the voltage for the RAM to 1.3, from 1.35 and started up OCCT. One hour in, my max temp is down 9 degrees and the cores are much closer to each other. Before temp spread was 15 degrees, now it's only 9. Will the large test run enough RAM to test it's stability?


If you want to be sure run 8 instances of HCI MemTest and devide the amount of free RAM minus a bit between them. You have 16 GB, Windows uses around 1.5 GB so you have 14.5 / 8 = 1.8 GB. You set around 1750 MB for each instance and let it run for at least 150% but if you want to be sure, let it run up to 500% (will take a couple of hours). Close every app before running it.


----------



## coc_james

Well, with only having dropped the RAM voltage, I wasn't able to pass OCCT 8hrs with 1.3 on RAM. It ended with an error on core #0. Is this related to the lower RAM voltage or was the clock never really stable? I tested it previously for 1 hour, thus failure occurred around 1.75 hours in.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Well, with only having dropped the RAM voltage, I wasn't able to pass OCCT 8hrs with 1.3 on RAM. It ended with an error on core #0. Is this related to the lower RAM voltage or was the clock never really stable? I tested it previously for 1 hour, thus failure occurred around 1.75 hours in.


likely to be core instability. 1hr isn't a very long time to tease out instability on the core. I personally don't consider an OC stable unless it passes Realbench for 8hrs.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> likely to be core instability. 1hr isn't a very long time to tease out instability on the core. I personally don't consider an OC stable unless it passes Realbench for 8hrs.


By your opinion there must be several unstable overclocks on the opening post chart including mine despite having being used daily for the last 6 months without any issues. I have used both OCCT and Realbench OCCT produces more heat and requires a higher Vcore and lower cache multiplier to pass than Realbench especially the current version.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Well, with only having dropped the RAM voltage, I wasn't able to pass OCCT 8hrs with 1.3 on RAM. It ended with an error on core #0. Is this related to the lower RAM voltage or was the clock never really stable? I tested it previously for 1 hour, thus failure occurred around 1.75 hours in.
> 
> 
> 
> likely to be core instability. 1hr isn't a very long time to tease out instability on the core. I personally don't consider an OC stable unless it passes Realbench for 8hrs.
Click to expand...

I was going for a final of 8hrs OCCT. Which, given the operating parameters of OCCT vs/RB, I THINK an 8hr run of OCCT would conclude with more definitive results than 8hrs of RB. I did a quick run for 1hr, then an 8hr with changes made. That's how I always check my clocks, except I previously used P95 exclusively.

Now, I'm wondering if there is something else I'm missing here. Isn't PLL or VCCIO voltage related to RAM and core? I'm not convinced that it's an unstable OC, outside of the RAM voltage drop. Considering I have testing this OC before on an 8hr pass with no issues, I'm wondering if I should look elsewhere.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I was going for a final of 8hrs OCCT. Which, given the operating parameters of OCCT vs/RB, I THINK an 8hr run of OCCT would conclude with more definitive results than 8hrs of RB. I did a quick run for 1hr, then an 8hr with changes made. That's how I always check my clocks, except I previously used P95 exclusively.
> 
> Now, I'm wondering if there is something else I'm missing here. Isn't PLL or VCCIO voltage related to RAM and core? I'm not convinced that it's an unstable OC, outside of the RAM voltage drop. Considering I have testing this OC before on an 8hr pass with no issues, I'm wondering if I should look elsewhere.


In my opinion OCCT and P95 is overkill. RealBench is more than enough as @scracy is saying. You'll never be able to stress your system during daily regular use as OCCT or even RB. Also, test CPU and RAM separately. If you're doing CPU stress test, use default 2133 MHz on RAM to eliminate that cause. After you're finished with CPU, go for RAM (with CPU OC'd and known as stable) and stress test it with HCI MemTest, you won't really find anything better than that tool.


----------



## Dissolution187

Is it a really bad sign that I can't hit [email protected]? I mean that's one of the first settings that this thread suggests and it instantly fails for me in OCCT.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> In my opinion OCCT and P95 is overkill. RealBench is more than enough as @scracy is saying. You'll never be able to stress your system during daily regular use as OCCT or even RB. Also, test CPU and RAM separately. If you're doing CPU stress test, use default 2133 MHz on RAM to eliminate that cause. After you're finished with CPU, go for RAM (with CPU OC'd and known as stable) and stress test it with HCI MemTest, you won't really find anything better than that tool.


Stability as we all know is a subjective thing. From my point of view and from personal experience an hour of OCCT and an hour of Realbench is a very good indication of stability for what I use my P.C for. Generally it is better to use at least two different stress tests as they all stress a CPU in different ways. Ultimately so long as you don't get blue screens of death or lockups and don't corrupt windows then you are good to go the way i see it regardless of how long you stress test for.


----------



## coc_james

I've not had an error in RB. WHat does it do/look like, when there is ONE?


----------



## mamuf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I've not had an error in RB. WHat does it do/look like, when there is ONE?


There is a section named "Windows Hardware Errors (WHEA)" in HWiNFO sensors. It usually shows single row but more rows for different type of erros could appear (I saw CPU cache, PCIe errors etc.)


----------



## Nebulous

Most excellent! So far I haven't tried higher, kinda letting it get itself dialed in. I've been gaming for hours with no issues. I'm very happy


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Stability as we all know is a subjective thing. From my point of view and from personal experience an hour of OCCT and an hour of Realbench is a very good indication of stability for what I use my P.C for. Generally it is better to use at least two different stress tests as they all stress a CPU in different ways. Ultimately so long as you don't get blue screens of death or lockups and don't corrupt windows then you are good to go the way i see it regardless of how long you stress test for.


I agree that it's subjective. But the biggest problem is that 99% of stress tests are doing AVX while 99% of daily used apps don't use AVX. The problem with this is that AVX load requires different amount of voltage and while the system might be 100% stable under these circumstances, the voltage table might be inaccurate and you might crash under normal load. That's why my preferred mode of stress testing is RB + 3ds Max with an older non-avx version of Corona Renderer. Including couple of game benchmarks would be even better.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> I agree that it's subjective. But the biggest problem is that 99% of stress tests are doing AVX while 99% of daily used apps don't use AVX. The problem with this is that AVX load requires different amount of voltage and while the system might be 100% stable under these circumstances, the voltage table might be inaccurate and you might crash under normal load. That's why my preferred mode of stress testing is RB + 3ds Max with an older non-avx version of Corona Renderer. Including couple of game benchmarks would be even better.


Which is why I said this "*Generally it is better to use at least two different stress tests as they all stress a CPU in different ways*" and this "*From my point of view and from personal experience an hour of OCCT and an hour of Realbench is a very good indication of stability*"


----------



## mamuf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mamuf*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> My primary use case is gaming so I was not trying to maximize things, although I went up to 5.2 GHz @ 1.344 Vcore and passed RB 15 minutes. So the 5 GHz is very nice (delidded) OC I think. But the noise to cool it down to those temps is still a bit high. I am new to OC so I don't really know if letting the CPU to higher temps could shorten its lifespan. I would like it to be nice and quiet but the humming produced by the fans at 900-1000 rpm is still OK (NF-S12A in front and back), so I could go a little bit down on fan speed curves and probably lower the clocks and voltage a bit, too.
> 
> I don't know why this happens, but obviously when running AVX loads (RB), the VID goes up another +0.02 V automatically (regular VID is +0.005 above Vcore set in UEFI).
> 
> Username: mamuf
> CPU Model: i5-7600K
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4700
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.290
> Vcore: 1.264
> FCLK: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-D15S, delidded
> Stability Test: Realbench 8 hours
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L644H081
> Ram Speed: XMP 2800 14-16-16-39
> Ram Voltage: 1.35
> VCCIO: Auto
> VCCSA: Auto
> Motherboard: Z270 Asus Prime
> LLC Setting: LLC Level 3
> Misc Comments: Ambient temp 21.5 C, IA AC Load Line .01, IA DC Load Line .01
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/klbtte


*Update:*

I went through my OC notes and found out there's a gap in Vcore I actually didn't try. On 1.23 Vcore it crashed (playing Dishonored 2) and the previous RB run was on 1.264 (1.248 for non-AVX), so I tried the middle path and it passed! When stressing with RB, reported Vcore is 1.248. For non-AVX loads it fluctuates between 1.232 and 1.248 averaging on 1.240 (see second screenshot with HCI memtest). I also tweaked fan speeds a bit, but the ambient temperature was few degrees higher than last time so nothing really changed here except it's a bit quieter now.

Username: mamuf
CPU Model: i5-7600K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4700
Vcore in UEFI: 1.280
Vcore: 1.248
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-D15S, delidded
Stability Test: Realbench 8 hours

Batch Number: Malaysia L644H081
Ram Speed: XMP 2800 14-16-16-39
Ram Voltage: 1.35
VCCIO: Auto
VCCSA: Auto
Motherboard: Z270 Asus Prime
LLC Setting: LLC Level 3
Misc Comments: Ambient temp 23-24 C, IA AC Load Line .01, IA DC Load Line .01


----------



## Adiadiere

Hey everyone,

NOOB MESSAGE INCOMING

I apologise if I ask some stupid questions but I'm new to this.

Bought a 7700K a few days ago with the Asus Strix Z270F and a corsair H100i GTX and have been dabbling in some overclocking.

I gave the Asus Dual Intelligent Processors 5 a shot at an overclock to see what it thought it could do and be stable and sits at around 4.9-5.0 GHz.
The thing that's been bothering me though is that the temps spike quite a lot into the 90's occasionally and I was wondering if anyone had any idea what this was?
I'm sure it's been answered but with 300 pages on this forum alone it may take me a while!
When on the overclock playing Battlefield 1 it will sit at about 73 degrees which I don't thinks too bad, but I noticed that my vcore fluctuates a lot and goes over 1.4v sometimes, and surely that's a little high and may be what's causing the jump in temp?
Should I turn turbo boost off if I'm oc'ing?
And help or similar system peeps have any ideas for me to try? I am keen to learn, I just hope I don't annoy anyone asking questions that may have already been answered

Thanks in advance for your help!


----------



## ssdaytona

The know I'm quoting an older message, but I just a 7700k with an L711B432 batch, but it says made in Vietnam. I though made in Vietnam batches started with an "x"

wonder if this chip going to be any good. we'll find out soon enough...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Vietnam Devils Canyon chips were better overclockers overall than Malay chips, possibly because Intel's newest fab plant is Vietnam. I think you will find there are not any Vietnam 7700K/6700K chips available yet, Intel tends to start manufacturing the higher end chips in Vietnam towards the end of the product cycle possibly to gear up Malaysia fab plant for the next generation of chips


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssdaytona*
> 
> The know I'm quoting an older message, but I just a 7700k with an L711B432 batch, but it says made in Vietnam. I though made in Vietnam batches started with an "x"
> 
> wonder if this chip going to be any good. we'll find out soon enough...


I am not 100% certain but when it says made in Vietnam, it may only mean it was packaged there, not necessarily lithographically made there. Its not uncommon for Intel to ship their semi-finished or tray chips to various market hubs in the world for packaging.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adiadiere*
> 
> Hey everyone,
> 
> NOOB MESSAGE INCOMING
> 
> I apologise if I ask some stupid questions but I'm new to this.
> 
> Bought a 7700K a few days ago with the Asus Strix Z270F and a corsair H100i GTX and have been dabbling in some overclocking.
> 
> I gave the Asus Dual Intelligent Processors 5 a shot at an overclock to see what it thought it could do and be stable *and sits at around 4.9-5.0 GHz.*
> The thing that's been bothering me though is that the temps spike quite a lot into the 90's occasionally and I was wondering if anyone had any idea what this was?
> I'm sure it's been answered but with 300 pages on this forum alone it may take me a while!
> When on the overclock playing Battlefield 1 it will sit at about 73 degrees which I don't thinks too bad, but I noticed that my vcore fluctuates a lot and goes over 1.4v sometimes, and surely that's a little high and may be what's causing the jump in temp?
> Should I turn turbo boost off if I'm oc'ing?
> And help or similar system peeps have any ideas for me to try? I am keen to learn, I just hope I don't annoy anyone asking questions that may have already been answered
> 
> Thanks in advance for your help!


leave turbo boost on/enabled, and speedstep, speed shift. Basically the auto overclocking works well, but needs to account for the wide range of cpu quality found out there.. so, it generally overvolts a bit. Note the vcore for 5.0. disable any auto oc. enter bios m set overclocking mode to Manual, synch all cores (at 50), set vcore to manual mode (for now) and enter the voltage ADIP "found", F10 to save and reboot with the new settings. run a quick stability test to check that all is okay, reboot and enter bios, lower vcore by 10-15mV, F10 again, test again... rinse and repeat until the vcore is too low to enter windows or fails stability (ASUS realbench stability test is perfect for this initial tuning.). post back with how it does...


----------



## Adiadiere

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> leave turbo boost on/enabled, and speedstep, speed shift. Basically the auto overclocking works well, but needs to account for the wide range of cpu quality found out there.. so, it generally overvolts a bit. Note the vcore for 5.0. disable any auto oc. enter bios m set overclocking mode to Manual, synch all cores (at 50), set vcore to manual mode (for now) and enter the voltage ADIP "found", F10 to save and reboot with the new settings. run a quick stability test to check that all is okay, reboot and enter bios, lower vcore by 10-15mV, F10 again, test again... rinse and repeat until the vcore is too low to enter windows or fails stability (ASUS realbench stability test is perfect for this initial tuning.). post back with how it does...


Thank you for the reply! I'll give it a go today and get back as to how it went.


----------



## Jaca

Hoping to gain some insight from the collective expertise of all you veteran OCers. I'm fairly new to OCing especially when pushing it past the click-and-configure setups. I overclocked my previous 4790k to 4.5 stable on 1.12 vcore and ran with it for years. Motherboard died on me and I have to send it back in for repair. So, since I work on this machine as well and cannot be down for 3 weeks, I went out to buy a 7700k/Hero IX/GSkill setup (my oldest son is pumped as he will be getting my old system once it comes back from RMA). Here is where my questions/concerns come in... with what I have done so far, my overclock does not seem to be performing as well as I was expecting. I'm getting benchmark numbers close to what my 4790k/980gtx setup was doing. Here is what I have done so far...

System components are...
- Asus Hero IX
- 7700k
- GSkill DDR4-3400

1. Set multiplier to x49 resulting in a 5004Mhz CPU overclock (BLK is set to 102.1 because of RAM setup)
2. Set the VCORE manually to 1.28
3. Set the RAM timing and frequency up based on the XMP recommendations (1.35v and that 102.1 BLK value - something I have never really messed with)

I have run this setup on Prime95 and IUTX for 12+ hours without failure and temps maxing out in the low 70s C.

I have not messed with any of the C state values or much of anything else on the MB except turning off what I believe to be things I don't need... bluetooth, wifi (not sure why these are in the BIOS since the board doesn't support them native). I've read numerous articles that talk about additional tweaking but the numbers they are starting with are much higher than what I am seeing.

So, my ask of you experts is this... where do I look/play next in the BIOS to see about increasing the overall performance of the chip/ram setup? I would greatly appreciate any suggestions or guidance. Also, if there is anything I left out that would help you diagnose, please let me know.


----------



## Dissolution187

Can someone help me with my cooler? For some reason I am getting temps in the high 70s during real bench tests. I have a H115i, and it seems like the water block and or my fans are not reving up to reduce the heat. I have tried reseating the block a few times with different paste to no avail. I know the 7700k temp spikes hard but i think my cooler should be able to handle it fairly well. I am using noctua paste at the moment as well. My rps hit around 1600 to 1700 while getting beat up by real bench, but i dont know if my water block is heating up to tell the fans to go harder. The temps in the water block are always around 30C. Any suggestions? Also my fans are working but it just seems like they dont kick up the speed when needed. It could be corsair link failing but i dont know how to fix that.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dissolution187*
> 
> Can someone help me with my cooler? For some reason I am getting temps in the high 70s during real bench tests. I have a H115i, and it seems like the water block and or my fans are not reving up to reduce the heat. I have tried reseating the block a few times with different paste to no avail. I know the 7700k temp spikes hard but i think my cooler should be able to handle it fairly well. I am using noctua paste at the moment as well. My rps hit around 1600 to 1700 while getting beat up by real bench, but i dont know if my water block is heating up to tell the fans to go harder. The temps in the water block are always around 30C. Any suggestions? Also my fans are working but it just seems like they dont kick up the speed when needed. It could be corsair link failing but i dont know how to fix that.


If you haven't delidded the cpu those temps sound pretty much what is expected of 7700k. There is a big thermal bottleneck between the CPU die and IHS - there's only so much you can do with external cooling.

That said if you aren't aiming for the extremest of overclocks your temps are fine.


----------



## Jaca

I have the same cooler and am seeing temps in the low 70s with my overclock. I had the same concerns as you and did a bunch of research trying to figure out what was going on. One consistent thing I read was to make sure your H115i was set to performance mode on the pump and that the fans are set to adjust based on the liquid temperature. It is the liquid temp that is important here and the fans on the radiator will have little impact to bring it down any further until the liquid gets significantly hotter. My liquid temp is around 28C when I first boot up, then hovers around 29-30C under normal use. When gaming or benching, I have seen it go up to 35C, which at that time, with my fan curve set as it is, the radiator fans will spin up.

Also, on the spikes in temp, if you have speedstep turned on in the BIOS, then from what I have seen and read, that can quickly heat up cores as it jumps the CPU to full speed. After a second, that temp levels out as the stress/benchmark is running. I believe this is just normal behavior with the 7700k. If you really want to get the temps down all together, I think delidding may be an option but you are currently within the thermal limits of the CPU and probably do not have anything to worry about.


----------



## mamuf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mamuf*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> *Update:*
> 
> I went through my OC notes and found out there's a gap in Vcore I actually didn't try. On 1.23 Vcore it crashed (playing Dishonored 2) and the previous RB run was on 1.264 (1.248 for non-AVX), so I tried the middle path and it passed! When stressing with RB, reported Vcore is 1.248. For non-AVX loads it fluctuates between 1.232 and 1.248 averaging on 1.240 (see second screenshot with HCI memtest). I also tweaked fan speeds a bit, but the ambient temperature was few degrees higher than last time so nothing really changed here except it's a bit quieter now.
> 
> Username: mamuf
> CPU Model: i5-7600K
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4700
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.280
> Vcore: 1.248
> FCLK: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-D15S, delidded
> Stability Test: Realbench 8 hours
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L644H081
> Ram Speed: XMP 2800 14-16-16-39
> Ram Voltage: 1.35
> VCCIO: Auto
> VCCSA: Auto
> Motherboard: Z270 Asus Prime
> LLC Setting: LLC Level 3
> Misc Comments: Ambient temp 23-24 C, IA AC Load Line .01, IA DC Load Line .01


So my excitement of a bit lower voltage might be ruined. Not sure why, but after 1-2 hours in Dishonored 2, the machine froze. The conditions between running RB and gaming differ in that for RB I had to turn off all monitoring utilities but hwinfo and kb/mouse sw as well. All these things are running when gaming. Also I have disconnected my HDDs for the stress tests just to prevent any data corruption while bsoding due to instability. The freeze eventually went to BSOD with "machine check exception", so it's something different than what I saw with unstable OC on CPU side. I didn't note the exact error code and didn't find it in system event log so I may try to reproduce it again to see what caused it. Note that I didn't play the game on the original OC voltage so I may try to play for a few hours with that to see if it crashes, too.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaca*
> 
> System components are...
> - Asus Hero IX
> - 7700k
> - GSkill DDR4-3400
> 
> 1. Set multiplier to x49 resulting in a 5004Mhz CPU overclock (BLK is set to 102.1 because of RAM setup)
> 2. Set the VCORE manually to 1.28
> 3. Set the RAM timing and frequency up based on the XMP recommendations (1.35v and that 102.1 BLK value - something I have never really messed with)
> 
> I have run this setup on Prime95 and IUTX for 12+ hours without failure and temps maxing out in the low 70s C.
> 
> I have not messed with any of the C state values or much of anything else on the MB except turning off what I believe to be things I don't need... bluetooth, wifi (not sure why these are in the BIOS since the board doesn't support them native). I've read numerous articles that talk about additional tweaking but the numbers they are starting with are much higher than what I am seeing.
> 
> So, my ask of you experts is this... where do I look/play next in the BIOS to see about increasing the overall performance of the chip/ram setup? I would greatly appreciate any suggestions or guidance. Also, if there is anything I left out that would help you diagnose, please let me know.


If it's not delidded, 70 °C seems suspiciously low for 1.28 Vcore running Prime95. If it's delidded, than that temperature is expected. If it's not delidded, 1.28 Vcore could be too low, I'd set it to 1.3-1.35 V.

I don't know what do you mean by low performance. Telling us some results would be helpful. Low performance could be because of missing/bad drivers. Check Device Manager that you have no warnings.

Posting a few BIOS screenshots could be helpful. You can do it by pressing F12. Make sure you have a FAT32 formatted USB drive plugged in. It will be saved as BMP so you have to resave it in Windows to JPEG with Paint.

First I'd do a clean start. Reset BIOS values to default. Then only adjust the multiplier to 50x and Vcore. Leave RAM on default for now. Tune every component step by step so you can measure the impact.

Download and run Corona Renderer Benchmark, it's very CPU and RAM dependent. With your config you should be around 3:10 while with RAM on 3200-3400 MHz around 3:00.

I recommend Corona Renderer Benchmark because it's giving the same results every time you rerun it +/- 1 second, it's long enough to get noticeable differences, it doesn't require to set HPET and it's less then 200 MB.


----------



## Jaca

dirtyred, thanks for the feedback. I pulled down Corona and ran it in 3:10 exactly (which i find eerily odd you nailed the number







). With that benchmark tool, the system did spike to 76C at the start then leveled out in the 68-72 range while running. Since I am fairly new to this, I may be looking at these numbers wrong so I've posted up the HWMonitor results from the run below...


I'll set everything back to the default and run from there. I find it odd though that my ram requires the BLK to be set at 102.1 to hit 3400. According to the QVL, the ram is supported. I've never played with the BLK so really have no idea how it impacts the overall performance. In the past, I have always had it set to 100. Could adjusting that value have any impact on the overall performance?


----------



## dirtyred

Corona Benchmark gives same results (+/- 1 second) for same configs so I find it good for comparison and it's really predictable. The temperatures seem to be fine and expected. The spike is because the fans have to spin up and it take a few seconds.

Higher Base Clock should increase overall system performance (CPU, RAM, PCIe) but it would be the last thing I'd adjust as it will shift all frequencies and can cause instability. After the CPU OC the next step should be the RAM. You have the timings on the packaging of the RAM. Forget XMP, do a manual overclock. It's much better and much more fun then just setting the default.

Note down the RAM frequency, timings and voltages (DRAM, VCCIO and System Agent) after you applied XMP. Then set back everything to default and start entering those manually except the BCLK, leave that on 100. Alternatively you can apply XMP and don't bother with manual RAM OC. Just set back BCLK to 100.

If your RAM is 3400 by default it should support 3466 MHz @ 100 BCLK without any issues or even 3600 MHz. I'd start at 3333 with factory default timings and voltages set by XMP. Let's say those are 16-16-16-36 and 2N at 1.35 V. In BIOS set those numbers and check if it posts. If it doesn't then raise VCCIO (1.10V~1.25V) and/or SA (1.10V~1.30V). SA should be a bit higher the VCCIO. VCCIO should be rougly 200 mV less then RAM voltage.

If your system POSTs, run 8 instances of HCI Memtest and devide the amount of free RAM between those. Let it run for at least 1-2 hours or 4-500%.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Corona Benchmark gives same results (+/- 1 second) for same configs so I find it good for comparison and it's really predictable. The temperatures seem to be fine and expected. The spike is because the fans have to spin up and it take a few seconds.
> 
> Higher Base Clock should increase overall system performance (CPU, RAM, PCIe) but it would be the last thing I'd adjust as it will shift all frequencies and can cause instability. After the CPU OC the next step should be the RAM. You have the timings on the packaging of the RAM. Forget XMP, do a manual overclock. It's much better and much more fun then just setting the default.
> 
> Note down the RAM frequency, timings and voltages (DRAM, VCCIO and System Agent) after you applied XMP. Then set back everything to default and start entering those manually except the BCLK, leave that on 100. Alternatively you can apply XMP and don't bother with manual RAM OC. Just set back BCLK to 100.
> 
> If your RAM is 3400 by default it should support 3466 MHz @ 100 BCLK without any issues or even 3600 MHz. I'd start at 3333 with factory default timings and voltages set by XMP. Let's say those are 16-16-16-36 and 2N at 1.35 V. In BIOS set those numbers and check if it posts. If it doesn't then raise VCCIO (1.10V~1.25V) and/or SA (1.10V~1.30V). SA should be a bit higher the VCCIO. VCCIO should be rougly 200 mV less then RAM voltage.
> 
> If your system POSTs, run 8 instances of HCI Memtest and devide the amount of free RAM between those. Let it run for at least 1-2 hours or 4-500%.


Im wanting to run memtest again but how exactly do you perfectly match up tested ram to available memory? Its always changing even if you have no programs open, wouldnt the best to be run 8 instances (7 of them set to 2gb for 16gb's of memory, for example) with the last one set to "test all unused memory".

Or is there a better way to do this?


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im wanting to run memtest again but how exactly do you perfectly match up tested ram to available memory? Its always changing even if you have no programs open, wouldnt the best to be run 8 instances (7 of them set to 2gb for 16gb's of memory, for example) with the last one set to "test all unused memory".
> 
> Or is there a better way to do this?


16Gig of ram, 8 intances of 1538 should suffice.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> 16Gig of ram, 8 intances of 1538 should suffice.


How do you figure? That's only adds up to 12 gb's.

Wouldn't 7 instances of 2048 and the 8th set to "all unused memory" make a bit more sense?

Im asking the reasoning behind this, not telling people so we're clear lol.


----------



## mamuf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im wanting to run memtest again but how exactly do you perfectly match up tested ram to available memory? Its always changing even if you have no programs open, wouldnt the best to be run 8 instances (7 of them set to 2gb for 16gb's of memory, for example) with the last one set to "test all unused memory".
> 
> Or is there a better way to do this?


Well, there is: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?73665-Our-preferred-memory-stress-test. But it requires you to create bootable USB drive with Linux Mint .

With HCI memtest, I always tried to close everything I could (according to memory usage in Task Manager / Process Explorer). Then just divide free memory by 8, take another few MBs off and go with that. I always passed with about 1-1.5 GB RAM used by OS+background tasks, about 300-500 MB RAM free and the rest covered by HCI memtest.


----------



## Scotty99

Well like i said i set 7 instances to 2047 and the last one to "all unused memory". I didnt know if this is how you should be doing it, but it made the most sense to me.


----------



## mamuf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well like i said i set 7 instances to 2047 and the last one to "all unused memory". I didnt know if this is how you should be doing it, but it made the most sense to me.


That will work, but the one for "all unused memory" will test that part of memory more than the other instances. That's why people divide the free memory evenly. It doesn't matter if single instance runs over 2048 or 1758 MB of RAM. It should distribute the load/coverage evenly - at least that makes the most sense to me


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well like i said i set 7 instances to 2047 and the last one to "all unused memory". I didnt know if this is how you should be doing it, but it made the most sense to me.


Have a look in this thread, will tell you all you need to know.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread/4480


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mamuf*
> 
> That will work, but the one for "all unused memory" will test that part of memory more than the other instances. That's why people divide the free memory evenly. It doesn't matter if single instance runs over 2048 or 1758 MB of RAM. It should distribute the load/coverage evenly - at least that makes the most sense to me


Right but there is no way to test all available memory unless you check the last one to "use all unused". Couldnt it be possible if you dont do the math exactly right the test could miss a bad sector of memory?


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Right but there is no way to test all available memory unless you check the last one to "use all unused". Couldnt it be possible if you dont do the math exactly right the test could miss a bad sector of memory?


Like i stated earlier,1538-1600 spread evenly over the amount of cores/threads, for a 4 core 8 thread cpu with 16 gig this should suffice.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Like i stated earlier,1538-1600 spread evenly over the amount of cores/threads, for a 4 core 8 thread cpu with 16 gig this should suffice.


Ya you just arent going to get it exactly on no matter what you do, i just dont see the negative to doing it the way i came up with other than it tests that bank of memory more than the others. If you are testing overnight this isnt even a concern.


----------



## mamuf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Right but there is no way to test all available memory unless you check the last one to "use all unused". Couldnt it be possible if you dont do the math exactly right the test could miss a bad sector of memory?


The HCI memtest leaves some free memory, too, it won't eat up all free memory to the last byte available.

I am not well versed in how virtual memory actually works in Windows, but the OS moves pages of memory around - and that's why you try not to exceed the free memory because then you would end up swapping a lot.

So, definitely, if you want to be sure you test the whole physical memory, you need something else like the old MemTest86. But that is no longer a recommended test for memory, it seems.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mamuf*
> 
> The HCI memtest leaves some free memory, too, it won't eat up all free memory to the last byte available.
> 
> I am not well versed in how virtual memory actually works in Windows, but the OS moves pages of memory around - and that's why you try not to exceed the free memory because then you would end up swapping a lot.
> 
> So, definitely, if you want to be sure you test the whole physical memory, you need something else like the old MemTest86. But that is no longer a recommended test for memory, it seems.


The reason is because GSAT does the same thing but is superior in every way. It is much more thorough and finds errors a lot quicker. However GSAT is only memory specific, it cannot easily spot bit errors in transmission or processing by the IMC. This is where HCI memtest comes in, it trades some of GSAT's raw ram verification speed in favour of simultaneously hammering the IMC + Mobo traces + CPU cache. This means that it can spot a CPU with a weak IMC or a weak mobo with poor traces which contribute to instability on otherwise stable ram speeds.

The typical workflow nowadays is to use GSAT in bootable Linux Mint for 1hr. Its fast at verifying if the RAM is even stable, and you also don't risk corrupting your OS with borderline stable Memory OCs. Then once it has passed GSAT, you hammer it with HCI Memtest to see if your CPU IMC + Cache + Mobo can actually tolerate those RAM OCs. Then if it passes that, we're pretty golden.


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im wanting to run memtest again but how exactly do you perfectly match up tested ram to available memory? Its always changing even if you have no programs open, wouldnt the best to be run 8 instances (7 of them set to 2gb for 16gb's of memory, for example) with the last one set to "test all unused memory".
> 
> Or is there a better way to do this?


Check how much Windows is using. Substract that from the available RAM. For example 15.9-1.2 GB = 14.7 GB = 15052 MB. Use a bit less so it won't start to swap if something starts running in the background, for example use 14400 MB. So 14400 / 8 = 1800 MB per instances. I usually use around 1750-1770 to be on the safe side.

It's alright to not test every last bit of the RAM. You're testing for stability, not hunting bad sectors on a HDD.


----------



## Jaca

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dirtyred*
> 
> Corona Benchmark gives same results (+/- 1 second) for same configs so I find it good for comparison and it's really predictable. The temperatures seem to be fine and expected. The spike is because the fans have to spin up and it take a few seconds.
> 
> Higher Base Clock should increase overall system performance (CPU, RAM, PCIe) but it would be the last thing I'd adjust as it will shift all frequencies and can cause instability. After the CPU OC the next step should be the RAM. You have the timings on the packaging of the RAM. Forget XMP, do a manual overclock. It's much better and much more fun then just setting the default.
> 
> Note down the RAM frequency, timings and voltages (DRAM, VCCIO and System Agent) after you applied XMP. Then set back everything to default and start entering those manually except the BCLK, leave that on 100. Alternatively you can apply XMP and don't bother with manual RAM OC. Just set back BCLK to 100.
> 
> If your RAM is 3400 by default it should support 3466 MHz @ 100 BCLK without any issues or even 3600 MHz. I'd start at 3333 with factory default timings and voltages set by XMP. Let's say those are 16-16-16-36 and 2N at 1.35 V. In BIOS set those numbers and check if it posts. If it doesn't then raise VCCIO (1.10V~1.25V) and/or SA (1.10V~1.30V). SA should be a bit higher the VCCIO. VCCIO should be rougly 200 mV less then RAM voltage.
> 
> If your system POSTs, run 8 instances of HCI Memtest and devide the amount of free RAM between those. Let it run for at least 1-2 hours or 4-500%.


dirtyred, thank you for the advice! I switched everything over to manual, set the BCLK back to 100, and was able to get the core stable at 5.0 on 1.28 vcore and the ram stable at 3600 on 1.35v. I got the corona benchmark down to 3:07 which is still a bit higher than what you thought it might be but I figure I can play with timings from here. I attempted a 5.1 overclock but had to push it all the way to 1.34 vcore which seemed like a large jump for an extras 100Mhz (especially on my h115i... temps were pushing mid 80s). I think I will try playing around with this 5ghz OC for now until I decide that a custom loop is in my future (just leaned my new graphics card wont support a custom EK water block so that derailed my custom loop for now). One more question for you if you don't mind... delidding... worth it to try yourself or pay SL $50 to do it ? (from what i am reading, delidding can drop 7700k temps significantly)


----------



## dirtyred

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaca*
> 
> dirtyred, thank you for the advice! I switched everything over to manual, set the BCLK back to 100, and was able to get the core stable at 5.0 on 1.28 vcore and the ram stable at 3600 on 1.35v. I got the corona benchmark down to 3:07 which is still a bit higher than what you thought it might be but I figure I can play with timings from here. I attempted a 5.1 overclock but had to push it all the way to 1.34 vcore which seemed like a large jump for an extras 100Mhz (especially on my h115i... temps were pushing mid 80s). I think I will try playing around with this 5ghz OC for now until I decide that a custom loop is in my future (just leaned my new graphics card wont support a custom EK water block so that derailed my custom loop for now). One more question for you if you don't mind... delidding... worth it to try yourself or pay SL $50 to do it ? (from what i am reading, delidding can drop 7700k temps significantly)


You're welcome! 3:07 is indeed higher than expected but I have 2 possible solutions:

Raise the cache multiplier to around 45-46. If your CPU downclocks during low load then adjust only the maximum cache multiplier, leave the minimum on auto. This could give you 1% boost. Not much but at 3 minute benchmark that's 1-2 seconds.

More important: tweak memory timings, this gives more boost. Higher memory frequency is not always faster as you have to loosen the timings. You have to find the sweetspot between bandwidth and latency. Try lowering the frequency to 3200 MHz and 2-4 steps lower timings than on 3600 MHz. For example if on 3600 MHz you have 18-18-18-36 then on 3200 MHz you can try 15-15-15-36 or even 15-15-15-28. As far as I know Z170/270 chips support maximum 28 tRAS timing. You might have to tweak RAM voltage a bit. Note that RAM voltage influences CPU temperatures because of the integrated memory controller.

Adjust command rate as well, on auto it's usually on 2T (2N), switch it to 1T (1N).

Really IMPORTANT: disable Fast Boot in BIOS or you could have a hard time POSTing when tweaking memory.

Your temperatures are fine, seems like you have an amazing chip that can do 5 GHz @ 1.28 non-delidded while staying below 80 °C. In your case I'd only delid if I want even lower temperatures, smaller temp spikes or you want to push it even further than 5 GHz. Note that lower temps should allow to use even lower Vcore so you can push the CPU even more. It's really up to you. Also, you either have to buy or borrow a delid tool which is around $30-40 but you can use it multiple times if you want to switch the TIM below the IHS. If you lack self confidence then pay for a delidding service.

About your GPU: if you can sell it without losing too much value then do it and get one that's supported by EK.


----------



## Jpmboy

Finally found time to put my Apex/7700K into a proper case (it's bee on a bench table since launch). Figured I'd keep it. [email protected], 3866c15 ram, NVMe Raid 0 on the DIMM2 riser card, and an exceptional 1080 (2189 stable to folding, boinc and gaming) absolutely silent. Steady-state thermal is water levels out at RT +8C under full load (approx 32C on the cold side of the rad at steady-state). Case is tempered glass Corsair 570X.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


















yeah - my photo skills need work.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Finally found time to put my Apex/7700K into a proper case (it's bee on a bench table since launch). Figured I'd keep it. [email protected], and an exceptional 1080 (2189 stable to folding, boinc and gaming) absolutely silent. Steady-state thermal is water levels out at RT +8C under full load (approx 32C on the cold side of the rad at steady-state). Case is tempered glass Corsair 570X.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - my photo skills need work.


Very nice, i have just purchased the Apex, seems like a great board.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Very nice, i have just purchased the Apex, seems like a great board.


I think it is. Not a ton of I/O, but plenty for my needs.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Finally found time to put my Apex/7700K into a proper case (it's bee on a bench table since launch). Figured I'd keep it. [email protected], and an exceptional 1080 (2189 stable to folding, boinc and gaming) absolutely silent. Steady-state thermal is water levels out at RT +8C under full load (approx 32C on the cold side of the rad at steady-state). Case is tempered glass Corsair 570X.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - my photo skills need work.


Beautiful. I love my 570x. What's your power limit set at to hit 2189? Best stable clock I can manage is 2152 at 130%.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Beautiful. I love my 570x. What's your power limit set at to hit 2189? Best stable clock I can manage is 2152 at 130%.


it's a non-reference ASUS card (the Turbo of all things). Just a lucky card, that's all. Took the prize *here*, only LN2/hard mod cards have done better. http://hwbot.org/submission/3552090_jpmboy_3dmark___time_spy_geforce_gtx_1080_9418_marks


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's a non-reference ASUS card (the Turbo of all things). Just a lucky card, that's all. Took the prize *here*, only LN2/hard mod cards have done better. http://hwbot.org/submission/3552090_jpmboy_3dmark___time_spy_geforce_gtx_1080_9418_marks


Great job, Respect


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Great job, Respect


lol - every once is a while a blind squirrel finds a nut.


----------



## scracy

Guys this question has been asked a lot throughout this thread and others in regards to temperature spikes with Kaby Lake. I found this post on another forum which I thought I would share with all of you as it is the most comprehensive explanation I have been able to find enjoy









"Sorry to show up late to the party. I'm a moderator at TomsHardware and the author of the Intel Temperature Guide - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1800828/intel-temperature-guide.html - mentioned earlier in this thread. I've been working on the topic of Intel processor temperatures for over 10 years, and have invested more than 5,000 hours of ongoing research and hands-on testing to help everyone understand this complicated topic. I've also been building, overclocking and modding PC's for over 20 years, and delidding since 3rd Generation Ivy Bridge. I'll say right up front that I do not have an Intel nondisclosure agreement, so I'm not constrained here, yet regardless of all my work, there's always more to learn about this topic.

I've spent the last several hours carefully reading through all 40 pages of this entire thread. I understand your frustrations, as our friends at Intel are prone to be somewhat vague and evasive, as if every statement has been pre-washed through the legal department. Nonetheless, there's a few items I'd like to bring to everyone's attention which will shed some light on the spiking and TIM problems, as well as clear up a few misconceptions, and perhaps offer a fresh perspective.

Concerning the spiking problem, I noticed one item in particular that's been overlooked in this thread, which is "Speed Shift".

Spiking has always been present, however, as a few of you have already pointed out, it hasn't been so obvious on prior Generations due to several variables. Intel's specification for Digital Thermal Sensor (DTS) response time is 256 milliseconds, or about 1/4th of a second, so Core temperatures respond instantly to changes in load. Intel introduced Speed Shift technology with Skylake, then kicked it up a notch with Kaby Lake. Speed Shift was intended as an improvement over SpeedStep, so Speed Shift responds faster to changes in workload demands while being more energy efficient, but the downside is spiking. Also, excessive spiking is sometimes caused by unnecessary tray startups, processes and services, so it help to keep your software cleaned up.

Here's two links to our sister website, AnandTech, which describes Speed Shift:

Examining Intel's New Speed Shift Tech on Skylake: More Responsive Processors - Examining Intel's New Speed Shift Tech on Skylake: More Responsive Processors

Speed Shift v2: Speed Harder - Speed Shift v2: Speed Harder - Intel Launches 7th Generation Kaby Lake: 15W/28W with Iris, 35-91W Desktop and Mobile Xeo&#8230;

Speed Shift is also described in the Datasheets for 6th and 7th Generation processors in Section 4 - Power Management:

http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/desktop-6th-gen-core-family-datasheet-vol-1.pdf

Datasheet, Vol. 1: 7th Gen Intel® Processor Family for S Platforms

It's interesting to note that as there's no distinction offered in BIOS between Speed Shift and SpeedStep, it can't be disabled or adjusted separately from SpeedStep. It may, however, be possible for Intel and it's motherboard partners to deploy microcode and BIOS updates to provide for different Speed Shift response levels and / or disable.

Concerning the TIM problem:

The following is from "Silicon Lottery" - https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/delid - which is actually a real company based outside Houston, Texas, who tests, bins and professionally delids processors. The following is their figures on how much delidding typically improves Core temperatures on 3rd through 7th Generation Quad Core "K" variants, which will give you an idea of just how bad the TIM problem really is:

7th Generation ... Kaby Lake - 12° to 25°C
6th Generation ... Skylake - 8°C to 18°C
5th Generation ... Broadwell - 8°C to 18°C
4th Generation ... Devil's Canyon - 7°C to 15°C
4th Generation ... Haswell - 10°C to 25°C
3rd Generation ... Ivy Bridge - 10°C to 25°C

In all fairness, before we jump to any conclusions and send out the lynch mob to string up the guys at Intel, let's keep in mind that besides being expense conscious, they also have some of the finest PhD's, thermodynamicists and engineers in the world on their payroll, so let's consider the challenges and limitations they've come up against. Here's an article which details the drawbacks of soldering these small Die sizes:

The Truth about CPU Soldering - http://overclocking.guide/the-truth-about-cpu-soldering/

Concerning Intel's Thermal Specifications, there's a few of you who have some misconceptions, so let's get that cleared up.

Core temperature (Tjunction) is measured at the heat sources near the transistor "Junctions" inside each of the Cores by individual Digital Thermal Sensors (DTS). Tcase is instead a single external factory only measurement centered on the surface of the Integrated Heat Spreader where the cooler is seated, so Tcase is not Core temperature. If users look up their processor's Thermal Specification at Intel's Product Information website, they often don't read or understand the definition. Since there are many software utilities for monitoring Core temperature, users often confuse Tcase with Core temperature.

Core temperature (Tjunction) is higher than CPU temperature (Tcase) due to differences in the proximity of sensors to heat sources. Although Core temperature sensors are factory calibrated by Intel, the specification for DTS accuracy is +/- 5°C. This means deviations between the highest and lowest Cores can be up to 10°C, with Turbo Boost disabled and all Cores at the same speed. Sensors are typically more accurate at high temperatures to protect against thermal damage, but due to calibration issues such as linearity, slope and range, idle temperatures may not be very accurate.

Since the Digital Thermal Sensors (DTS) are at the heat sources, and the factory temperature measurement on the Integrated Heat Spreader (IHS) is not, there's a temperature "gradient" between DTS and IHS locations. This is why Core temperatures are higher than Tcase Thermal Specifications. At 100% Thermal Design Power (TDP), the gradient on Core 2 and Core i soldered processors through 2nd Generation is about 5°C, but the gradient on TIM'd 3rd through 7th Generation can be up to 25°C. This goes back to the TIM problem.

Tcase values aren't only measured, they're also calculated based on stock cooler TDP and processor TDP. Cooler models with different TDP values are packaged with different TDP processors. Several Generations of Quad Core CPU's at 77, 84, 88 and 95 Watts were packaged with a universal 95 Watt cooler. 6th and 7th Generation i5 and i7 "K" processors are 91 Watts, but the cooler is 130 Watts and is sold separately: Intel's Skylake Cooler - http://vr-zone.com/articles/this-is-what-intels-first-cpu-cooler-for-skylake-looks-like/97189.html

Compared below are three Intel processor / cooler combinations with respect to TDP and Tcase Specifications:

Example 1: i7 2700K 95 Watts TDP / Cooler 95 Watts TDP / Difference 0 Watts / Tcase 72°C.
Example 2: i7 3770K 77 Watts TDP / Cooler 95 Watts TDP / Difference 18 Watts / Tcase 67°C.
Example 3: i7 6700K 91 Watts TDP / Cooler 130 Watts TDP / Difference 39 Watts / Tcase 64°C.

The higher the cooler TDP is from the processor TDP, the lower the Tcase Specification, just as when the stock cooler is replaced with a higher TDP aftermarket cooler, Core temperatures are lower. Tcase is based on different combinations of stock coolers and CPU's, which is why Specifications vary. The examples above suggest the 6700K is less thermally capable than the 2700K, which is misleading, because the 6700K has a higher Throttle temperature.

Mobile (laptop) processors don't have an Integrated Heat Spreader, so they don't have Tcase Specifications; only Tj Max. And since Intel changed the Thermal Specification for 7th Generation Desktop processors from Tcase to Tjunction (Tj Max), this standardizes Desktop and Mobile Specifications. Intel's long overdue change signifies that Tj Max is the limiting Thermal Specification; not Tcase. Your Tj Max Specification is shown in the monitoring utility "Core Temp" - http://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp

Tj Max Specifications vary from 80°C to 105°C. Some processors Throttle at 80°C, while others become unstable over 80°C. Core i 6th and 7th Generation CPU's have Configurable TDP (cTDP) and Scenario Design Power (SDP) which can trigger Throttling as low as 80°C. Although most processors Throttle at 100°C (212°F), it's not advisable to push your CPU to the thermal limit, just as you wouldn't operate a vehicle with the temperature gauge pegged in the red zone.

If your processor is at or near Throttle temperature, it's already too hot. The consensus among highly experienced and well informed system builders and overclockers, is that cooler is better for ultimate stability, performance and longevity. As such, all agree that it's wise to observe a reasonable thermal limit below Tj Max. So regardless of your rig's environmental conditions, system configuration, workloads or any other variables, sustained Core temperatures above 80°C aren't recommended.

Guys, sorry for the long winded explanations, but in my experience, more information is better than not enough, since the essence of the topic is in the details. I hope this helps everyone in some way or another"


----------



## wingman99

The red zone in a car gauge is the damage zone. Intel Tj max is 100c then 99c is the safe zone.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The red zone in a car gauge is the damage zone. Intel Tj max is 100c then 99c is the safe zone.


Okay. You run your processor at 99C. Most other people like to leave a margin of safety.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Guys this question has been asked a lot throughout this thread and others in regards to temperature spikes with Kaby Lake. I found this post on another forum which I thought I would share with all of you as it is the most comprehensive explanation I have been able to find enjoy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Sorry to show up late to the party. I'm a moderator at TomsHardware and the author of the Intel Temperature Guide - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1800828/intel-temperature-guide.html - mentioned earlier in this thread. I've been working on the topic of Intel processor temperatures for over 10 years, and have invested more than 5,000 hours of ongoing research and hands-on testing to help everyone understand this complicated topic. I've also been building, overclocking and modding PC's for over 20 years, and delidding since 3rd Generation Ivy Bridge. I'll say right up front that I do not have an Intel nondisclosure agreement, so I'm not constrained here, yet regardless of all my work, there's always more to learn about this topic.
> 
> I've spent the last several hours carefully reading through all 40 pages of this entire thread. I understand your frustrations, as our friends at Intel are prone to be somewhat vague and evasive, as if every statement has been pre-washed through the legal department. Nonetheless, there's a few items I'd like to bring to everyone's attention which will shed some light on the spiking and TIM problems, as well as clear up a few misconceptions, and perhaps offer a fresh perspective.
> 
> Concerning the spiking problem, I noticed one item in particular that's been overlooked in this thread, which is "Speed Shift".
> 
> Spiking has always been present, however, as a few of you have already pointed out, it hasn't been so obvious on prior Generations due to several variables. Intel's specification for Digital Thermal Sensor (DTS) response time is 256 milliseconds, or about 1/4th of a second, so Core temperatures respond instantly to changes in load. Intel introduced Speed Shift technology with Skylake, then kicked it up a notch with Kaby Lake. Speed Shift was intended as an improvement over SpeedStep, so Speed Shift responds faster to changes in workload demands while being more energy efficient, but the downside is spiking. Also, excessive spiking is sometimes caused by unnecessary tray startups, processes and services, so it help to keep your software cleaned up.
> 
> Here's two links to our sister website, AnandTech, which describes Speed Shift:
> 
> Examining Intel's New Speed Shift Tech on Skylake: More Responsive Processors - Examining Intel's New Speed Shift Tech on Skylake: More Responsive Processors
> 
> Speed Shift v2: Speed Harder - Speed Shift v2: Speed Harder - Intel Launches 7th Generation Kaby Lake: 15W/28W with Iris, 35-91W Desktop and Mobile Xeo&#8230;
> 
> Speed Shift is also described in the Datasheets for 6th and 7th Generation processors in Section 4 - Power Management:
> 
> http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/desktop-6th-gen-core-family-datasheet-vol-1.pdf
> 
> Datasheet, Vol. 1: 7th Gen Intel® Processor Family for S Platforms
> 
> It's interesting to note that as there's no distinction offered in BIOS between Speed Shift and SpeedStep, it can't be disabled or adjusted separately from SpeedStep. It may, however, be possible for Intel and it's motherboard partners to deploy microcode and BIOS updates to provide for different Speed Shift response levels and / or disable.
> 
> Concerning the TIM problem:
> 
> The following is from "Silicon Lottery" - https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/delid - which is actually a real company based outside Houston, Texas, who tests, bins and professionally delids processors. The following is their figures on how much delidding typically improves Core temperatures on 3rd through 7th Generation Quad Core "K" variants, which will give you an idea of just how bad the TIM problem really is:
> 
> 7th Generation ... Kaby Lake - 12° to 25°C
> 6th Generation ... Skylake - 8°C to 18°C
> 5th Generation ... Broadwell - 8°C to 18°C
> 4th Generation ... Devil's Canyon - 7°C to 15°C
> 4th Generation ... Haswell - 10°C to 25°C
> 3rd Generation ... Ivy Bridge - 10°C to 25°C
> 
> In all fairness, before we jump to any conclusions and send out the lynch mob to string up the guys at Intel, let's keep in mind that besides being expense conscious, they also have some of the finest PhD's, thermodynamicists and engineers in the world on their payroll, so let's consider the challenges and limitations they've come up against. Here's an article which details the drawbacks of soldering these small Die sizes:
> 
> The Truth about CPU Soldering - http://overclocking.guide/the-truth-about-cpu-soldering/
> 
> Concerning Intel's Thermal Specifications, there's a few of you who have some misconceptions, so let's get that cleared up.
> 
> Core temperature (Tjunction) is measured at the heat sources near the transistor "Junctions" inside each of the Cores by individual Digital Thermal Sensors (DTS). Tcase is instead a single external factory only measurement centered on the surface of the Integrated Heat Spreader where the cooler is seated, so Tcase is not Core temperature. If users look up their processor's Thermal Specification at Intel's Product Information website, they often don't read or understand the definition. Since there are many software utilities for monitoring Core temperature, users often confuse Tcase with Core temperature.
> 
> Core temperature (Tjunction) is higher than CPU temperature (Tcase) due to differences in the proximity of sensors to heat sources. Although Core temperature sensors are factory calibrated by Intel, the specification for DTS accuracy is +/- 5°C. This means deviations between the highest and lowest Cores can be up to 10°C, with Turbo Boost disabled and all Cores at the same speed. Sensors are typically more accurate at high temperatures to protect against thermal damage, but due to calibration issues such as linearity, slope and range, idle temperatures may not be very accurate.
> 
> Since the Digital Thermal Sensors (DTS) are at the heat sources, and the factory temperature measurement on the Integrated Heat Spreader (IHS) is not, there's a temperature "gradient" between DTS and IHS locations. This is why Core temperatures are higher than Tcase Thermal Specifications. At 100% Thermal Design Power (TDP), the gradient on Core 2 and Core i soldered processors through 2nd Generation is about 5°C, but the gradient on TIM'd 3rd through 7th Generation can be up to 25°C. This goes back to the TIM problem.
> 
> Tcase values aren't only measured, they're also calculated based on stock cooler TDP and processor TDP. Cooler models with different TDP values are packaged with different TDP processors. Several Generations of Quad Core CPU's at 77, 84, 88 and 95 Watts were packaged with a universal 95 Watt cooler. 6th and 7th Generation i5 and i7 "K" processors are 91 Watts, but the cooler is 130 Watts and is sold separately: Intel's Skylake Cooler - http://vr-zone.com/articles/this-is-what-intels-first-cpu-cooler-for-skylake-looks-like/97189.html
> 
> Compared below are three Intel processor / cooler combinations with respect to TDP and Tcase Specifications:
> 
> Example 1: i7 2700K 95 Watts TDP / Cooler 95 Watts TDP / Difference 0 Watts / Tcase 72°C.
> Example 2: i7 3770K 77 Watts TDP / Cooler 95 Watts TDP / Difference 18 Watts / Tcase 67°C.
> Example 3: i7 6700K 91 Watts TDP / Cooler 130 Watts TDP / Difference 39 Watts / Tcase 64°C.
> 
> The higher the cooler TDP is from the processor TDP, the lower the Tcase Specification, just as when the stock cooler is replaced with a higher TDP aftermarket cooler, Core temperatures are lower. Tcase is based on different combinations of stock coolers and CPU's, which is why Specifications vary. The examples above suggest the 6700K is less thermally capable than the 2700K, which is misleading, because the 6700K has a higher Throttle temperature.
> 
> Mobile (laptop) processors don't have an Integrated Heat Spreader, so they don't have Tcase Specifications; only Tj Max. And since Intel changed the Thermal Specification for 7th Generation Desktop processors from Tcase to Tjunction (Tj Max), this standardizes Desktop and Mobile Specifications. Intel's long overdue change signifies that Tj Max is the limiting Thermal Specification; not Tcase. Your Tj Max Specification is shown in the monitoring utility "Core Temp" - http://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp
> 
> Tj Max Specifications vary from 80°C to 105°C. Some processors Throttle at 80°C, while others become unstable over 80°C. Core i 6th and 7th Generation CPU's have Configurable TDP (cTDP) and Scenario Design Power (SDP) which can trigger Throttling as low as 80°C. Although most processors Throttle at 100°C (212°F), it's not advisable to push your CPU to the thermal limit, just as you wouldn't operate a vehicle with the temperature gauge pegged in the red zone.
> 
> If your processor is at or near Throttle temperature, it's already too hot. The consensus among highly experienced and well informed system builders and overclockers, is that cooler is better for ultimate stability, performance and longevity. As such, all agree that it's wise to observe a reasonable thermal limit below Tj Max. So regardless of your rig's environmental conditions, system configuration, workloads or any other variables, sustained Core temperatures above 80°C aren't recommended.
> 
> Guys, sorry for the long winded explanations, but in my experience, more information is better than not enough, since the essence of the topic is in the details. I hope this helps everyone in some way or another
> 
> 
> "


yeah man! +1


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The red zone in a car gauge is the damage zone. Intel Tj max is 100c then 99c is the safe zone.
> 
> 
> 
> Okay. You run your processor at 99C. Most other people like to leave a margin of safety.
Click to expand...

Then what is the safe zone tell me?


----------



## Adiadiere

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Guys this question has been asked a lot throughout this thread and others in regards to temperature spikes with Kaby Lake. I found this post on another forum which I thought I would share with all of you as it is the most comprehensive explanation I have been able to find enjoy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Sorry to show up late to the party. I'm a moderator at TomsHardware and the author of the Intel Temperature Guide - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1800828/intel-temperature-guide.html - mentioned earlier in this thread. I've been working on the topic of Intel processor temperatures for over 10 years, and have invested more than 5,000 hours of ongoing research and hands-on testing to help everyone understand this complicated topic. I've also been building, overclocking and modding PC's for over 20 years, and delidding since 3rd Generation Ivy Bridge. I'll say right up front that I do not have an Intel nondisclosure agreement, so I'm not constrained here, yet regardless of all my work, there's always more to learn about this topic.
> 
> Guys, sorry for the long winded explanations, but in my experience, more information is better than not enough, since the essence of the topic is in the details. I hope this helps everyone in some way or another"


Literally on of the best, most well thought through and praised explanations of this I have seen. Thank you sir, for your time and effort has not gone unappreciated!

Do you have any information on Core Coltages you'd care to share?


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Then what is the safe zone tell me?


I'll quote the relevant portion, being you ignored it:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> If your processor is at or near Throttle temperature, it's already too hot. The consensus among highly experienced and well informed system builders and overclockers, is that cooler is better for ultimate stability, performance and longevity. As such, all agree that it's wise to observe a reasonable thermal limit below Tj Max. So regardless of your rig's environmental conditions, system configuration, workloads or any other variables, sustained Core temperatures above 80°C aren't recommended.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adiadiere*
> 
> Literally on of the best, most well thought through and praised explanations of this I have seen. Thank you sir, for your time and effort has not gone unappreciated!
> 
> Do you have any information on Core Coltages you'd care to share?


Not my work as I found it on another forum but I felt it was worth sharing







Raja from Asus has made it pretty clear in the past that core voltages of more than 1.4V for 24/7 use are not recommended.


----------



## clackersx

Username: clackersx
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: Bclk. 100.10
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5005
Cache Frequency: 4504.5
Vcore in UEFI: 1.460
Vcore: 1.442 HWinfo (1.45 multimeter)
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delidded, H110i
Stability Test: Prime95 Blend, 8 threads, min FFT 8, Max FFT 4096, Memory 14000, Time each FFT 3min.
Total test time 26 hours.

Batch Number: L702D309 Malaysia
Ram Speed: DDR3 2600 11-13-13-31 CR1
Ram Voltage: 1.68
VCCIO: STOCK
VCCSA: STOCK
Motherboard: Z170 Asus Z170-P D3
LLC Setting: Level 4


----------



## PeterOC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Not my work as I found it on another forum but I felt it was worth sharing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raja from Asus has made it pretty clear in the past that core voltages of more than 1.4V for 24/7 use are not recommended.


My current overclock is [email protected] and it drops to 50x1.36 when it gets to 80C. This is with LLC 5 so voltage is not constant 1.408. Do you think it's too much for 24/7? I use the PC only a few hours a day at most, but it's on 24/7.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PeterOC*
> 
> My current overclock is [email protected] and it drops to 50x1.36 when it gets to 80C. This is with LLC 5 so voltage is not constant 1.408. Do you think it's too much for 24/7? I use the PC only a few hours a day at most, but it's on 24/7.


Remember its current that kills a CPU not so much voltage. I don't think 1.408V is really going to be an issue 24/7 provided you are not running Prime95 all day every day. Also keep in mind that just because CPU-Z says 1.408V doesn't necessarily mean that it is, it might be between 1.392V and 1.408V (16mV steps)


----------



## Adiadiere

So I've been playing around with my 7700K and Asus Z270F for the past couple of days, at all kinds of settings. I've found that whatever overclock I do I'm still hitting 80 degrees plus, but the one thing that always drives up the temps is giving the RAM more voltage.
For Example, I had the 5GHz profile on from Asus (just to test it out) and the memory was clocked in at 2133MHz (Not the 3000 it's rated for) but it was stable at 5GHz and the Vcore seemed to fluctuate between 1.376 and 1.408 at 100%. Them temps got to around 84 degrees. The second I upped the RAM clock to 3000MHz and the RAM voltage to 1.35v temps hit 92 easily.

I have a Corsair H100i GTX cooler that idles around 28 degrees water temp, and CPU at 33/34 degrees. (Ambient 23 degrees)

My current Overclock is a weak 4.8GHz at 1.32 Vcore with RAM at 3000MHz 1.344V and Idle is 34 degrees and 78 under load. I figured this was perhaps the best trade off.

Please can anyone give any feedback or suggestions for what I could do next? Re-apply TIM? De-lid? (would rather not void warranty)

If anyone else has a similar build please jump in here!

Full specs:

i7 7700k
Asus Z270F
Corsair H100i GTX
16GB Corsair Vengeance 3000MHz RGB
Corsair 240GB MP500 M.2 PCIE SSD
GTX 780ti Superclocked
2TB Seagate HDD
EVGA Supernova G2 1000W
Corsair Obsidian 750D
LG 29EA93 21:9 2560x1080


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adiadiere*
> 
> So I've been playing around with my 7700K and Asus Z270F for the past couple of days, at all kinds of settings. I've found that whatever overclock I do I'm still hitting 80 degrees plus, but the one thing that always drives up the temps is giving the RAM more voltage.
> For Example, I had the 5GHz profile on from Asus (just to test it out) and the memory was clocked in at 2133MHz (Not the 3000 it's rated for) but it was stable at 5GHz and the Vcore seemed to fluctuate between 1.376 and 1.408 at 100%. Them temps got to around 84 degrees. The second I upped the RAM clock to 3000MHz and the RAM voltage to 1.35v temps hit 92 easily.
> 
> I have a Corsair H100i GTX cooler that idles around 28 degrees water temp, and CPU at 33/34 degrees. (Ambient 23 degrees)
> 
> My current Overclock is a weak 4.8GHz at 1.32 Vcore with RAM at 3000MHz 1.344V and Idle is 34 degrees and 78 under load. I figured this was perhaps the best trade off.
> 
> Please can anyone give any feedback or suggestions for what I could do next? Re-apply TIM? De-lid? (would rather not void warranty)
> 
> If anyone else has a similar build please jump in here!
> 
> Full specs:
> 
> i7 7700k
> Asus Z270F
> Corsair H100i GTX
> 16GB Corsair Vengeance 3000MHz RGB
> Corsair 240GB MP500 M.2 PCIE SSD
> GTX 780ti Superclocked
> 2TB Seagate HDD
> EVGA Supernova G2 1000W
> Corsair Obsidian 750D
> LG 29EA93 21:9 2560x1080


78C under what "load"?


----------



## Adiadiere

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 78C under what "load"?


Sorry, using Asus Realbench


----------



## MaKeN

Dellidet
1.39 v under load /5.1 / cpu power 100w / custom loop

My water temps on idle are about 29 / full load 36-40c
Cpu temps running RB are 67c max

So i asume that your temps are just fine for a h100 and not dellidet 7700k

More to that , i would say your chip is "cold" for a 7700k .
If you are fine with 4.8 keep it that way
You want 5.0 and lower temps , dellid it.

What for would you keep the warranty on it?


----------



## Adiadiere

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Dellidet
> 1.39 v under load /5.1 / cpu power 100w / custom loop
> 
> My water temps on idle are about 29 / full load 36-40c
> Cpu temps running RB are 67c max
> 
> So i asume that your temps are just fine for a h100 and not dellidet 7700k
> 
> More to that , i would say your chip is "cold" for a 7700k .
> If you are fine with 4.8 keep it that way
> You want 5.0 and lower temps , dellid it.
> 
> What for would you keep the warranty on it?


Now you see your 1.39v seems high from what a lot of people have said, I know motherboards and every cpu is different come into it but how are people getting 5.2ghz at like 1.28V? Haha

I want the warranty in case it ****s when overclocking, I got intels overclock guarantee to be safe

Also, what is your processors batch#?


----------



## BackwoodsNC

got my set at 5.1 at 1.380v But under load it jumps around from 1.480 to 1.416.

WHat i dont understand if you run the intel extreme tuning utility it can go all the way to 1.5 for some reason. "benchmark part of it"

MB is z270 gigabyte k7

LLC on high

temps stay under 90c with custom loop


----------



## nrpeyton

I hve the exa
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Finally found time to put my Apex/7700K into a proper case (it's bee on a bench table since launch). Figured I'd keep it. [email protected], 3866c15 ram, NVMe Raid 0 on the DIMM2 riser card, and an exceptional 1080 (2189 stable to folding, boinc and gaming) absolutely silent. Steady-state thermal is water levels out at RT +8C under full load (approx 32C on the cold side of the rad at steady-state). Case is tempered glass Corsair 570X.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - my photo skills need work.


Nice research on the DRR4 overclocking: I've taken advantage of this. So a rep+ is definitely worth it here:

*\/ \/ \/ \/*

We have the same hardware.

Maximus ROG APEX
& i7 7700k

I reduced increased my O/C from:
4000 Mhz 18, 19, 19, 39
to:
3866 Mhz 15, 16, 16 36.

Passed a 2x8gb (16GB) memtest at 100% coverage 

Left at AUTO;
-VCCSA defaulted to 1.335v _(reported in Windows)._
&
-VCCIO to 1.296

_Stock XMP profile for this G.SKILL kit is: 3600MHZ at 17, 18, 18 38_

And from this table:



This brings my DDR4 effectiveness from 9.0 down to 7.75.

2 Last thing I need to work)

1) Trying to get my core overclock a little better. I'm still stuck at 4.9Ghz daily. _(or 5Ghz with ridiculous voltages)_
and
2) First and foremost -- seeing if I can keep my new DDR4 overclock the same *but* at reduces voltages. (at the moment I am on 1.5v DDR4 + the VCCIO & VCCSA mentioned above)


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Very nice, i have just purchased the Apex, seems like a great board.


I also have the APEX.

Let me know how you do with max overclocks. Would be great to bounce off each other, good luck..


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> I also have the APEX.
> 
> Let me know how you do with max overclocks. Would be great to bounce off each other, good luck..


Hi mate, yeh the Apex is a top board, just getting used to the Asus bios again after using Gigabyte boards for some time now. I have my 7700k at 5.2ghz core 4.9ghz uncore at the moment, takes 1.408v, i have 2 sticks of my 32gig Gskill 3200mhz C14 kit running at 3866mhz C16 @1.440v, SA and IO @1.1125V. You need to let HCI run for at least 400%, more if you can, the newer version of HCI takes less time than the older version did, so worth the $5 or just over £4 in our money, lol, version 5.0.


----------



## sdmf74

So what is the concensus on Speedshift? I read earlier about it causing spikes but how much of a concern should this be and are most people using speedshift while overclocking?


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> So what is the concensus on Speedshift? I read earlier about it causing spikes but how much of a concern should this be and are most people using speedshift while overclocking?


Speedshift disabled for me as a rule.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Adiadiere*
> 
> Sorry, using Asus Realbench


yeah - that's pretty hot. Check the cooling block mount and if it is good then really the only way to tame the thermal behavior of these chips is to delid. Otherwise, lower the OC.. hey, a 4.8GHz 7700K is still VERY fast!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> I hve the exa
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Nice research on the DRR4 overclocking: I've taken advantage of this. So a rep+ is definitely worth it here:
> 
> *\/ \/ \/ \/*
> 
> We have the same hardware.
> 
> Maximus ROG APEX
> & i7 7700k
> 
> I reduced increased my O/C from:
> 4000 Mhz 18, 19, 19, 39
> to:
> 3866 Mhz 15, 16, 16 36.
> 
> Passed a 2x8gb (16GB) memtest at 100% coverage
> 
> Left at AUTO;
> -VCCSA defaulted to 1.335v _(reported in Windows)._
> &
> -VCCIO to 1.296
> 
> _Stock XMP profile for this G.SKILL kit is: 3600MHZ at 17, 18, 18 38_
> 
> And from this table:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This brings my DDR4 effectiveness from 9.0 down to 7.75.
> 
> 2 Last thing I need to work)
> 
> 1) Trying to get my core overclock a little better. I'm still stuck at 4.9Ghz daily. _(or 5Ghz with ridiculous voltages)_
> and
> 2) First and foremost -- seeing if I can keep my new DDR4 overclock the same *but* at reduces voltages. (at the moment I am on 1.5v DDR4 + the VCCIO & VCCSA mentioned above)


You did lower that VSA voltage - right? 1.3+ volts is getting up there. Best to measure it off the MB.








Nothing to complain about with a 4.9GHz OC
Edit: yuou should load Raja's ram preset, then try lowering the freq to 3866 and adjust primary timings. HIs secondary timings work very well.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> So what is the concensus on Speedshift? I read earlier about it causing spikes but how much of a concern should this be and are most people using speedshift while overclocking?


I've not seen any spikes due to speedshift (or speedstep for that matter). Both are intended to raise and lower voltage based on load/demand... these are not spikes. Choose one or the other if you want dynamic clocks and voltage. Frankly, for day-friver settings, I just leave both on Auto. It that case, Shift rules provide for more rapid response to load changes.








!


----------



## sdmf74

Yeah now that I think about it I did turn off speedstep cause im using a manual oc and high performance power options. I was waiting for the next bios update before I set an adaptive oc (I kinda figured one woulda been released by now). But you say to use one or the other huh? So probably best to use speedshift instead of speedstep I imagine.

Or both auto as you mentioned.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> So what is the concensus on Speedshift? I read earlier about it causing spikes but how much of a concern should this be and are most people using speedshift while overclocking?


I turned Speed shift off and on to test and it makes no difference in temperature.


----------



## EDK-TheONE

New test:

CPU: i7-7700k @ 4700 @ 1.135v (bios) fixed 1.142v (idle or load) delided (Grizzly Conductonaut) cache=4200
MB: Z270 M7 latest bios llc=auto
Cooler:H100i (4x 1200RPM fan case) thermal compound: chill factor 3
Test: 5min cinbench stable temp (max 60)
ambient temp: above 30


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Yeah now that I think about it I did turn off speedstep cause im using a manual oc and high performance power options. I was waiting for the next bios update before I set an adaptive oc (I kinda figured one woulda been released by now). But you say to use one or the other huh? So probably best to use speedshift instead of speedstep I imagine.
> 
> Or both auto as you mentioned.


I haven't seen SStep and SShift clash for "control". Auto on both has been working just fine on this APEX with adaptive vcore. If you use manual override (fixed voltage) either (or both







) will lower the multiplier at idle state and allow for c-states to take effect. Tho, if you want max clocks and performance at all times, disable both, disable c-states... and let 'er rip!


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - that's pretty hot. Check the cooling block mount and if it is good then really the only way to tame the thermal behavior of these chips is to delid. Otherwise, lower the OC.. hey, a 4.8GHz 7700K is still VERY fast!
> You did lower that VSA voltage - right? 1.3+ volts is getting up there. Best to measure it off the MB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing to complain about with a 4.9GHz OC
> Edit: yuou should load Raja's ram preset, then try lowering the freq to 3866 and adjust primary timings. HIs secondary timings work very well.
> I've not seen any spikes due to speedshift (or speedstep for that matter). Both are intended to raise and lower voltage based on load/demand... these are not spikes. Choose one or the other if you want dynamic clocks and voltage. Frankly, for day-friver settings, I just leave both on Auto. It that case, Shift rules provide for more rapid response to load changes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> !


Lowered my DDR4 voltage from 1.5v to 1.475. (lowest I could go and still past MemTest.

Passed MemTest with:

VCCSA:
BIOS - 1.23750v
HWINFO64 (Windows): 1.272

VCCIO:
BIOS: 1.22500v
HWINFO64 (windows) 1.264

New memory O/C of:
3866 MHZ
15, 16, 16, 35
CR: 1T

P.S.

Has anyone noticed their memory O/C's slightly better at lower CPU temps _(due to colder onboard memory controller or VCCIO)?_


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Lowered my DDR4 voltage from 1.5v to 1.475. (lowest I could go and still past MemTest.
> 
> Currently working on VCCIO & VCSSA. at voltages:
> 
> Passed with:
> 
> VCCSA:
> BIOS - 1.23750v
> HWINFO64 (Windows): 1.272
> 
> VCCIO:
> BIOS: 1.22500v
> HWINFO64 (windows) 1.272


I think you are really pushing the edge for 24/7. Benchmarking for an evening - fine. But, this is all personally imposed limitations. For daily, I try to keep things so that the rig will not exceed 150% of TDP under realbench or x264, and VDimm at or below 1.45V (surprisingly, VDIMM limits are really from the CPU side, not from the ram side of things. The IMC will go before the sticks cook). Please post up a snip with AsRock Timing configurator and the SPD tab of CPUZ. what are you running that needs that much VSA and VCCIO? (just curious)


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I think you are really pushing the edge for 24/7. Benchmarking for an evening - fine. But, this is all personally imposed limitations. For daily, I try to keep things so that the rig will not exceed 150% of TDP under realbench or x264, and VDimm at or below 1.45V (surprisingly, VDIMM limits are really from the CPU side, not from the ram side of things. The IMC will go before the sticks cook). Please post up a snip with AsRock Timing configurator and the SPD tab of CPUZ. what are you running that needs that much VSA and VCCIO? (just curious)






In BIOS the voltages for VCCIO & VCSSA are: 1.22500v and 1.23750v.
Which report higher windows.
(As shown in the screenshots to the right-hand-side of the utility you asked for).

_(They're both also considerably less than when left to AUTO). (which results in 1.3++)_


----------



## moorhen2

Sometimes with SA and IO voltages less is more, but obviously chip and ram dependent, thats how it is with mine anyway.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In BIOS the voltages for VCCIO & VCSSA are: 1.22500v and 1.23750v.
> Which report higher windows.
> (As shown in the screenshots to the right-hand-side of the utility you asked for).
> 
> _(They're both also considerably less than when left to AUTO). (which results in 1.3++)_


yeah - so you see the ChA and ChB RTLs? They are off so the ram is not training properly (may be that one stick is weak compared to the other). That kit should do 3866 c16-16-16-38-1T with 1.425V and VSA a bit lower (at least). once you get RTL D0 for ChA and B to be 55 and 56, in that order, by tuning voltages (even train at 1.45 and set eventual to 1.425) then work on tightening up CAS, tRTP, FAW, RAS etc.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EDK-TheONE*
> 
> New test:
> 
> CPU: i7-7700k @ 4700 @ 1.135v (bios) fixed 1.142v (idle or load) delided (Grizzly Conductonaut) cache=4200
> MB: Z270 M7 latest bios llc=auto
> Cooler:H100i (4x 1200RPM fan case) thermal compound: chill factor 3
> Test: 5min cinbench stable temp (max 60)
> ambient temp: above 30


Not to come off rude or anything but why delid and not overclock your cpu? Just seems like kind of a waste considering these chips can all do 49x-50x+ easily with decent temps and no delid.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Not to come off rude or anything but why delid and not overclock your cpu? Just seems like kind of a waste considering these chips can all do 49x-50x+ easily with decent temps and no delid.


I disagree with that statement. I've had a couple 7700k's that could barely run STOCK (44x) turbo speeds without throttling even water cooled.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> I disagree with that statement. I've had a couple 7700k's that could barely run STOCK (44x) turbo speeds without throttling even water cooled.


What? Then either you had defective chips or your settings or cooling setup was flawed


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> What? Then either you had defective chips or your settings or cooling setup was flawed


Based on comments from Silicon Lottery, it's not uncommon: http://www.overclock.net/t/1630030/quick-sl-question-in-regards-to-7700k-binning#post_26084699


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Based on comments from Silicon Lottery, it's not uncommon: http://www.overclock.net/t/1630030/quick-sl-question-in-regards-to-7700k-binning#post_26084699


Is your chip an early or later production date. ?


----------



## sdmf74

That's the first I've heard of it and also that's coming from a company that sells binned chips at a premium price so I wouldn't take what they say as gospel.
I have heard of people getting binned SL chips that don't run at what they claim also.


----------



## Silicon Lottery

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> That's the first I've heard of it and also that's coming from a company that sells binned chips at a premium price so I wouldn't take what they say as gospel.
> I have heard of people getting binned SL chips that don't run at what they claim also.


I'm not aware of any of our customers stuck with chips that don't mirror what we test beforehand. We have always quickly issued replacements to the few out there that have had trouble.

And yes, there are plenty of 7700Ks out there that throttle at stock under Linpack loads on AIOs. The latest Linpack is very brutal.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> I'm not aware of any of our customers stuck with chips that don't mirror what we test beforehand. We have always quickly issued replacements to the few out there that have had trouble.
> 
> And yes, there are plenty of 7700Ks out there that throttle at stock under Linpack loads on AIOs. The latest Linpack is very brutal.


To be fair he didnt say "under linpack loads" he said "I disagree with that statement. I've had a couple 7700k's that could barely run STOCK (44x) turbo speeds without throttling even water cooled." Watercooled could mean custom cooling or AIO's

AND I never said you refused a replacement to customers and I never said you stuck them with chips of any kind. Thats just putting words in my mouth. I simply said I have read multiple people say they recieved a chip that didnt perform as stated,
but im sure it was due to their motherboard or their overclocking skills right.


----------



## Silicon Lottery

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> To be fair he didnt say "under linpack loads" he said "I disagree with that statement. I've had a couple 7700k's that could barely run STOCK (44x) turbo speeds without throttling even water cooled."
> 
> AND I never said you refused a replacement to customers and I never said you stuck them with chips of any kind. Thats just putting words in my mouth. I simply said I have read multiple people say they recieved a chip that didnt perform as stated,
> but im sure it was due to their motherboard or their overclocking skills right.


What @garyd9 said was valid, you can't assume he meant his 7700Ks were throttling under a light load or at idle? Linpack can cause throttling at the stock turbo speeds of a 7700K.


----------



## sdmf74

So we're just gonna assume he was talking about linpack loads, I think you're reaching a little.
Look I get it you tell customers it's common for brand new i7 7700k's to throttle when watercooling so you can sell more binned chips at a premium. I wouldn't call it a dirty tactic just probably not the way I would run my business is all.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> So we're just gonna assume he was talking about linpack loads, I think you're reaching a little.
> Look I get it you tell customers it's common for brand new i7 7700k's to throttle when watercooling so you can sell more binned chips at a premium. I wouldn't call it a dirty tactic just probably not the way I would run my business is all.


He was talking about linpack.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Based on comments from Silicon Lottery, it's not uncommon: http://www.overclock.net/t/1630030/quick-sl-question-in-regards-to-7700k-binning#post_26084699


----------



## sdmf74

Not in this thread, at least not from the comments I read


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> To be fair he didnt say "under linpack loads" he said "I disagree with that statement. I've had a couple 7700k's that could barely run STOCK (44x) turbo speeds without throttling even water cooled." Watercooled could mean custom cooling or AIO's


I didn't _originally_ clarify as running under linpack, but in my reply I did include a link to a message that specifies linpack.

However, the entire discussion of what constitutes running "at load" is really a can of worms, and something I've seen debated over and over. To ME, heat loading involves running linpack and stability loading involves running prime95. Other people can use "ROG Bench" or other toys and call it "good enough." It's NOT good enough for me.

Unless and until you clarify what a given person defines as loading a processor, you are likely making invalid assumptions.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> What @garyd9 said was valid, you can't assume he meant his 7700Ks were throttling under a light load or at idle? Linpack can cause throttling at the stock turbo speeds of a 7700K.


Thank you.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Not in this thread, at least not from the comments I read


Then you made an invalid assumption of how I test my processors, and didn't read the linked post which clarifies the load.

I am curious, though, how YOU define loading a processor to determine if it'll heat throttle under full turbo speeds. ROG bench? OCCT? AIDA? Cinebench? Copying files? Dragging a window around the desktop in Windows (which, oddly, does seem to kick CPU cores into turbo)? Just setting windows power saving to "performance" and letting it idle at full speed?


----------



## moorhen2

It's a case of "horses for courses" and each to their own when thrashing silicon is concerned, but the Prime thing has been done to death im afraid. JMO,


----------



## nrpeyton

*It's amazing what 15 degrees can do!*

Finally got around to re-connecting the Water Chiller into my loop today.

Running the coolant at 14c (as this is as low as the dew point will allow me to go today to avoid condensation-- tomorrow might be better).

Anyway I can now run 5Ghz at 1.4v (in BIOS with LLC left to AUTO).

Just passed Realbench 15 minute run with 3 hash checks.

Currently running x264 -- all good so far. Before the 15c drop I need at least 1.45-1.5v for 5GHZ.

Next on my list is 1) cache, then 2) look back over what jpmboy suggested regarding my memory overclocking-- to see if I can get everything all working simultaneously


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> *It's amazing what 15 degrees can do!*
> 
> Finally got around to re-connecting the Water Chiller into my loop today.
> 
> Running the coolant at 14c (as this is as low as the dew point will allow me to go today to avoid condensation-- tomorrow might be better).
> 
> Anyway I can now run 5Ghz at 1.4v (in BIOS with LLC left to AUTO).
> 
> Just passed Realbench 15 minute run with 3 hash checks.
> 
> Currently running x264 -- all good so far. Before the 15c drop I need at least 1.45-1.5v for 5GHZ.
> 
> Next on my list is 1) cache, then 2) look back over what jpmboy suggested regarding my memory overclocking-- to see if I can get everything all working simultaneously


Looking good.


----------



## sdmf74

I didnt assume you just didnt clarify. Fair enough but I think most of the assumptions and miscommunications were made by SL, like when you said custom loop and he said AIO. Anyway I use several different programs and methods for determining stability with the exception of OCCT. Then after its dialed in I just use my rig as normal for a couple weeks to make sure it continues to run smooth even at idle or just browsing as you know sometimes instabilities don't just happen at full load.

I did read the link after SL tried merging the two threads and you also mentioned your motherboard was causing voltage hikes/spikes, not sure if you are still using the same one though. All things need to be taken into account not just the cpu especially when we are talking about faulty bios'which could have been the sole cause and not your 2 cpu samples.

I do agree with one thing SL said though and that's with respect to HT as I have seen it raise temps as much as 10°+ on these chips during stress testing.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Looking good.


Thanks.

I reckon if I was to also delid I could probably get 5.1 Ghz ;-)

Only concern I've got is this:

x264 (while claiming on the OP to be an *easier* stress test is drawing 116 watts + with v.core at 1.45v).

Whereas if I run Realbench the v.core simply sits at a healthier 1.392v - 1.407v drawing only 98 watts

I'm at: 1.4v in BIOS with LLC @ auto

Anything to worry about?
Or am I fretting over nothing lol?


----------



## caenlen

Can someone tell me if there is a way to monitor my Kaby Lake 7820HK speeds in real time while gaming? I want to see how long it downclocks for... I go for 3.9ghz all 4 cores in all benchmarks just fine no downclocking, even stress testing, but for some reason when I game I will close game and look at HWmonitor and it shows it downclocked to 2.9ghz at some point, temps are great, 70 celsius max... not sure whats up, I just want to see if I am getting 3.9ghz while in game for the majority of the time or what... I have no second monitor to just leave it up and running... would be nice if I did lol


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Can someone tell me if there is a way to monitor my Kaby Lake 7820HK speeds in real time while gaming? I want to see how long it downclocks for... I go for 3.9ghz all 4 cores in all benchmarks just fine no downclocking, even stress testing, but for some reason when I game I will close game and look at HWmonitor and it shows it downclocked to 2.9ghz at some point, temps are great, 70 celsius max... not sure whats up, I just want to see if I am getting 3.9ghz while in game for the majority of the time or what... I have no second monitor to just leave it up and running... would be nice if I did lol


You can use Riva Tuner and HWINFO64
(you set it up under OSD (on screen display) or something in the settings on hwinfo64

just make sure you've started Riva Tuner as well.. as they're two different apps... but coded to talk to eachother.

They are invaluable to me.. you can monitor absolutely anything from voltage, to speed, to frequency, even power draw and temps.. basically ANYTHING you can monitor in hwinfo64 can be passed to Riva Tuner in real time.

It appears on-screen in your game the same way FRAPS does.

*Like this: (right click & open new tab for FULL SIZE-- you can see it in the top left hand corner of my screenshot)*


----------



## sdmf74

Nrpeyton are you using an asus motherboard? Have you tried setting LLC instead of using auto

@caenlen long shot but if you have a logitech mouse you can download the logitech app and watch your clocks on your phone while you game.

It will show your total cpu % usage and each cores usage also and show your cpu speed and temp and mem usage etc.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Nrpeyton are you using an asus motherboard? Have you tried setting LLC instead of using auto
> 
> @caenlen long shot but if you have a logitech mouse you can download the logitech app and watch your clocks on your phone while you game.


Yes, I've tried all different combos of LLC in the past..

In the end I decided ASUS already has it optimised best on 'auto'.

You're better off with a bit voltage overshoot at idle (when there's not much current being drawn) with a nice healthy v.droop at load. (I just need to make sure that my initial v.core setting is high enough so when the v.droop occurs it doesn't go low enough to cause instability.

I.E. I'd rather be at 1.45v at idle (only drawing maybe 20 watts)

And then only be at 1.4v at load (while drawing 90+ watts).

AS OPPOSED to:

1.45v at idle
and 1.45v at load


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> However, the entire discussion of what constitutes running "at load" is really a can of worms, and something I've seen debated over and over. To ME, heat loading involves running linpack and stability loading involves running prime95. Other people can use "ROG Bench" or other toys and call it "good enough." It's NOT good enough for me.


So you should hardly be surprised that someone may have not understood your arguably excessive and impractical requirements for stability.

Automotive vehicles can be dangerous. I don't require that my car be safely operable at 300 kmph in fear that I might catch a gust of wind while headed down a mountain. If I did, I'd probably need to buy an exotic sports car Now if I sold cars, can you imagine how silly it would be for me to suggest a sports car to someone looking for a family sedan?

If you are looking to run AVX and/or mission critical workloads, a fair argument could be made that it's silly for you to overclock any machine and especially one with consumer grade hardware.

Surely there is someone here on a higher horse who thinks we are all fools; because they don't understand our various needs. I highly doubt you need what you claim to desire for a rational purpose aside from wanting to overclock conservatively; not that there is anything wrong with that.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Yes, I've tried all different combos of LLC in the past..
> 
> In the end I decided ASUS already has it optimised best on 'auto'.
> 
> You're better off with a bit voltage overshoot at idle (when there's not much current being drawn) with a nice healthy v.droop at load. (I just need to make sure that my initial v.core setting is high enough so when the v.droop occurs it doesn't go low enough to cause instability.
> 
> I.E. I'd rather be at 1.45v at idle (only drawing maybe 20 watts)
> 
> And then only be at 1.4v at load (while drawing 90+ watts).
> 
> AS OPPOSED to:
> 
> 1.45v at idle
> and 1.45v at load


For your overclock and using Asus rog z270 motherboard around 5 LLC should be perfect for you, that's what I'm using and it seems many others with similar oc's have settled on 5LLC as well.
I wouldn't trust the auto setting but thats just me.

Some people have been known to throttle on stock settings when using auto LLC LOL j/k


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Nrpeyton are you using an asus motherboard? Have you tried setting LLC instead of using auto
> 
> @caenlen long shot but if you have a logitech mouse you can download the logitech app and watch your clocks on your phone while you game.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I've tried all different combos of LLC in the past..
> 
> In the end I decided ASUS already has it optimised best on 'auto'.
> 
> You're better off with a bit voltage overshoot at idle (when there's not much current being drawn) with a nice healthy v.droop at load. (I just need to make sure that my initial v.core setting is high enough so when the v.droop occurs it doesn't go low enough to cause instability.
> 
> I.E. I'd rather be at 1.45v at idle (only drawing maybe 20 watts)
> 
> And then only be at 1.4v at load (while drawing 90+ watts).
> 
> AS OPPOSED to:
> 
> 1.45v at idle
> and 1.45v at load
Click to expand...

I just use all the power saving features so idle voltage drops down. The Vcore looks like this DVID, LLC AUTO, Prime95 v28.10 Max 1.332v, RealBench Max 1.296v, Web browsing Max 1.344v idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off 1.332v


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> That's the first I've heard of it and also that's coming from a company that sells binned chips at a premium price so I wouldn't take what they say as gospel.
> I have heard of people getting binned SL chips that don't run at what they claim also.


I had a 7700K from Silicon Lottery that did not perform as advertised at least not on my system, they were brilliant when it came to after sales service and replaced it with one that was even better


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> So you should hardly be surprised that someone may have not understood your arguably excessive and impractical requirements for stability.


Good thing I included that link to clarify, don't you think?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Surely there is someone here on a higher horse who thinks we are all fools; because they don't understand our various needs. I highly doubt you need what you claim to desire for a rational purpose aside from wanting to overclock conservatively; not that there is anything wrong with that.


My own ideas, and I understand that others don't agree, is that I want things as stable as I can make them. To me, that means testing in the most stressful conditions I can. Nothing I have access to heats up my CPU like linpack, so I use that. Nothing I have access to is as sensitive to errors as Prime95, so I also use that. If I "pass" those tests (with no errors and without exceeding 80C), then I'm confident that nothing I do in my "daily" usage might cause problems. In actual daily use, I rarely (if ever) exceed 65C on my CPU.

Oh, I also test the heat handling of my water loop by running furmark and linpack at the same time. It's a completely "unreasonable" test, but it make me feel better that my loop can dissipate whatever heat that gets thrown at it.

Does that make me overly cautious and conservative? Perhaps. I also backup my data (and backup my backups.) Oh, and I have health insurance, home owners insurance (that covers my computers, too), etc.

As for my car... Well, last time I "overclocked" (tuned) a car, I actually did take it to the track to test things.







I miss that Mustang.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I had a 7700K from Silicon Lottery that did not perform as advertised at least not on my system, they were brilliant when it came to after sales service and replaced it with one that was even better


I know and that's great.Props to them for that! A lot of companies could strive for better customer service such as this. EVGA is one that does, Asus unfortunately does not. BTW I never said SL refused to replace anyones cpu, that was their rep putting words in my mouth.


----------



## nrpeyton

Well I thought all was good and well at 1.4v with the coolant at 14-16c

However just failed a Realbench run.

Was at 5Ghz and 4.6Ghz cache at the time.

So I've removed the cache overclock (returned it to it's default of 4.2Ghz)

And now testing again with 5Ghz core at 1.410v (and LLC on AUTO).

I'm using OCCT this time. But whats scaring me is OCCT has my v.core at 1.472v in Windows.
_
At 15 mins so far, no errors reported._

I've also verified the v.core using a multi-meter. And WOW to my surprise. hwinfo64 is amazingly accurate. Right down to the last milli volt.

Also drawing about 120 watts on the CPU at that voltage. But socket temp is only 51c & core temps: 62c

I have 'large data set' selected-- as it's best for error detection on the 64 bit test version.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - so you see the ChA and ChB RTLs? They are off so the ram is not training properly (may be that one stick is weak compared to the other). That kit should do 3866 c16-16-16-38-1T with 1.425V and VSA a bit lower (at least). once you get RTL D0 for ChA and B to be 55 and 56, in that order, by tuning voltages (even train at 1.45 and set eventual to 1.425) then work on tightening up CAS, tRTP, FAW, RAS etc.


So instead of:
RTL (CHA) D0: 55
&
RTL (CHB) D0: 62

I should be able to train it to:

RTL (CHA) D0: 55
&
RTL (CHB) D0: 56

?

And the big gap between the A & B is how you know it's not training correctly?

If I've read (picked that up correctly) thanks. I appreciate it. Thanks.

If not please correct me. rep+


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> *It's amazing what 15 degrees can do!*
> Finally got around to re-connecting the Water Chiller into my loop today.
> Running the coolant at 14c (as this is as low as the dew point will allow me to go today to avoid condensation-- tomorrow might be better).
> Anyway I can now run 5Ghz at 1.4v (in BIOS with LLC left to AUTO).
> Just passed Realbench 15 minute run with 3 hash checks.
> Currently running x264 -- all good so far. Before the 15c drop I need at least 1.45-1.5v for 5GHZ.
> Next on my list is 1) cache, then 2) look back over what jpmboy suggested regarding my memory overclocking-- to see if I can get everything all working simultaneously


the clock ceiling on these chips is very temperature sensitive. remember, using a chiller give you a low min temp, but without a delid, the max temp (especially in the microenvironment of thje die where it really maters) may not be as low since the TIM on the stock chip - even if it is applied properly - has a fairly low flux value.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Thanks.
> I reckon if I was to also delid I could probably get 5.1 Ghz ;-)
> Only concern I've got is this:
> x264 (while claiming on the OP to be an *easier* stress test is drawing 116 watts + with v.core at 1.45v).
> Whereas if I run Realbench the v.core simply sits at a healthier 1.392v - 1.407v drawing only 98 watts
> I'm at: 1.4v in BIOS with LLC @ auto
> 
> Anything to worry about?
> Or am I fretting over nothing lol?


you'd probably do beter with a delid than a chiller + stock TIM. JMO
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> So instead of:
> RTL (CHA) D0: 55
> &
> RTL (CHB) D0: 62
> 
> *I should be able to train it to:
> 
> RTL (CHA) D0: 55
> &
> RTL (CHB) D0: 56*
> 
> ?
> And the big gap between the A & B is how you know it's not training correctly?
> If I've read (picked that up correctly) thanks. I appreciate it. Thanks.
> If not please correct me. rep+
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


yes. you can set these manually in bios. the corresponding IOLs would be "7" with those RTLs.


----------



## nrpeyton

Anyone know if you can do Dry Ice on a delidded chip? Or would you have to repeat the delidding process (but 2nd time applying normal paste instead of liquid metal).?


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Anyone know if you can do Dry Ice on a delidded chip? Or would you have to repeat the delidding process (but 2nd time applying normal paste instead of liquid metal).?


Liquid metal won't work below 0C or so, so you'll need to use a paste like Kryonaut under the IHS for DICE.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Liquid metal won't work below 0C or so, so you'll need to use a paste like Kryonaut under the IHS for DICE.


Thanks, rep+

What kind of temp drop would I still be likely to see if I only used Kryonaut instead of CLU/Conductonaut.

Would it still be worth delidding? I do the odd Exreme Dry Ice sesion from time to time. (although I've not had time to do a session on my new 7700k yet).

I'm still weighing up all the pro's/con's of delidding. I've also never delidded before. I suppose it actually wouldn't be _that_ difficult to simply repeat process with Kryonaut when I eventually do my Dry Ice session. (Then repeat with Liquid Metal again once I'm done).

Edit: I seem to have answered my own question









Trying to see if I can lower my v.core a little (_just_ under 1.4v in BIOS or 1.456v in HWINFO64 during OCCT) and still pass 1hr OCCT.

Core 3 always seems to be the culprit. (core 3 causes the error).

And when I look at temps the *averages* during OCCT at are:

core 0: 59
core 1: 56
core 2: 54
core 3: 59

/\
which looks great

However when I look at the *maximums* it's a different story:

core 0: 81
core 1: 74
core 2: 76
core 3: 83

No surprise core 3 has the highest maximum reported temp.

P.S.
_For anyone whose just chimed in-- those temps are during OCCT stressing at just below 1.4v in BIOS, LLC on Auto (or 1.456v in HWINFO64) with a Water Chiller set to 14c coolant temp & no delid)._


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, rep+
> 
> What kind of temp drop would I still be likely to see if I only used Kryonaut instead of CLU/Conductonaut.
> 
> Would it still be worth delidding? I do the odd Exreme Dry Ice sesion from time to time. (although I've not had time to do a session on my new 7700k yet).
> 
> I'm still weighing up all the pro's/con's of delidding. I've also never delidded before. I suppose it actually wouldn't be _that_ difficult to simply repeat process with Kryonaut when I eventually do my Dry Ice session. (Then repeat with Liquid Metal again once I'm done).
> 
> Edit: I seem to have answered my own question
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trying to see if I can lower my v.core a little (_just_ under 1.4v in BIOS or 1.456v in HWINFO64 during OCCT) and still pass 1hr OCCT.
> 
> Core 3 always seems to be the culprit. (core 3 causes the error).
> 
> And when I look at temps the *averages* during OCCT at are:
> 
> core 0: 59
> core 1: 56
> core 2: 54
> core 3: 59
> 
> /\
> which looks great
> 
> However when I look at the *maximums* it's a different story:
> 
> core 0: 81
> core 1: 74
> core 2: 76
> core 3: 83
> 
> No surprise core 3 has the highest maximum reported temp.
> 
> P.S.
> _For anyone whose just chimed in-- those temps are during OCCT at approx 1.4v in BIOS (or 1.456v during stressing in HWINFO64 with a Water Chiller set to 14c coolant temp & no delid)._


Intel's paste isn't a rockstar below 0C either, major gains switching to Kryonaut for sub zero. Under ambient conditions, Kryonaut is still better than stock Intel paste but still falls about 8C short of liquid metal.

I'd suggest just removing the IHS and not sealing it back on. No need to delid again. Switch between Kryonaut and liquid metal depending on what you're using the chip for at the moment.


----------



## nrpeyton

Sounds good.

I'm only 15 mins away from passing this OCCT test.

Fingers crossed.

My v.core is set to 1.395v in BIOS with AUTO LLC. (Either way I've been working up 10 milli volts at a time from 1.375v which failed).

Really hoping I pass this. Because it's the only way I can keep the v.core to a maximum of 1.45 under load in HWINFO64 _during_ stressing. (I.E. I'm already at 1.456v now during the test)

Edit: 9 mins to go on a 60 min test and it failed
























Core 3 again!!!









Edit 2:

I'm SOOO close... _(to 5 Ghz at no more than 1.45v)_

Is there any other little tricks in the BIOS I could try to give me that last little push (little edge I need)? I've already changed the VRM Switching Frequency to it's max of 800 KHZ (and had to place a fan over the VRM heat-sink to compensate to protect the board from the extra heat).

_I have the ROG Maximus Apex -- there must be something?_

_If I increase v.core anymore then I'm going past 1.395v which puts me into the realms of 1.45++++ under load._

Edit 3:

Thought about trying again with 1.405v (in BIOS) but unfortunately that's still giving 1.472v (HWINFO64) during stressing.

Already passed a 7hr run at 1.410v when I fell asleep. (also with cache at 4.7Ghz). And same *at load* HWINFO64 voltages.
So think I'm just going to call it a day now. And move onto memory.

*Edit 4:*

Funny thing is, Realbench (while still drawing roughly the same power/watts as OCCT). Only has the *at load* v.core at 1.408. However just crashed. Despite passing 8hrs of OCCT at the same settings. Arghh...









I feel like giving up until I delid.
or
Just running at another voltage boost until the chip dies and intel replaces it under a tuning plan.

The Chiller will, _(at least)_, stop any thermal throttling. _(As coolant temp is at 13-14c.)_

My chip really is a silicon lottery disaster, lol.


----------



## Kalpa

@nrpeyton Wait you have a cooling solution capable of non-delidded 5ghz 1.4V during stress test, that's not making your cpu thermal throttle?

Just... how?









EDIT: Ah, I read the previous posts, so a coolant refrigerator of some kind. Nevertheless pretty impressive.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Sounds good.
> 
> I'm only 15 mins away from passing this OCCT test.
> 
> Fingers crossed.
> 
> My v.core is set to 1.395v in BIOS with AUTO LLC. (Either way I've been working up 10 milli volts at a time from 1.375v which failed).
> 
> Really hoping I pass this. Because it's the only way I can keep the v.core to a maximum of 1.45 under load in HWINFO64 _during_ stressing. (I.E. I'm already at 1.456v now during the test)
> 
> Edit: 9 mins to go on a 60 min test and it failed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Core 3 again!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit 2:
> 
> I'm SOOO close... _(to 5 Ghz at no more than 1.45v)_
> 
> Is there any other little tricks in the BIOS I could try to give me that last little push (little edge I need)? I've already changed the VRM Switching Frequency to it's max of 800 KHZ (and had to place a fan over the VRM heat-sink to compensate to protect the board from the extra heat).
> 
> _I have the ROG Maximus Apex -- there must be something?_
> 
> _If I increase v.core anymore then I'm going past 1.395v which puts me into the realms of 1.45++++ under load._
> 
> Edit 3:
> 
> Thought about trying again with 1.405v (in BIOS) but unfortunately that's still giving 1.472v (HWINFO64) during stressing.
> 
> Already passed a 7hr run at 1.410v when I fell asleep. (also with cache at 4.7Ghz). And same *at load* HWINFO64 voltages.
> So think I'm just going to call it a day now. And move onto memory.
> 
> *Edit 4:*
> 
> Funny thing is, Realbench (while still drawing roughly the same power/watts as OCCT). Only has the *at load* v.core at 1.408. However just crashed. Despite passing 8hrs of OCCT at the same settings. Arghh...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I feel like giving up until I delid.
> or
> Just running at another voltage boost until the chip dies and intel replaces it under a tuning plan.
> 
> The Chiller will, _(at least)_, stop any thermal throttling. _(As coolant temp is at 13-14c.)_
> 
> My chip really is a silicon lottery disaster, lol.


Go colder and drop your Uncore multiplier by a bin or two.


----------



## nrpeyton

Right-- memory is now training properly:



However since increasing my 7700k core/cache overclock I'm getting memTest errors immediately. (Despite being able to pass before _*even*_ when it wasn't correctly trained).

So I assume then; that overclocking your CPU can hamper your memory overclock.

I was sure my CPU overclock was stable. (_5Ghz, 4.7Ghz cache at 1.415v, LLC auto)._

So is this:

a) a sign that my 7700k overclock isn't actually really stable
or
b) simply that its harder to get a good memory overclock at the upper end of your CPU overclock?

Edit:
Lowering my cache back to default (4.2) hasn't helped.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Right-- memory is now training properly:
> 
> 
> 
> However since increasing my 7700k core/cache overclock I'm getting memTest errors immediately. (Despite being able to pass before _*even*_ when it wasn't correctly trained).
> 
> So I assume then; that overclocking your CPU can hamper your memory overclock.
> 
> I was sure my CPU overclock was stable. (_5Ghz, 4.7Ghz cache at 1.415v, LLC auto)._
> 
> So is this:
> 
> a) a sign that my 7700k overclock isn't actually really stable
> or
> b) simply that its harder to get a good memory overclock at the upper end of your CPU overclock?
> 
> Edit:
> Lowering my cache back to default (4.2) hasn't helped.


First place i would look at if getting Memtest errors is SA voltage. Core and Uncore will have an effect on ram i think.


----------



## moorhen2

This is what i have for 5ghz core, 4.6ghz uncore, 1.300v in bios, idle is between 1.300 and 1.318, under load 1.296, llc 5, i realy think you need to start manualy setting LLC, JMO.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> First place i would look at if getting Memtest errors is SA voltage. Core and Uncore will have an effect on ram i think.


I left SA to start with (to see how I get on) before proceeding with my plan to reduce it incrementally.

But I never got that far...

As even on *Auto* VCSSA went to 1.34v+

I've since returned to my XMP profile. 3600 Mhz @ 16, 16, 16, 36.

No errors so far. Thank god.

However that XMP profile only yields a DDR4 performance index of 8.88.

Before I overclocked the 7700k's core & cache. I was able to hit 3866 @ 15, 16, 16, 35 1T. With no errors. (Which gave a nice performance index of about 7.5).


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> This is what i have for 5ghz core, 4.6ghz uncore, 1.300v in bios, idle is between 1.300 and 1.318, under load 1.296, llc 5, i realy think you need to start manualy setting LLC, JMO.


I've tried all different combos of LLC in the past.. none helped.

In the end i took jpmboy's advice which was leave LLC alone:
-You end up with overshoot at idle (i.e. more voltage at less current draw)
-But nice healthy v.droop at high current + high load.

Unfortunately I'm just trying to work with what I've got, which is an EPIC FAIL in terms of silicon lottery. One of the worst on this forum I believe.

Don't get me wrong, now that I've got the Water Chiller hooked up I might give it another quick bash with a few different LLC settings and see if anything helps. But I have to admit I think it's going to be a waste of time. I'll try it though.









Fact you're able to hit 5Ghz at 1.3v is unbelievable to me lol. Thats fantastic. Even with 13c coolant temp I still need 1.415v (LLC auto) for 5Ghz. Which in Realbench = 1.408v and in OCCT 1.472v


----------



## moorhen2

I would be inclined to load sytem defaults and just play with the core frequency, leave uncore and ram alone, i am sure your chip cant be that bad. I am sure you know what your doing, not trying to teach you how to suck eggs, lol.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> I would be inclined to load sytem defaults and just play with the core frequency, leave uncore and ram alone, i am sure your chip cant be that bad. I am sure you know what your doing, not trying to teach you how to suck eggs, lol.


Lol I know... I hear what you're saying..

Sometimes I find it difficult to believe myself.

It really is though :-(

First place I started a few months ago was JUST on the core only.

Even tried playing around with settings like VRM switching frequency but to no avail.

It's only once I found my daily stable (4.9Ghz at 1.35v LLC auto) I begun looking at other things.

At that time.. I needed 1.45 - 1.5v for 5Ghz which caused thermal throttling.

Now with the Chiller-- at least I can do 5GHZ at 1.415v. LLC Auto. (but obviously as I've discussed that often results in much higher v.cores at load). If I change LLC I just end up having to change the base v.core to compensate and I end up stuck in the same circle.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> This is what i have for 5ghz core, 4.6ghz uncore, 1.300v in bios, idle is between 1.300 and 1.318, under load 1.296, llc 5, i realy think you need to start manualy setting LLC, JMO.


Hey I noticed from your screenshot your v.core is the same at min, max & average?

Mine jumps around quite a bit.

Your CPU frequency looks the same. Always at 5Ghz.

Are you not using "adaptive" and setting your v.core as "additional turbo"?

Reason I'm asking is:
Have you found your system more stable at lower voltages when just setting a fixed frequency and v.core without the energy saving features?


----------



## moorhen2

I use fixed voltages, im old school, lol. I disable all c-states, speedshift/speedstep, voltages in do fluctuate under load between 1.296 and 1.316, just they were all at 1.296 when i snipped a screenshot.









What bios revision are you on. ?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> I use fixed voltages, im old school, lol. I disable all c-states, speedshift/speedstep, voltages in do fluctuate under load between 1.296 and 1.316, just they were all at 1.296 when i snipped a screenshot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What bios revision are you on. ?


Just an fyi, that will kill chips 10x faster than if you had variable volts. 1.35v constant will kill a chip before 1.5v spikes will.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> I use fixed voltages, im old school, lol. I disable all c-states, speedshift/speedstep, voltages in do fluctuate under load between 1.296 and 1.316, just they were all at 1.296 when i snipped a screenshot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What bios revision are you on. ?


The latest, 0906.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Just an fyi, that will kill chips 10x faster than if you had variable volts. 1.35v constant will kill a chip before 1.5v spikes will.


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Just an fyi, that will kill chips 10x faster than if you had variable volts. 1.35v constant will kill a chip before 1.5v spikes will.


If the voltage within the Safe range no problem at all, just more power draw but rock solid OC


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> If the voltage within the Safe range no problem at all, just more power draw but rock solid OC


Thank you sir, i just did'nt want to argue with Scotty99.


----------



## Kalpa

I believe rather firmly that whichever voltage configuration gives you least power draw at the highest stress level is the one that makes your chip last the longest.

Of course this is one topic that can be debated endlessly, as probably no instance in the world has done a 10 year long research using high enough sample sizes for all kinds of different configurations to measure degradation...


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Lol I know... I hear what you're saying..
> 
> Sometimes I find it difficult to believe myself.
> 
> It really is though :-(
> 
> First place I started a few months ago was JUST on the core only.
> 
> Even tried playing around with settings like VRM switching frequency but to no avail.
> 
> It's only once I found my daily stable (4.9Ghz at 1.35v LLC auto) I begun looking at other things.
> 
> At that time.. I needed 1.45 - 1.5v for 5Ghz which caused thermal throttling.
> 
> Now with the Chiller-- at least I can do 5GHZ at 1.415v. LLC Auto. (but obviously as I've discussed that often results in much higher v.cores at load). If I change LLC I just end up having to change the base v.core to compensate and I end up stuck in the same circle.


Have you delidded the chip yet? the massive temp drops due to your chiller may stabilise that 5ghz you want. Also, yes, Memory OC does affect core stability. Nearer to the edge of your chip's core stability, you will have to start choosing between Mem OC or Core OC.


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Can someone tell me if there is a way to monitor my Kaby Lake 7820HK speeds in real time while gaming? I want to see how long it downclocks for... I go for 3.9ghz all 4 cores in all benchmarks just fine no downclocking, even stress testing, but for some reason when I game I will close game and look at HWmonitor and it shows it downclocked to 2.9ghz at some point, temps are great, 70 celsius max... not sure whats up, I just want to see if I am getting 3.9ghz while in game for the majority of the time or what... I have no second monitor to just leave it up and running... would be nice if I did lol


Just FYI MSI Afterburner new release today allows for real time CPU clock monitor in the rivatuner overlay









So MSI fixed all my issues today... #respect. I am buying a MSI mobo and GPU next build just out of respect.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Can someone tell me if there is a way to monitor my Kaby Lake 7820HK speeds in real time while gaming? I want to see how long it downclocks for... I go for 3.9ghz all 4 cores in all benchmarks just fine no downclocking, even stress testing, but for some reason when I game I will close game and look at HWmonitor and it shows it downclocked to 2.9ghz at some point, temps are great, 70 celsius max... not sure whats up, I just want to see if I am getting 3.9ghz while in game for the majority of the time or what... I have no second monitor to just leave it up and running... would be nice if I did lol


Caenlen,
You probably forgot me, but I bought the MSI GT73VR with the 7820HK and GTX 1070. My 7820HK overclocks to 4.2 ghz on -100mv undervolt (temps max 67-73C depending on hot or a/c room temp, using 8 thread stockfish chess engine, NOT burn your CPU Prime95) and 4.5 ghz on default voltage. I returned the 7700HQ MSI GT72VR because I hated the locked CPU. 4.5 ghz on all cores with ability to use the iGPU on battery > 3.4 ghz on all cores and no iGPU.

Does Throttlestop Obsidian (8.48) have a Limit Reasons checkbox ? It should.

To stop TDP Throttling, you need to raise CPU CURRENT LIMIT (Amps). In the MSI Bios, this can be set to 400 for 100 amps, which prevents throttling until Thermal limit of 100C.
There should be something similar in the Clevo Bios. This has nothing to do with Power Limit 1/2. You want the CURRENT LIMIT increased. Then you can increase PL1 and PL2 to 200W afterwards.

In XTU, you can increase current limit by changing the current Amps (A) to 100. It's better to do this in the Bios, however, because XTU settings sometimes get reverted for no reason.

If you already increased the current limit to 100 amps (100A) in Bios or XTU, you should use Throttlestop 8.48 and enable speed shift in the settings. Then set the value to 0 in the main window and set high performance power profile in control panel. That should stop downclocking.

I suggest you go ask on the clevo section of notebookreview forums on this, as the Clevo owners all know about this stuff. As far as the Clevo Prema Bios, you need to talk to ask over there. Mr Fox doesn't accept private messages but he will reply on the forums. A few of them are testers for Prema.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Just an fyi, that will kill chips 10x faster than if you had variable volts. 1.35v constant will kill a chip before 1.5v spikes will.


That's just a silly post.


----------



## becks

Yellow everyone, haven't posted in a while, been in holiday for almost 4 weeks now..
Lots of things happened here it seems....
@nrpeyton I see you'r from UK as well buddy so if you need a helping hand with the delid let me know. I can post you delid - re'lid tool + rtv + some Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut LM (postage on you







- Hampshire area here)

Anyhow, my system works great as it is topping at 5.2 now with 2 Avx offset and ram @ 3733 fully stable for what I trow at it...passed 2h Gsat, 500+ HCI, 8h+ RB......
But every now and then when I cold boot it it shuts down on its own before BIOS post..than if I press the power again it boots fine. Any clue as to what it might be ?


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Caenlen,
> You probably forgot me, but I bought the MSI GT73VR with the 7820HK and GTX 1070. My 7820HK overclocks to 4.2 ghz on -100mv undervolt (temps max 67-73C depending on hot or a/c room temp, using 8 thread stockfish chess engine, NOT burn your CPU Prime95) and 4.5 ghz on default voltage. I returned the 7700HQ MSI GT72VR because I hated the locked CPU. 4.5 ghz on all cores with ability to use the iGPU on battery > 3.4 ghz on all cores and no iGPU.
> 
> Does Throttlestop Obsidian (8.48) have a Limit Reasons checkbox ? It should.
> 
> To stop TDP Throttling, you need to raise CPU CURRENT LIMIT (Amps). In the MSI Bios, this can be set to 400 for 100 amps, which prevents throttling until Thermal limit of 100C.
> There should be something similar in the Clevo Bios. This has nothing to do with Power Limit 1/2. You want the CURRENT LIMIT increased. Then you can increase PL1 and PL2 to 200W afterwards.
> 
> In XTU, you can increase current limit by changing the current Amps (A) to 100. It's better to do this in the Bios, however, because XTU settings sometimes get reverted for no reason.
> 
> If you already increased the current limit to 100 amps (100A) in Bios or XTU, you should use Throttlestop 8.48 and enable speed shift in the settings. Then set the value to 0 in the main window and set high performance power profile in control panel. That should stop downclocking.
> 
> I suggest you go ask on the clevo section of notebookreview forums on this, as the Clevo owners all know about this stuff. As far as the Clevo Prema Bios, you need to talk to ask over there. Mr Fox doesn't accept private messages but he will reply on the forums. A few of them are testers for Prema.


Yep, I already had 100 amps set in BIOS, my value was 400 as well







thanks for the other tips.

you should try the new MSI afterburner as well, my gtx 1070 boosts to 2012 ghz and i put +500 on the vram, I am rocking 9ghz vram now on a gpu laptop lol temps don't go past 80 celsius.


----------



## ducegt

Speaking of current limit... ASRock released a new BIOS update for Z270 K6 which actually has a working current limit option. The prior 120A limit wasn't enough for me to prevent Hwinfo from flagging it...regardless of any napkin ohms law calculation. New version is 2.10 and they cited memory improvements, but this version seems to be from a different branch as memory for me is now worse than 2.0 and 2.10 has a display port boot bug that was present in earlier versions as well. I was able to XTU 5.2 1.408v @ 28C ambient without throttling in anyway with this new update. Took ya long enough ASRock...


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> Yep, I already had 100 amps set in BIOS, my value was 400 as well
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanks for the other tips.
> 
> you should try the new MSI afterburner as well, my gtx 1070 boosts to 2012 ghz and i put +500 on the vram, I am rocking 9ghz vram now on a gpu laptop lol temps don't go past 80 celsius.


Keep Limit Reasons open when you're testing to see what is happening when it downclocks. Also make sure you have high performance power plan active.

Your Bios should also tell you the current power limit 1 and 2 values (MSI defaults this to 200W). If they're there and set to 45W, you can change those.

May want to give XTU a try if you are getting TDP flag under "Limit Reasons" in Throttlestop.
HWInfo64 also will report TDP flags, but buried in the charts (don't use HWInfo and throttlestop's limit reasons at the same time).


----------



## coc_james

Just did my delid. Reran my OCCT at current settings, max temps dropped by 20 degrees. Oddly enough my minimum core and maximum core difference only went from 15 to 8. I figured I'd try the 51x multi again. Set vcore at 140 offset, and tuned to LLC1. Running OCCT now, .5 hrs in and Vcore maxes out at 1.44 and max core is 71. Previously my max core was 89 at 50x, +135 w/ LLC2. So, what is the maximum safe voltage that I should pull in OCCT?


----------



## coc_james

Well, crap. At 6hrs and 57min, OCCT pulled a core #2 error. Guess I have to start from scratch, unless anyone has any ideas. Currently my settings are:
51xCore
47xCache
AVX 0
BIOS Vcore 1.34
OCCT Vcore 1.44
Using everything except speed shift
3600mhz RAM
1.35 dramV
16, 18, 18, 36, 2t
VCCIO 1.2
SA 1.25


----------



## sdmf74

1. Not enough vcore (not sure what you mean by OCCT vcore though)
2. Not enough Dram voltage - 1.38v mininum


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Well, crap. At 6hrs and 57min, OCCT pulled a core #2 error. Guess I have to start from scratch, unless anyone has any ideas. Currently my settings are:
> 51xCore
> 47xCache
> AVX 0
> BIOS Vcore 1.34
> OCCT Vcore 1.44
> Using everything except speed shift
> 3600mhz RAM
> 1.35 dramV
> 16, 18, 18, 36, 2t
> VCCIO 1.2
> SA 1.25


an error after 6h of occt is fine... and probably best to quit abusing your cpu with OCCT since it really says nothing about real world stability once you get thermal management under control (eg, delidded). Use a combo of x264, x265, HCi memtest and/or GSAT.


----------



## becks

Every now and then when I cold boot the PC it shuts down on its own before BIOS post..than if I press the power again it boots fine. Any clue as to what it might be ?


----------



## sdmf74

My apologies I didn't read that carefully enough apparently, jpmboy is correct. I don't use OCCT either nor prime95. No sense in beating up your cpu with such tests when you can find stability with Realbench, aida64 or other tests Mentioned.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Well, crap. At 6hrs and 57min, OCCT pulled a core #2 error. Guess I have to start from scratch, unless anyone has any ideas. Currently my settings are:
> 51xCore
> 47xCache
> AVX 0
> BIOS Vcore 1.34
> OCCT Vcore 1.44
> Using everything except speed shift
> 3600mhz RAM
> 1.35 dramV
> 16, 18, 18, 36, 2t
> VCCIO 1.2
> SA 1.25


Why in God's name are you running OCCT (which uses linpack binaries) for SIX HOURS on an overvolted, overclocked CPU?
Are you trying to degrade your chip? It may have degraded slightly already.

Despite all the naysers in this forum who kept calling me a liar and bashing me (and NONE Of them agreeing to reinburse me, OF COURSE, when eventually, people found out I was right all along), I degraded TWO 2600k's running mulitple hours of prime95 at 5 ghz, and one was just at 1.38v originally.

If you want a REAL WORLD test, run stockfish chess engine (on an engine which supports that format) on max # of threads. If you can pass this, no real world (meaning: no AVX, LinX tests) application will crash.

Prime Blend, (only if you disable FMA3, AVX; read the undoc.txt file), is still going to be more stressful. If you disable FMA/AVX and want to test the CPU core for stability, you can run prime small FFT only if you are not overvolting.

What degrades chips is a combination of heat, voltage and *CURRENT*. Accidentally putting 1.5v into a chip won't damage it. Putting it under LOAD if you are not under subzero will.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Well, crap. At 6hrs and 57min, OCCT pulled a core #2 error. Guess I have to start from scratch, unless anyone has any ideas. Currently my settings are:
> 51xCore
> 47xCache
> AVX 0
> BIOS Vcore 1.34
> OCCT Vcore 1.44
> Using everything except speed shift
> 3600mhz RAM
> 1.35 dramV
> 16, 18, 18, 36, 2t
> VCCIO 1.2
> SA 1.25
> 
> 
> 
> Why in God's name are you running OCCT (which uses linpack binaries) for SIX HOURS on an overvolted, overclocked CPU?
> Are you trying to degrade your chip? It may have degraded slightly already.
> 
> Despite all the naysers in this forum who kept calling me a liar and bashing me (and NONE Of them agreeing to reinburse me, OF COURSE, when eventually, people found out I was right all along), I degraded TWO 2600k's running mulitple hours of prime95 at 5 ghz, and one was just at 1.38v originally.
> 
> If you want a REAL WORLD test, run stockfish chess engine (on an engine which supports that format) on max # of threads. If you can pass this, no real world (meaning: no AVX, LinX tests) application will crash.
> 
> Prime Blend, (only if you disable FMA3, AVX; read the undoc.txt file), is still going to be more stressful. If you disable FMA/AVX and want to test the CPU core for stability, you can run prime small FFT only if you are not overvolting.
> 
> What degrades chips is a combination of heat, voltage and *CURRENT*. Accidentally putting 1.5v into a chip won't damage it. Putting it under LOAD if you are not under subzero will.
Click to expand...

I do understand a little about this. My peak wattage was just over 100 watts. I know OCCT and P95 is overkill. But, failed clocks have caused me a lot of problems in the past. I don't like doing clean installs due to corrupted data. I have my 2500k still kicking at 4.7 w/ 1.42 volts. I used P95 to tune it and it's been stable since. I'm not the best overclocker out there, not even great. I do, however, understand how to kill a processor.

My real world use also includes 4k raw video and raw image processing, in addition to some 3d CAD renderings. I do mostly use it for gaming, but I need it to be stable when I'm processing huge raw video and image files. I'm not hugely concerned about degradation, simply because when I built this I knew that the i9 was coming and fully intend on giving this rig to my son and build an x299 build.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Well, crap. At 6hrs and 57min, OCCT pulled a core #2 error. Guess I have to start from scratch, unless anyone has any ideas. Currently my settings are:
> 51xCore
> 47xCache
> AVX 0
> BIOS Vcore 1.34
> OCCT Vcore 1.44
> Using everything except speed shift
> 3600mhz RAM
> 1.35 dramV
> 16, 18, 18, 36, 2t
> VCCIO 1.2
> SA 1.25
> 
> 
> 
> Why in God's name are you running OCCT (which uses linpack binaries) for SIX HOURS on an overvolted, overclocked CPU?
> Are you trying to degrade your chip? It may have degraded slightly already.
> 
> Despite all the naysers in this forum who kept calling me a liar and bashing me (and NONE Of them agreeing to reinburse me, OF COURSE, when eventually, people found out I was right all along), I degraded TWO 2600k's running mulitple hours of prime95 at 5 ghz, and one was just at 1.38v originally.
> 
> If you want a REAL WORLD test, run stockfish chess engine (on an engine which supports that format) on max # of threads. If you can pass this, no real world (meaning: no AVX, LinX tests) application will crash.
> 
> Prime Blend, (only if you disable FMA3, AVX; read the undoc.txt file), is still going to be more stressful. If you disable FMA/AVX and want to test the CPU core for stability, you can run prime small FFT only if you are not overvolting.
> 
> What degrades chips is a combination of heat, voltage and *CURRENT*. Accidentally putting 1.5v into a chip won't damage it. Putting it under LOAD if you are not under subzero will.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I do understand a little about this. My peak wattage was just over 100 watts. I know OCCT and P95 is overkill. But, failed clocks have caused me a lot of problems in the past. I don't like doing clean installs due to corrupted data. I have my 2500k still kicking at 4.7 w/ 1.42 volts. I used P95 to tune it and it's been stable since. I'm not the best overclocker out there, not even great. I do, however, understand how to kill a processor.
> 
> My real world use also includes 4k raw video and raw image processing, in addition to some 3d CAD renderings. I do mostly use it for gaming, but I need it to be stable when I'm processing huge raw video and image files. I'm not hugely concerned about degradation, simply because when I built this I knew that the i9 was coming and fully intend on giving this rig to my son and build an x299 build.
Click to expand...

I'm with you, I only test with Prime95 v28.10 I need total stability and RealBench is not good enough. My i5 2500k lasted 5 years with high voltage without degrading.


----------



## Falkentyne

Prime is ok if you can keep the temps down, but do NOT ever, ever run prime overnight or those 12 hour runs like some of the clubs "require" you to do for membership. Not all chips are identical, but enough of them *WILL* degrade. And that just leads to MORE OCD testing and more degradation as you start panicking. It's a very vicious cycle, and not everyone on these forums is filthy rich (some people are living paycheck to paycheck, some are disabled, some are students who barely have enough to get through school, etc). You can run prime for 12 hours at 1.4v, pass, then someone needs a screenshot that you didn't take, so you run it again and you get an error in 3 hours, so then your previous stable voltage is no longer stable, so you bump it to 1.41v, get an freeze after 8 hours....etc etc...

If you're going to run a brutal test that blasts absurd levels of current through an overvolted chip, do a quick test (no longer than 15 minutes--I'm serious about this, unless you're rich, then do whatever you want), see if you can pass an iteration without BSOD or errors, then quit the stress testing and use something real world.

My go to stress test is a chess engine. Realistic high loads, more than what any game would throw at it, and if you pass, use the computer normally.

The worst feeling in the world is seeing that your chip that used to require 1.30v for 5 ghz now requires 1.35v and is running 10C hotter, because you degraded the chip with high voltage+absurd current.

Seriously, if you guys don't use programs for your work or studies that require AVX or FMA type instructions, please consider using the *Free* stockfish chess engine for more reasonable stress testing.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Prime is ok if you can keep the temps down, but do NOT ever, ever run prime overnight or those 12 hour runs like some of the clubs "require" you to do for membership. Not all chips are identical, but enough of them *WILL* degrade. And that just leads to MORE OCD testing and more degradation as you start panicking. It's a very vicious cycle, and not everyone on these forums is filthy rich (some people are living paycheck to paycheck, some are disabled, some are students who barely have enough to get through school, etc). You can run prime for 12 hours at 1.4v, pass, then someone needs a screenshot that you didn't take, so you run it again and you get an error in 3 hours, so then your previous stable voltage is no longer stable, so you bump it to 1.41v, get an freeze after 8 hours....etc etc...
> 
> If you're going to run a brutal test that blasts absurd levels of current through an overvolted chip, do a quick test (no longer than 15 minutes--I'm serious about this, unless you're rich, then do whatever you want), see if you can pass an iteration without BSOD or errors, then quit the stress testing and use something real world.
> 
> My go to stress test is a chess engine. Realistic high loads, more than what any game would throw at it, and if you pass, use the computer normally.
> 
> The worst feeling in the world is seeing that your chip that used to require 1.30v for 5 ghz now requires 1.35v and is running 10C hotter, because you degraded the chip with high voltage+absurd current.


Agreed you dont need to run stress tests for hours and hours. Personally an hour of OCCT combined with an hour of Realbench is more than enough to get sufficient stability for my needs, 6 months after doing this never had a blue screen of death and no lock ups or stability issues.


----------



## Kalpa

My real stress test is just running [email protected] whenever I'm not actively at the computer, and if the system crashes while I'm away too often then I know I need to adjust the OC... 

So far I've had one bluescreen event, been running this OC for a total of... five(?) weeks now.

We'll see how long this chip lasts with ~1.23V load voltage (~1.3V idle voltage) and ~85C average core temps during [email protected]


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I do understand a little about this. My peak wattage was just over 100 watts. I know OCCT and P95 is overkill. But, failed clocks have caused me a lot of problems in the past. I don't like doing clean installs due to corrupted data. I have my 2500k still kicking at 4.7 w/ 1.42 volts. I used P95 to tune it and it's been stable since. I'm not the best overclocker out there, not even great. *I do, however, understand how to kill a processor.*
> 
> My real world use also includes 4k raw video and raw image processing, in addition to some 3d CAD renderings. I do mostly use it for gaming, but I need it to be stable when I'm processing huge raw video and image files. I'm not hugely concerned about degradation, simply because when I built this I knew that the i9 was coming and fully intend on giving this rig to my son and build an x299 build.


lol - I can see that. But in all seriousness, a bad cpu OC is very unlikely to corrupt an OS install, but a bad ram OC (or pseudo stable ram) will, and many times without any premonitory warning. This is why using something like OCCT or p95 is flawed. Yes, they test the core (Intel considers p95 and linpac as "Virus Mode" for a reason) but take a VERY long time to reveal ram errors. check out Google stressapptest and/or HCi memtest *here* and use something like *x264* and x265 stability tests for your use scenario. I too do a lot of 4K (and 8K) video encoding (and a whole bunch of other stuff too







) x264, GSAT/HCi, and maybe a couple of loops of IBT to cover a high-current scenario has never let me down.








oh.. and sandy were/are exceptional chips. my 2700K is still running in a box in the AV closet, capturing video from 6 security cameras around the house 24/7/365... tho now air cooled, it still runs at 4.8/1.425V and barely breaks a sweat. A landmark series of CPUs.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> My real stress test is just running [email protected] whenever I'm not actively at the computer, and if the system crashes while I'm away too often then I know I need to adjust the OC...
> So far I've had one bluescreen event, been running this OC for a total of... five(?) weeks now.
> We'll see how long this chip lasts with ~1.23V load voltage (~1.3V idle voltage) and ~85C average core temps during [email protected]


[email protected] and Boinc are very good.


----------



## wingman99

Is there a way to tell the production date off the Intel CPU Box label?


----------



## wingman99

What is the stock Vcore of a i7 7700k at 4.5GHz?


----------



## encrypted11

The first 4 digits identifies the CPU's wafer production date (YWW) no?

If you were making references to default VID, it varies. My first had a VID of 1.296V and was inducing errors/crashes to applications from temperature spikes at stock but it clocked to 4.8GHz barely stable at 1.35v, sent it back to intel.

My 1.232V VID 7700K does 5.1GHz reliably on 1.376V. My 6700K had a VID of 1.168.


----------



## ssdaytona

^ umm, can you send a chip back to Intel for a poor o/c?

I just tried 2 new 7700k and they are both horrible. can't even get 4.9ghz stable with 4.7 cache at 1.35v


----------



## NubLock42

Hi, first time overclocking on an Intel platform, I have a question. Here's my build for help: Intel I5 7600k, MSI Z270 M3, Corsair H115i, G. Skill Aegis RAM @ 2400 MHZ. Thinking about updating the RAM and a higher MHZ frequency. Otherwise, I'm happy with my current build.

Does disabling the HPET in BIOS help or hinder overclocking?
How do I start overclocking? (Will look up videos for personal use, however I will like to hear from you guys.)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NubLock42*
> 
> Hi, first time overclocking on an Intel platform, I have a question. Here's my build for help: Intel I5 7600k, MSI Z270 M3, Corsair H115i, G. Skill Aegis RAM @ 2400 MHZ. Thinking about updating the RAM and a higher MHZ frequency. Otherwise, I'm happy with my current build.
> 
> Does disabling the HPET in BIOS help or hinder overclocking?
> How do I start overclocking? (Will look up videos for personal use, however I will like to hear from you guys.)


The High Precision Event Timer (HPET) is a hardware timer used in personal computers. It was developed jointly by AMD and Microsoft and has been incorporated in PC chipsets since circa 2005. Formerly referred to by Intel as a Multimedia Time.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Precision_Event_Timer

So HPET wont help in overclocking it is for the chip set not the processor.

Here is a link for overclocking. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/gaming/how-to-overclock.html


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NubLock42*
> 
> Hi, first time overclocking on an Intel platform, I have a question. Here's my build for help: Intel I5 7600k, MSI Z270 M3, Corsair H115i, G. Skill Aegis RAM @ 2400 MHZ. Thinking about updating the RAM and a higher MHZ frequency. Otherwise, I'm happy with my current build.
> 
> Does disabling the HPET in BIOS help or hinder overclocking?
> How do I start overclocking? (Will look up videos for personal use, however I will like to hear from you guys.)


has no effect on the OC. Tho when it is disabled the user can manipulate the RTC (real time clock) so that some benchmarks and stability tests "think" they are doing more "per tick".








Also, it may not be a bios function on all boards. MS windows can control this. from an Admin command prompt:
_bcdedit /set useplatformclock yes_ (to enable, "no" to disable)
This overrides any setting in bios.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> has no effect on the OC. Tho when it is disabled the user can manipulate the RTC (real time clock) so that some benchmarks and stability tests "think" they are doing more "per tick".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, it may not be a bios function on all boards. MS windows can control this. from an Admin command prompt:
> _bcdedit /set useplatformclock yes_ (to enable, "no" to disable)
> This overrides any setting in bios.


Before HPET was standardized, manipulating the RTC was a very infamous trick used back in the old days to "speed hack" in FPS games. And since you were not using a 'hack' to do it, you wouldn't get auto flagged and banned that way; bans would have to be done manually. The most famous example was changing the RTC to move in turbo in Quake and Counter-Strike, in the pre-Steam days. Most games developed a patch server side, to limit updates and cause you to 'warp' back to the proper position if you attempted it (thus making you lag badly and be unplayable). You could still do this in single player games to sped up power clearing (although the mobs would also be sped up). A very common example was using the RTC hacks to speed up dungeon clearing and walking back to base in the old Diablo RPG.


----------



## NubLock42

OK. I ask because while I was using the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 system, I needed to disable the HPET. However, with a msi tomahawk system, I couldn't figure out how to disable it from both the cmd prompt and the BIOS. But that's not the issue here, the real issue is how I'm going to start overclocking on the BIOS.


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssdaytona*
> 
> ^ umm, can you send a chip back to Intel for a poor o/c?
> 
> I just tried 2 new 7700k and they are both horrible. can't even get 4.9ghz stable with 4.7 cache at 1.35v


You can't, you need the relevant application loge depicting theb issue anyway, but if your moral compass feels its alright to return a chip on the basis of a poor overclock that would be a separate question. Normally manufacturers including Intel only guarantee their products to work at just its rated spec.

My chip was spitting out a tonne of these on various applications. It would require a delid to work it even at stock settings.

l


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ssdaytona*
> 
> ^ umm, can you send a chip back to Intel for a poor o/c?
> 
> I just tried 2 new 7700k and they are both horrible. can't even get 4.9ghz stable with 4.7 cache at 1.35v
> 
> 
> 
> You can't, you need the relevant application loge depicting theb issue anyway, but if your moral compass feels its alright to return a chip on the basis of a poor overclock that would be a separate question. Normally manufacturers including Intel only guarantee their products to work at just its rated spec.
> 
> My chip was spitting out a tonne of these on various applications. It would require a delid to work it even at stock settings.
> 
> l
Click to expand...

I don't think it was temperature related my i5 7600k runs fine at 90c.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't think it was temperature related my i5 7600k runs fine at 90c.


We have agreed on many points in the past, but I wouldn't dismiss temperature being a potential reason for instability (even at stock configuration). It is a known factor, and we know with Intel's thermal bottleneck with 7700k there may well be more than usual amount of defective products that passed the QC.

Of course, extra voltage will compensate for that.

Regarding the previous post, I used to get breakpoint errors on firefox usually related to memory instability, not CPU - @encrypted11 might want to look into that.


----------



## ssdaytona

lol, of course not. if we could return just b/c of a poor o/c then I suspect intel would be out of business.

I was just curious how it was possible to return a chip directly to intel. thanks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> You can't, you need the relevant application loge depicting theb issue anyway, but if your moral compass feels its alright to return a chip on the basis of a poor overclock that would be a separate question. Normally manufacturers including Intel only guarantee their products to work at just its rated spec.
> 
> My chip was spitting out a tonne of these on various applications. It would require a delid to work it even at stock settings.
> 
> l


----------



## encrypted11

Just an RMA ticket.
But I received a check refund because the RMA depot's 7700K were completely plundered at that point. The earliest restock was 3-4 weeks (no promises)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssdaytona*
> 
> lol, of course not. if we could return just b/c of a poor o/c then I suspect intel would be out of business.
> 
> I was just curious how it was possible to return a chip directly to intel. thanks


Hmm. Thanks for the response. The chip was returned so I couldn't perform further tests.
To be clear, these were the chips that went into the same computer, nothing at the OS level was changed except the necessary BIOS adjustments:
-1 year old SR2L0 6700K delidded - worked fine

-7700K #1 - gave several errors, running moderately heavy loads can cause applications to spit up "errors" (collectively)
(They include completely unresponsive apps, OS GUI, icons in the start menu wouldn't launch or respond to anything occasionally after use of apps including XTU, AIDA64 stress test alone at stock, memory reverted to JEDEC DDR4-2133). I couldn't get away without a PC restarts over the course of the day.

-7700K#2 - from the same retailer.
This one ran 5.1GHz stable without a delid, with just a temperature reduction with CLU (and 5.2GHz benchmark stable)

I would doubt there was a software misconfiguration or hardware defect (temperature induced?) outside of the CPU.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Regarding the previous post, I used to get breakpoint errors on firefox usually related to memory instability, not CPU - @encrypted11 might want to look into that.


----------



## Kalpa

*sigh* I had another bluescreen event during the weekend. Although minidump revealed nvidia driver to be involved and I was running OpenHardwareMonitor (which has conflicted with other kernelmode drivers before), I lowered the CPU OC nevertheless.

Now running at 4.6 core/4.2 cache +
AVX modifier of 4 (so... practically downclocking when running AVX







I'll probably look into increasing AVX freq later), but at a rather significantly lower voltage - this thing seems to be fine with ~1.15V during load. This is a whopping 80mV lower than what 4.7/4.4/avx3 needed for stability. I believe the temperature drop affects the rather large jump in voltage requirement - previous configuration ran [email protected] over 85C average, with highest spikes reaching 90C, now I'm barely hitting 80C at most.

Here be some graphs from last night:


----------



## syrinks

This information is fake ?
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/25/intel_skylake_kaby_lake_microcode_bug/


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *syrinks*
> 
> This information is fake ?
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/25/intel_skylake_kaby_lake_microcode_bug/


Wow, seems legit. Guess we'll see.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *syrinks*
> 
> This information is fake ?
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/25/intel_skylake_kaby_lake_microcode_bug/


can't say I've experienced any issues and my 7700K has been Folding for weeks at a time.


----------



## encrypted11

https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/specification-updates/7th-gen-core-family-spec-update.pdf

Use the search feature. Keyword "KBL095".

Can't say I'm experiencing any issue. If you've looked at the Skylake & Kabylake platform specification update on a regular basis, Kaby Lake inherits a significant proportion of Skylake erratas since they're from the same family. That said, I haven't experienced the highlighted issue on my 6700K over the course of a year either.

You'd have to run an affected workflow to get impacted.


----------



## Kalpa

I've put all the blame of my random crashes on an unstable overclock and/or conflicting software.

I'd still put the blame on them. Looking at the links and documentation, it seems that the problem needs some really specific things to occur. Most probably things that won't happen for your average home user running your average home user software.

Nevertheless, might as well disable hyperthreading for the time being... maybe even see if I can run this thing at a tad higher clocks without


----------



## sdmf74

So is that the consensus, disable hyperthreading till we get a bios update that addresses it? (if that will even ever happen)


----------



## Falkentyne

This bug was fixed OVER A YEAR AGO. Jesus christ everyone is acting like the sky is falling. OS's have microcode which fixes this (in windows) via windows update, if the BIOS doesn't fix this in a Bios flash. NO kabylake processors were affected.

I can't believe when someone posts clickbait, it spreads over the internet and turns into more clickbait....

http://www.overclock.net/t/1633031/debian-warning-intel-skylake-kaby-lake-processors-broken-hyper-threading

hey folks, let's take a year old bug that Intel fixed, post something and watch the sky fall !


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> This bug was fixed OVER A YEAR AGO. Jesus christ everyone is acting like the sky is falling. OS's have microcode which fixes this (in windows) via windows update, if the BIOS doesn't fix this in a Bios flash. NO kabylake processors were affected.
> 
> I can't believe when someone posts clickbait, it spreads over the internet and turns into more clickbait....
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1633031/debian-warning-intel-skylake-kaby-lake-processors-broken-hyper-threading
> 
> hey folks, let's take a year old bug that Intel fixed, post something and watch the sky fall !


How can it be over a year old when the processor hasn't been out for that long? As well, the Intel errata for the issue is dated May 2017....


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> This bug was fixed OVER A YEAR AGO. Jesus christ everyone is acting like the sky is falling. OS's have microcode which fixes this (in windows) via windows update, if the BIOS doesn't fix this in a Bios flash. NO kabylake processors were affected.
> 
> I can't believe when someone posts clickbait, it spreads over the internet and turns into more clickbait....
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1633031/debian-warning-intel-skylake-kaby-lake-processors-broken-hyper-threading
> 
> hey folks, let's take a year old bug that Intel fixed, post something and watch the sky fall !
> 
> 
> 
> How can it be over a year old when the processor hasn't been out for that long? As well, the Intel errata for the issue is dated May 2017....
Click to expand...

Whoa whoa whoa, just hold your logic here! ?


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Whoa whoa whoa, just hold your logic here! ?


Maybe it's a logic bug?


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Whoa whoa whoa, just hold your logic here! ?
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe it's a logic bug?
Click to expand...

Bwahahahahaha Good one


----------



## wingman99

Intel's Skylake and Kaby Lake CPUs have nasty microcode bug. This is true it is from the LINK: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/25/intel_skylake_kaby_lake_microcode_bug/


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel's Skylake and Kaby Lake CPUs have nasty microcode bug. This is true it is from the LINK: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/25/intel_skylake_kaby_lake_microcode_bug/


It's always amusing when you read a full page of people discussing a topic... and then out of the blue there's another reply announcing the same thing that's already being discussed as if it was never brought up. Obviously, not everyone reads before posting.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel's Skylake and Kaby Lake CPUs have nasty microcode bug. This is true it is from the LINK: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/25/intel_skylake_kaby_lake_microcode_bug/
> 
> 
> 
> It's always amusing when you read a full page of people discussing a topic... and then out of the blue there's another reply announcing the same thing that's already being discussed as if it was never brought up. Obviously, not everyone reads before posting.
Click to expand...

I don't get it.

Hey, did you guys hear that there's a bug in the 6th and 7th gen hyperthreaded chips? Yeah, apparently, Skylake has been fixed, but not released, no word on Kaby yet.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> This bug was fixed OVER A YEAR AGO. Jesus christ everyone is acting like the sky is falling. OS's have microcode which fixes this (in windows) via windows update, if the BIOS doesn't fix this in a Bios flash. NO kabylake processors were affected.
> 
> I can't believe when someone posts clickbait, it spreads over the internet and turns into more clickbait....
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1633031/debian-warning-intel-skylake-kaby-lake-processors-broken-hyper-threading
> 
> hey folks, let's take a year old bug that Intel fixed, post something and watch the sky fall !


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I don't get it.
> 
> Hey, did you guys hear that there's a bug in the 6th and 7th gen hyperthreaded chips? Yeah, apparently, Skylake has been fixed, but not released, no word on Kaby yet.












is this the same one that could only be revealed in a specific p95 FFT? If yes - then you are absolutely correct. Was fixed long time ago.








most folks do not realize the microcode is updated by windows. All they ned to do is note the one in bios, and then use AID64 to see which one is being used after OS handoff.


----------



## coc_james

@Jpmboy

Pretty sure this is a new one. It's all over the web, today.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> This bug was fixed OVER A YEAR AGO. Jesus christ everyone is acting like the sky is falling. OS's have microcode which fixes this (in windows) via windows update, if the BIOS doesn't fix this in a Bios flash. NO kabylake processors were affected.
> 
> I can't believe when someone posts clickbait, it spreads over the internet and turns into more clickbait....
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1633031/debian-warning-intel-skylake-kaby-lake-processors-broken-hyper-threading
> 
> hey folks, let's take a year old bug that Intel fixed, post something and watch the sky fall !
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I don't get it.
> 
> Hey, did you guys hear that there's a bug in the 6th and 7th gen hyperthreaded chips? Yeah, apparently, Skylake has been fixed, but not released, no word on Kaby yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> is this the same one that could only be revealed in a specific p95 FFT? If yes - then you are absolutely correct. Was fixed long time ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> most folks do not realize the microcode is updated by windows. All they ned to do is note the one in bios, and then use AID64 to see which one is being used after OS handoff.
Click to expand...

If that were true why did Intel make a Bios microcode update for prime95 Bug?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> @Jpmboy
> 
> Pretty sure this is a new one. It's all over the web, today.


could be... but I haven;t had any issues with my work stream and weeks of Boinc or folding. Anyway, the p95 error from last year was a kabylake thing, may have carried over to SKL, in order to see in in p95 we had to use an older version and a single FFT (I posted the replication results back then and the fix with the patch at the time - on my 6700K), and even then it was very sporadic in replication. That issue was patched quickly. If this is a new one someone found in some particular application/problem, it will be patched. But terming this as a dangerous bug is just silly IMO. Wut - someone controlling the Nuc launch codes with their PC?


----------



## wsarahan

Guys how are you?

I bought my 4770K at launch and have it till now

I`ll make an upgrade to 7700K, can you guys solve me some doubts?

How much can i reach without have to do much in this CPU, i mean, i don`t have too much patience for testing. what could be a easy OC? 4.5 /4.6 like my 4770k?

What should i chance in bios? I know exactly what should i do in my GAz87X now with my 4770k, i know that bios change from each manufacturer but what`s the basic to change?

Can someome put some template like this for 7770k? This tuto solved my life and i use this for 4770k till today

http://www.overclock.net/t/1401976/the-gigabyte-z87-haswell-overclocking-oc-guide

Thanks


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> But terming this as a dangerous bug is just silly IMO. Wut - someone controlling the Nuc launch codes with their PC?


I hope not. It could be dangerous for data and computing centres, ie. the commercial use of PC hardware. Data corruption in such instances can rack up monetary damage very quickly. There's more to computing than us home users and our little enthusiast rig building and penis measuring schemes...

...but you're right in the assessment of the rarity of the bug - it seems extremely rare, and needs a very specific set of circumstances to manifest. Apparently most commonly used compilers don't tend to generate machine-level code in a way to trigger this in most situations, but custom codebases using custom compilers may be at risk (heck, that's how the whole thing was discovered from what I gather)


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wsarahan*
> 
> Guys how are you?
> 
> I bought my 4770K at launch and have it till now
> 
> I`ll make an upgrade to 7700K, can you guys solve me some doubts?
> 
> How much can i reach without have to do much in this CPU, i mean, i don`t have too much patience for testing. what could be a easy OC? 4.5 /4.6 like my 4770k?
> 
> What should i chance in bios? I know exactly what should i do in my GAz87X now with my 4770k, i know that bios change from each manufacturer but what`s the basic to change?
> 
> Can someome put some template like this for 7770k? This tuto solved my life and i use this for 4770k till today
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1401976/the-gigabyte-z87-haswell-overclocking-oc-guide
> 
> Thanks


Yeah, Sin wrote that. There's not much in the way of "generic" info, outside of, increase multi, test, pass? Increase multi. Fail? Increase Vcore. You'll have more luck with finding tutorials for a specific motherboard.


----------



## wsarahan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Yeah, Sin wrote that. There's not much in the way of "generic" info, outside of, increase multi, test, pass? Increase multi. Fail? Increase Vcore. You'll have more luck with finding tutorials for a specific motherboard.


Thanks, when i buy the Motherboard i come back here

Any MB brand or model suggestion for an easy OC?

Thanks again


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wsarahan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Yeah, Sin wrote that. There's not much in the way of "generic" info, outside of, increase multi, test, pass? Increase multi. Fail? Increase Vcore. You'll have more luck with finding tutorials for a specific motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, when i buy the Motherboard i come back here
> 
> Any MB brand or model suggestion for an easy OC?
> 
> Thanks again
Click to expand...

I like Gigabyte for easy overclocking. All I had to do for 4.5GHz is set the multiplier and XMP for memory.


----------



## wsarahan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I like Gigabyte for easy overclocking. All I had to do for 4.5GHz is set the multiplier and XMP for memory.


You just set 45 and the XMP?

Auto vcore?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> is this the same one that could only be revealed in a specific p95 FFT? If yes - then you are absolutely correct. Was fixed long time ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> most folks do not realize the microcode is updated by windows. All they ned to do is note the one in bios, and then use AID64 to see which one is being used after OS handoff.


hmmm
don't think so

Quote:


> Under complex micro-architectural conditions, short loops of less than 64 instructions that use AH, BH, CH or DH registers as well as their corresponding wider register (eg RAX, EAX or AX for AH) may cause unpredictable system behaviour. This can only happen when both logical processors on the same physical processor are active.


https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/desktop-6th-gen-core-family-spec-update.html

under SKL150
no fix yet

though being on windows 10 I'm not exactly worried
this seems to be a very specific problem
and Windows 10 can just issue a fix through it's microcode driver
windows 7 and 8 don't have official support for skylake and kaby; not gonna get a fix that way me thinks

ehh
CPU's have bugs
thats what the microcode updates for UEFI's are for
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wsarahan*
> 
> Thanks, when i buy the Motherboard i come back here
> 
> Any MB brand or model suggestion for an easy OC?
> 
> Thanks again


Asus
Gigabyte
all work well enough

4.5 isn't exactly a challenge to Kaby

the Asus 5Gz profile works well enough
though too generous on voltage

ehh
wingman is used to gigabyte

I'm used to Asus

overclocking is easy these days
still need luck with the CPU

I've just entered 48 as multiplier and left everything else on auto for my first attempt
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> I hope not. It could be dangerous for data and computing centres, ie. the commercial use of PC hardware. Data corruption in such instances can rack up monetary damage very quickly. There's more to computing than us home users and our little enthusiast rig building and penis measuring schemes...
> 
> ...but you're right in the assessment of the rarity of the bug - it seems extremely rare, and needs a very specific set of circumstances to manifest. Apparently most commonly used compilers don't tend to generate machine-level code in a way to trigger this in most situations, but custom codebases using custom compilers may be at risk (heck, that's how the whole thing was discovered from what I gather)


I don't think anyone uses a desktop CPU there
as for skylake-x
well
easy
microcode update
either for the UEFI or windows
if you're using something besides windows, there is already a fix I've read


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wsarahan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I like Gigabyte for easy overclocking. All I had to do for 4.5GHz is set the multiplier and XMP for memory.
> 
> 
> 
> You just set 45 and the XMP?
> 
> Auto vcore?
Click to expand...

Yes Auto Vcore, 45 on my i5 7600k and XMP for memory G.skill 3200 14-14-14-34. I could set my overclock higher and just add Dynamic DVID +0.050. However 4.5GHz is more than I use in gaming, stock speed gives me the same FPS as overclocked.


----------



## wsarahan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yes Auto Vcore, 45 on my i5 7600k and XMP for memory G.skill 3200 14-14-14-34. I could set my overclock higher and just add Dynamic DVID +0.050. However 4.5GHz is more than I use in gaming, stock speed gives me the same FPS as overclocked.


I`ll use for gaming only as well

When i get the cpu and mobo (will take a gigabyte one) i come back here asking for help


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wsarahan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yes Auto Vcore, 45 on my i5 7600k and XMP for memory G.skill 3200 14-14-14-34. I could set my overclock higher and just add Dynamic DVID +0.050. However 4.5GHz is more than I use in gaming, stock speed gives me the same FPS as overclocked.
> 
> 
> 
> I`ll use for gaming only as well
> 
> When i get the cpu and mobo (will take a gigabyte one) i come back here asking for help
Click to expand...

If you purchase a i7 7700k insted of i5 7600k the CPU VID will be higher so on stock voltage, then it will clock up much higher than 4.5GHz on stock voltage if you have good cooling.

I've seen i7 7700k Vids of 1.296v to 1.230v.

My i5 7600k Vid is 1.200v at 4.2GHz- 4.5GHz. running prime95 v28.10

Gigabyte made a Bios update to lower the VID thus Vcore on all motherboard for kaby lake.

I use my PC for everything, I just don't do any folding or encoding anymore so overclocking is just for fun.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I don't think anyone uses a desktop CPU there


Indeed they'd likely be running Xeons...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wsarahan*
> 
> I`ll use for gaming only as well
> 
> When i get the cpu and mobo (will take a gigabyte one) i come back here asking for help


You have come to the right place, everyone is going to have a different opinion on which board to get. Having used both Gigabyte and Asus personally I would go for something like a ROG Hero board in terms of value for money and in terms of ease of overclockability since most of the information regarding Kaby lake is usually expressed in "Asus" terms. As for overclocks expect anything from 4.7Ghz to 5.2Ghz at reasonable 24/7 voltages. If anything 7700K is easier to overclock than a 4770K since you really only have to deal with Vcore and multiplier, unlike the 4770K which has several voltages to deal with, either way its a good upgrade







Asus multi core enhancement will run 7700K at 4.5Ghz out of the box.


----------



## wsarahan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> hmmm
> don't think so
> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/desktop-6th-gen-core-family-spec-update.html
> 
> under SKL150
> no fix yet
> 
> though being on windows 10 I'm not exactly worried
> this seems to be a very specific problem
> and Windows 10 can just issue a fix through it's microcode driver
> windows 7 and 8 don't have official support for skylake and kaby; not gonna get a fix that way me thinks
> 
> ehh
> CPU's have bugs
> thats what the microcode updates for UEFI's are for
> Asus
> Gigabyte
> all work well enough
> 
> 4.5 isn't exactly a challenge to Kaby
> 
> the Asus 5Gz profile works well enough
> though too generous on voltage
> 
> ehh
> wingman is used to gigabyte
> 
> I'm used to Asus
> 
> overclocking is easy these days
> still need luck with the CPU
> 
> I've just entered 48 as multiplier and left everything else on auto for my first attempt
> I don't think anyone uses a desktop CPU there
> as for skylake-x
> well
> easy
> microcode update
> either for the UEFI or windows
> if you're using something besides windows, there is already a fix I've read


Peter thanks a lot

Where can i find this 5.2 profile for Asus?

Edit: found in first page

What is this other options that i need to change?

VCCIO / SA and LLC level?

Thanks


----------



## wsarahan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> You have come to the right place, everyone is going to have a different opinion on which board to get. Having used both Gigabyte and Asus personally I would go for something like a ROG Hero board in terms of value for money and in terms of ease of overclockability since most of the information regarding Kaby lake is usually expressed in "Asus" terms. As for overclocks expect anything from 4.7Ghz to 5.2Ghz at reasonable 24/7 voltages. If anything 7700K is easier to overclock than a 4770K since you really only have to deal with Vcore and multiplier, unlike the 4770K which has several voltages to deal with, either way its a good upgrade
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asus multi core enhancement will run 7700K at 4.5Ghz out of the box.


Thanks, so if i get an asus i can get easily 5.0 with a good cooler?

Just need to put 50 multi and play with voltages right?

Wich voltage should i start to 5/5.2 for 24/7 on a asus board?

Tks


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wsarahan*
> 
> Thanks, so if i get an asus i can get easily 5.0 with a good cooler?
> 
> Just need to put 50 multi and play with voltages right?
> 
> Wich voltage should i start to 5/5.2 for 24/7 on a asus board?
> 
> Tks


The overclock you will achieve with Kaby Lake is not so much due to the motherboard and more due to the silicon lottery. The reason I suggested an Asus board is primarily due to the quality,features and the fact they use terminology in their UEFI that most of us here are more familiar with than the terminology Gigabyte uses, hence potentially more help if you need it. According to silicon lottery about 62% of 7700K will achieve 5.0Ghz so your chances are very good of being able to achieve 5.0Ghz. The only voltage you really need to worry about on any board regardless of brand is Vcore, you dont have a separate voltage adjustment for the cache or input voltage as you do with your 4770K, so much simpler


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> I hope not. It could be dangerous for data and computing centres, ie. the commercial use of PC hardware. Data corruption in such instances can rack up monetary damage very quickly. There's more to computing than us home users and our little enthusiast rig building and penis measuring schemes...
> 
> ...but you're right in the assessment of the rarity of the bug - it seems extremely rare, and needs a very specific set of circumstances to manifest. Apparently most commonly used compilers don't tend to generate machine-level code in a way to trigger this in most situations, but custom codebases using custom compilers may be at risk (heck, that's how the whole thing was discovered from what I gather)


lol - I do not know of any data or compute centers running skylake desktop cpus in their racks, including a few garage shop operations. But hey, who knows what standards some folks will bend to ripoff their IT customers .








On the other hand, a privateer coder might run into this.
I won't be disabling HT based on anything reported. Besides, there are more serious and prevalent "No Fix" errata.


----------



## D13mass

Guys, our table in 1 post here has real values ? Because probably I have worst 7700k, because for 4800mhz stable I need almost 1.40V


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D13mass*
> 
> Guys, our table in 1 post here has real values ? Because probably I have worst 7700k, because for 4800mhz stable I need almost 1.40V


That would be the silicon lottery


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wsarahan*
> 
> Thanks, so if i get an asus i can get easily 5.0 with a good cooler?
> 
> Just need to put 50 multi and play with voltages right?
> 
> Wich voltage should i start to 5/5.2 for 24/7 on a asus board?
> 
> Tks


without a delid you're probably running into heat problems

that being said
I'd set vcore manually at, mmm
1.3v and multi to 48
set core cache ratio to 45
run Asus RealBench stresstest

if it passes for an hour I would bump the multiplier up to 49

keeping an eye on temps

if it's not stable, a bump in voltage
if it's stable up to 50, not stable? bump voltage a bit again until stable

*keep an eye on temps*
if temps are too hot you have reached the end of you're OC journey
only way to get temps down again is less voltage (obviously at the cost of frequency) or a delid

a delid is often a requirement to get to 5ghz without reaching too high temps

that being said
I had 88 degrees with Asus RealBench (I think, am on mobile) with 5 Ghz at 1.35v on my 7600k (i7 run hotter because of HT by the way) without a delid and an Air cooler

toasty
but stable
*however*
I knew I was going to delid
was a before and after test

*it is important to verify stability and keeping an eye on temps*

do not underestimate those

some had bad luck with they're 7700k
if you've come to a setting that's stable for an hour and you're happy with
let Asus RealBench (or any of the tools required to enter in the statistics) run for 8 hours

VCCIO and SA refers to voltages for the memory controller build into the CPU
leave them as is

when you have more experience and want to overclock RAM very high (like 4000+), chasing after bench scores those settings become more important

LLC we change trying not to let voltage drop too much or overshoot
which is kinda natural
just trying to stabilize the voltage, especially under load
needs to be tried by each user

however
for the beginning just leave as is
if you want to optimize things we can do that later

but first we have to know which voltage you need to be stable at a frequency you want


----------



## wsarahan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wsarahan*
> 
> Thanks, so if i get an asus i can get easily 5.0 with a good cooler?
> 
> Just need to put 50 multi and play with voltages right?
> 
> Wich voltage should i start to 5/5.2 for 24/7 on a asus board?
> 
> Tks
> 
> 
> 
> without a delid you're probably running into heat problems
> 
> that being said
> I'd set vcore manually at, mmm
> 1.3v and multi to 48
> set core cache ratio to 45
> run Asus RealBench stresstest
> 
> if it passes for an hour I would bump the multiplier up to 49
> 
> keeping an eye on temps
> 
> if it's not stable, a bump in voltage
> if it's stable up to 50, not stable? bump voltage a bit again until stable
> 
> *keep an eye on temps*
> if temps are too hot you have reached the end of you're OC journey
> only way to get temps down again is less voltage (obviously at the cost of frequency) or a delid
> 
> a delid is often a requirement to get to 5ghz without reaching too high temps
> 
> that being said
> I had 88 degrees with Asus RealBench (I think, am on mobile) with 5 Ghz at 1.35v on my 7600k (i7 run hotter because of HT by the way) without a delid and an Air cooler
> 
> toasty
> but stable
> *however*
> I knew I was going to delid
> was a before and after test
> 
> *it is important to verify stability and keeping an eye on temps*
> 
> do not underestimate those
> 
> some had bad luck with they're 7700k
> if you've come to a setting that's stable for an hour and you're happy with
> let Asus RealBench (or any of the tools required to enter in the statistics) run for 8 hours
> 
> VCCIO and SA refers to voltages for the memory controller build into the CPU
> leave them as is
> 
> when you have more experience and want to overclock RAM very high (like 4000+), chasing after bench scores those settings become more important
> 
> LLC we change trying not to let voltage drop too much or overshoot
> which is kinda natural
> just trying to stabilize the voltage, especially under load
> needs to be tried by each user
> 
> however
> for the beginning just leave as is
> if you want to optimize things we can do that later
> 
> but first we have to know which voltage you need to be stable at a frequency you want
Click to expand...

Thanks for the amazing post

For me something about 4.5 till 4.8 is more than enough for me for non delided

In this case should I start with what voltage?

And llc in this case? The more number less voltage drop?

Tks again

Enviado do meu iPhone usando Tapatalk


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wsarahan*
> 
> Thanks for the amazing post
> 
> For me something about 4.5 till 4.8 is more than enough for me for non delided
> 
> In this case should I start with what voltage?
> 
> And llc in this case? The more number less voltage drop?
> 
> Tks again
> 
> Enviado do meu iPhone usando Tapatalk


k
multi at 48
and vcore at 1.3v
I think thats where I started as well
except it wasn't a challenge at all for my CPU

if you look at the list in the first post
some have a bit less, some have more
I'd start at 1.3v, and work my way up or down

from what I have seen an LLC of 4 to 6 seems to be best for most
it's like this:

you have a software open for temps
and cpu-z
with the stresstest program of you're choice
when you run the stress the voltage might change (I like the value in cpu-z the most)
we're trying to be as spot on to the value you want to aim for in the end

I'm old school a bit and use override for voltage
but if you're having an Asus you could also try to use adaptive mode

there are 3 modes how voltage gets supplied to you're CPU on an Asus board

manual override:
the voltage always stays at that value (maybe easiest for now, at least until you know which voltage you need)

offset:
applies always a certain value to the normal voltage, like
0.8v +0.0125v
1.2v +0.0125v

and adaptive:
which lets the board use normal voltages
and only gives more when you need all the speed
with this mode you can just tell the board to use a maximum of 1.3v (or whichever voltage you will need)


*the last 2 modes* let the CPU use less voltage when its being idle, or isn't being used a lot (browsing, videos)

if you're asking how I would do it?
I'd set it to manual at 1.3v (or if you want adaptive to 1.3v)

multi to 48
load XMP profile
set LLC to 4

and start testing


----------



## wsarahan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wsarahan*
> 
> Thanks for the amazing post
> 
> For me something about 4.5 till 4.8 is more than enough for me for non delided
> 
> In this case should I start with what voltage?
> 
> And llc in this case? The more number less voltage drop?
> 
> Tks again
> 
> Enviado do meu iPhone usando Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> k
> multi at 48
> and vcore at 1.3v
> I think thats where I started as well
> except it wasn't a challenge at all for my CPU
> 
> if you look at the list in the first post
> some have a bit less, some have more
> I'd start at 1.3v, and work my way up or down
> 
> from what I have seen an LLC of 4 to 6 seems to be best for most
> it's like this:
> 
> you have a software open for temps
> and cpu-z
> with the stresstest program of you're choice
> when you run the stress the voltage might change (I like the value in cpu-z the most)
> we're trying to be as spot on to the value you want to aim for in the end
> 
> I'm old school a bit and use override for voltage
> but if you're having an Asus you could also try to use adaptive mode
> 
> there are 3 modes how voltage gets supplied to you're CPU on an Asus board
> 
> manual override:
> the voltage always stays at that value (maybe easiest for now, at least until you know which voltage you need)
> 
> offset:
> applies always a certain value to the normal voltage, like
> 0.8v +0.0125v
> 1.2v +0.0125v
> 
> and adaptive:
> which lets the board use normal voltages
> and only gives more when you need all the speed
> with this mode you can just tell the board to use a maximum of 1.3v (or whichever voltage you will need)
> 
> 
> *the last 2 modes* let the CPU use less voltage when its being idle, or isn't being used a lot (browsing, videos)
> 
> if you're asking how I would do it?
> I'd set it to manual at 1.3v (or if you want adaptive to 1.3v)
> 
> multi to 48
> load XMP profile
> set LLC to 4
> 
> and start testing
Click to expand...

Thanks man, you really saved a my life and a lot of time!!!! Will save here for when I get the board and the cpu

When my setup be in hands and if I have another doubt can I ask again here?

Enviado do meu iPhone usando Tapatalk


----------



## wingman99

I just stress tested prime95 v28.10 for 8 hours at 4.6GHz on air and it passed.

i5 7600k

multiplier 46
Vcore Auto
uncore 4100MHz
G.SKIll 3200 14-14-14-34 XMP
Cooler hyper 212


----------



## Kalpa

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I just stress tested prime95 v28.10 for 8 hours at 4.6GHz on air and it passed.
> 
> i5 7600k
> 
> multiplier 46
> Vcore Auto
> uncore 4100MHz
> G.SKIll 3200 14-14-14-34 XMP
> Cooler hyper 212






What's your vcore during load?

I'm running my 7700K HT enabled at 4.6GHz now. Cache 4.2GHz. AVX offset 4 (4.2GHz). LLC setting "Standard". On air (machine in sig)

BIOS set voltage: 1.240V
Voltage during load: ~1.16V

Software being ran: [email protected] with 6 threads one CPU slot, one GPU slot, Cookie clicker on Firefox and latest addition Realm Grinder (standalone via steam).

Been running since last evening, that was 8 continuous hours in when I left for work in the morning. If it doesn't crash during the day it'll be 20+ continuous hours when I get back home.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I just stress tested prime95 v28.10 for 8 hours at 4.6GHz on air and it passed.
> 
> i5 7600k
> 
> multiplier 46
> Vcore Auto
> uncore 4100MHz
> G.SKIll 3200 14-14-14-34 XMP
> Cooler hyper 212
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's your vcore during load?
> 
> I'm running my 7700K HT enabled at 4.6GHz now. Cache 4.2GHz. AVX offset 4 (4.2GHz). LLC setting "Standard". On air (machine in sig)
> 
> BIOS set voltage: 1.240V
> Voltage during load: ~1.16V
> 
> Software being ran: [email protected] with 6 threads one CPU slot, one GPU slot, Cookie clicker on Firefox and latest addition Realm Grinder (standalone via steam).
> 
> Been running since last evening, that was 8 continuous hours in when I left for work in the morning. If it doesn't crash during the day it'll be 20+ continuous hours when I get back home.
Click to expand...

Sounds good.

My i5 7600k Vcore Realbench minimum 1.164v, Prime95 v28.10 minimum 1.200v


----------



## Kalpa

Nice. My VIDs are all over the place, if I were to use dynamic voltage (auto) with these settings the motherboard would likely boost VCore (needlessly) to 1.22-1.25 range during load. Although, granted, I actually haven't tested with this exact configuration (hmm, I guess I just got my pastime set for tonight...







)


----------



## BoredErica

Ello friends.

Been overclocking my ram. Gskill announced 4333 c19 ram. I'll probably save that for Coffee Lake if the stars align.

I've been running some stress tests to see temps before I switch over to custom loop. What I noticed was with the Linpack package test, temps get really hot, but then it goes back down. It's like there are phases of hot and cold, so it averages out to something that's slightly cooler than OCCT's Linpack test. More testing to be done with the loop. My 3rd core is usually the hottest, we're talking 70 vs 95C spread here vs other cores.

I ran a bit of OCCT (newer version) normally.

Not much else to report I guess. I think OCCT hammered my cache and I had to lower it for the temp test.

I read the Asus OC guide.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I've been running some stress tests to see temps before I switch over to custom loop. What I noticed was with the Linpack package test, temps get really hot, but then it goes back down. It's like there are phases of hot and cold, so it averages out to something that's slightly cooler than OCCT's Linpack test.


It _appears_ that linpack (via the linpack GUI package) will start each cycle loading RAM (cooler), then time processing (hotter) and then end the cycle freeing RAM (cooler.) The cycles are clearly visible if you watch the CPU package power (not temp) in hwinfo. If you have 32 GB of RAM, you can set linpack to use 24+ GB and the "hot" portion really drives up the temps. In a water loop, 3-4 cycles of that with 24+ GB of RAM will peak the water temps.

I can't compare to OCCT, as my machine is on a home domain and the OCCT author never responded to my requests asking for a work-around to personal domain usage. Compared to prime95, linpack does peak higher temps (for me.)

If you really want to stress a water loop, doing that at the same time as running furmark (with a GPU block on the same loop) will quickly peak your water temps. No, it's not a "reasonable" test and certainly not something I'd leave running for long. However, if you want to see "worst case" water temps, I don't know of any better way.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> It _appears_ that linpack (via the linpack GUI package) will start each cycle loading RAM (cooler), then time processing (hotter) and then end the cycle freeing RAM (cooler.) The cycles are clearly visible if you watch the CPU package power (not temp) in hwinfo. If you have 32 GB of RAM, you can set linpack to use 24+ GB and the "hot" portion really drives up the temps. In a water loop, 3-4 cycles of that with 24+ GB of RAM will peak the water temps.
> 
> I can't compare to OCCT, as my machine is on a home domain and the OCCT author never responded to my requests asking for a work-around to personal domain usage. Compared to prime95, linpack does peak higher temps (for me.)
> 
> If you really want to stress a water loop, doing that at the same time as running furmark (with a GPU block on the same loop) will quickly peak your water temps. No, it's not a "reasonable" test and certainly not something I'd leave running for long. However, if you want to see "worst case" water temps, I don't know of any better way.


It's not being used to test worst case temps for my loop. It's more of a curiosity than anything else. I'm running 3x560mm, so it's really down to thermal transfer from the die to the water.

I only have 16gb of ram, but I did set it up to use up all of my ram.

Testing Furmark on 1080ti I got lower temps compared to Superposition. The power target is not high enough, it's throttling on Furmark.

cheers


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Nice. My VIDs are all over the place, if I were to use dynamic voltage (auto) with these settings the motherboard would likely boost VCore (needlessly) to 1.22-1.25 range during load. Although, granted, I actually haven't tested with this exact configuration (hmm, I guess I just got my pastime set for tonight...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Intel's VID since sandy bridge adjusts for CPU load, multiplier and temp.

If you do the testing post back what you have for Vcore on dynamic Auto at 4.6GHz.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> It's not being used to test worst case temps for my loop. It's more of a curiosity than anything else. I'm running 3x560mm, so it's really down to thermal transfer from the die to the water.
> 
> I only have 16gb of ram, but I did set it up to use up all of my ram.
> 
> Testing Furmark on 1080ti I got lower temps compared to Superposition. The power target is not high enough, it's throttling on Furmark.
> 
> cheers


Its extremely likely the damn small die size is bottle-necking the thermal transfer really hard, doubling rad space only seems to buy 5C at a time. I get my highest temps with PrimeAVX small FFTs @ 65C.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I'm running 3x560mm, so it's really down to thermal transfer from the die to the water


There's only one word that could describe my response to that: Wow.


----------



## MaKeN

Where did you fit 3x560mm?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Where did you fit 3x560mm?


My shelf.

Considering Caselabs for next build.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> My shelf.
> 
> Considering Caselabs for next build.


Go server rack with wheels. Easily another 3x540mm rads right there


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel's VID since sandy bridge adjusts for CPU load, multiplier and temp.
> 
> If you do the testing post back what you have for Vcore on dynamic Auto at 4.6GHz.


Looks I went with netflix (without chill) instead of random tinkering for what little time I had tonight, but I did a quick test. Kept my frequency settings as they were (4.6 core / 4.2 cache / avx offset 4), only changed the voltage setting. Oh and LLC is still at "standard".

"Auto" failed to boot (tried twice in a row, not sure what's up with it, no energy to investigate) - "normal" (with 0 offset) booted okay, follows the VID readings closely, gives me ~1.27V on 4.6GHz load, and (no surprise here) 1.22V for AVX load (which is running at 4.2GHz) - and consequently the temps are substantially higher than at 1.16V 

I have bad memories of trying negative offset with these, the most I could do with higher base frequencies was like -10mV. I doubt there's much to gain here.

So, for my use case, manually set static voltage it seems to be, alas. It's okay, my machine is never truly idle, and in fact is running some distributed computing more often than not ([email protected] is the latest thing I got hooked on)

I'm sure a better motherboard would allow for better voltage settings. All these Maximum Asus Heroes seem to have all kinds of settings at their fingertips... and I bet gigabyte's flagship model would be much better equipped in BIOS options as well. (Is it Gaming K7 or what? Oh right the new one was called AORUS or whatever... damn marketing...)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel's VID since sandy bridge adjusts for CPU load, multiplier and temp.
> 
> If you do the testing post back what you have for Vcore on dynamic Auto at 4.6GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks I went with netflix (without chill) instead of random tinkering for what little time I had tonight, but I did a quick test. Kept my frequency settings as they were (4.6 core / 4.2 cache / avx offset 4), only changed the voltage setting. Oh and LLC is still at "standard".
> 
> "Auto" failed to boot (tried twice in a row, not sure what's up with it, no energy to investigate) - "normal" (with 0 offset) booted okay, follows the VID readings closely, gives me ~1.27V on 4.6GHz load, and (no surprise here) 1.22V for AVX load (which is running at 4.2GHz) - and consequently the temps are substantially higher than at 1.16V
> 
> I have bad memories of trying negative offset with these, the most I could do with higher base frequencies was like -10mV. I doubt there's much to gain here.
> 
> So, for my use case, manually set static voltage it seems to be, alas. It's okay, my machine is never truly idle, and in fact is running some distributed computing more often than not ([email protected] is the latest thing I got hooked on)
> 
> I'm sure a better motherboard would allow for better voltage settings. All these Maximum Asus Heroes seem to have all kinds of settings at their fingertips... and I bet gigabyte's flagship model would be much better equipped in BIOS options as well. (Is it Gaming K7 or what? Oh right the new one was called AORUS or whatever... damn marketing...)
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting the dynamic auto test for 4.6GHz.

If I had a i7 7700k I would also need to use negative Dynamic DVID, that can only go so far because it lowers the Base voltage to far with a large negative offset causing stability problems. With working in the forums helping folks on all top end motherboards including ASUS there is no options to only reduce turbo Dynamic/ adaptive vcore. As far as I know most people with the i7 7700k have to use manual Vcore on all motherboards if stock voltage is to high for them when overclocking.

Stock auto overclocking Vcore increases with CPU VID and motherboard calibration to VID.
Gigabyte lowered the VID calibration on the last Bios update, if they did not I would have too much voltage running stock Auto.

I like using the i5s, the stock VID is lower than the i7s and I don't need the extra threads.


----------



## sdmf74

Anybody here with an Asus maximus ix formula/code and an NVME ssd installed in the first slot?

Im wondering if I can slip the ssd cover off with my gpu installed, or will I have to remove my gpu to remove the cover?

It looks like the ssd cover extends underneath the gpu but im not sure if it can be removed with (watercooled) gpu in place. Asus says the cover has hinges but im not sure what side they are on

sorry wrong thread


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Anybody here with an Asus maximus ix formula/code and an NVME ssd installed in the first slot?
> 
> Im wondering if I can slip the ssd cover off with my gpu installed, or will I have to remove my gpu to remove the cover?


I did have a 'code' with an m.2 device there. I found that the plastic cover trapped the PCH and m.2 device heat and drove temperatures for those devices higher than I was happy with. I tried to remove the cover without removing the graphics card, but (at least in my case) the graphics card kept me from being able to get the cover off.

(I eventually returned the 'code' board and went back to a "hero" that doesn't have the plastic heat retainer.)


----------



## sdmf74

Thanks Gary looks like I'm gonna use the second slot then.


----------



## garyd9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> One more question I noticed samsung has a driver download for the 960 pro, is it necessary to download that or use Asus driver?


In my opinion, use the samsung driver for better performance and power management.


----------



## sdmf74

I edited that out cause I found a document about the samsung driver that explained everything after I asked.


----------



## Forecast

I doubt anyone remembers my post from a few weeks back, but I just built my first computer in almost 20 years. Last one before my 7700k was an AMD-K6. I have an Asrock Taichi, and I'm running at 5.0/4.6ghz stable with my RAM at 3333mhz at 13-14-14-28.

I have previously completed Realbench at 8 hours, but I didn't do the proper screenshots. I have to go back and check. I've completed 4+ hours of GSAT with the memory timings I listed with zero errors. I will get screenshots of that soon.

The reason for my post, however, is holy crap what a difference a delid makes. Previously 30 minutes of Realbench had me at 80-84 degrees if not higher. I was having to go down to 1.27 to 1.28 to not overheat anymore than that. I passed Realbench 8 hours once, but also had a crash after 5 hours.

I just delidded with a Rockit 88, and actually pushed my BIOS voltage up to 1.29 in BIOS .hitting 1.328 at load in HWMonitor. Temps are hovering in the 57-59 range with a max of 62. Over a 20 degree drop. I used Conductonaut on the die and IHS underneath, and then Gelid Extreme on the IHS meeting my H100i v2 AIO. Since my crashing may have been due to thermals I'm actually going to back the voltage down to 1.26/1.27 and see if I can get stable there, And pretty sure I can make a run for 5.1ghz now and if extremely lucky 5.2ghz.

If you've been too nervous previously to delid, the Rockit 88 makes it almost foolproof. Scraping the stock Intel glue off, applying the liquid metal, and then gluing the IHS back with gasket sealer was actually WAY tougher than the delid itself. Delid itself literally takes less than a minute.

Now I just need to delid my other 7700k and see how it performs. It is in a Plex server running on an air cooler @ 4.8ghz using 1.235 vcore. Excited to see which chip ends up best, but delidding is extremely easy and well worth it. If I can do it anyone can. Just 2 weeks ago I was extremely nervous installing a new video card. Been out of computers for a LONG time


----------



## BoredErica

For "CPU bound" games, is it just ram latency/read that affects performance?

I don't see how ram write speed matters. We want fast ram so when the cache misses the CPU can grab the data from the fast ram pronto, right?

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> I doubt anyone remembers my post from a few weeks back, but I just built my first computer in almost 20 years. Last one before my 7700k was an AMD-K6. I have an Asrock Taichi, and I'm running at 5.0/4.6ghz stable with my RAM at 3333mhz at 13-14-14-28.
> 
> I have previously completed Realbench at 8 hours, but I didn't do the proper screenshots. I have to go back and check. I've completed 4+ hours of GSAT with the memory timings I listed with zero errors. I will get screenshots of that soon.
> 
> The reason for my post, however, is holy crap what a difference a delid makes. Previously 30 minutes of Realbench had me at 80-84 degrees if not higher. I was having to go down to 1.27 to 1.28 to not overheat anymore than that. I passed Realbench 8 hours once, but also had a crash after 5 hours.
> 
> I just delidded with a Rockit 88, and actually pushed my BIOS voltage up to 1.29 in BIOS .hitting 1.328 at load in HWMonitor. Temps are hovering in the 57-59 range with a max of 62. Over a 20 degree drop. I used Conductonaut on the die and IHS underneath, and then Gelid Extreme on the IHS meeting my H100i v2 AIO. Since my crashing may have been due to thermals I'm actually going to back the voltage down to 1.26/1.27 and see if I can get stable there, And pretty sure I can make a run for 5.1ghz now and if extremely lucky 5.2ghz.
> 
> If you've been too nervous previously to delid, the Rockit 88 makes it almost foolproof. Scraping the stock Intel glue off, applying the liquid metal, and then gluing the IHS back with gasket sealer was actually WAY tougher than the delid itself. Delid itself literally takes less than a minute.
> 
> Now I just need to delid my other 7700k and see how it performs. It is in a Plex server running on an air cooler @ 4.8ghz using 1.235 vcore. Excited to see which chip ends up best, but delidding is extremely easy and well worth it. If I can do it anyone can. Just 2 weeks ago I was extremely nervous installing a new video card. Been out of computers for a LONG time


What glue did you use?
Back when I passed on delidding entirely, people were using razors/vice only.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> What glue did you use?
> 
> Back when I passed on delidding entirely, people were using razors/vice only.


cpu bound games tend to load the on-die IO more than gpu games. With SKL it is best to shoot for he highest frequency you can boot at then begin tightening timings. For dual channel, frequency rules.








moist folks use any black silicon gasket material... but, sealing is optional and shoudl you ever nee d to redo the paste, some gasket material can be more difficult to pop. At most "tack" the 4 corners with a dab.


----------



## Forecast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> cpu bound games tend to load the on-die IO more than gpu games. With SKL it is best to shoot for he highest frequency you can boot at then begin tightening timings. For dual channel, frequency rules.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> moist folks use any black silicon gasket material... but, sealing is optional and shoudl you ever nee d to redo the paste, some gasket material can be more difficult to pop. At most "tack" the 4 corners with a dab.


Exactly how I did mine. Little dab of gasket sealer in the corners. Actually used a separate needle and syringe to make sure it was a thin like that rounded the corners to make sure the IHS would hold, but would be skinny enough to allow the IHS to seat fully on the die and avoid the gaps that people say create some of the temp issues.


----------



## Forecast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> What glue did you use?
> 
> Back when I passed on delidding entirely, people were using razors/vice only.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> What glue did you use?
> 
> Back when I passed on delidding entirely, people were using razors/vice only.


I don't game enough to be able to answer your first question that well. For me, I just want a fast system, and CAS 13 @ 3333mhz is hard to beat. I will try some higher frequencies with CAS 15 later, but CAS 14 was a no go past 3333mhz unless I went well above 1.45v.

This is the gasket glue I used. This is what Silicon Lottery uses on their chips.

Permatex 82180 Ultra Black Maximum Oil Resistance RTV Silicone Gasket Maker, 3.35 oz. Tube https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0002UEN1U/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_OizvzbWJYKBF0


----------



## Forecast

One thing we've only collected anecdotally in this thread is info about temperatures. It would be great to see people using AIOs, custom loops, and solid air coolers report back what kind of temps they get at full load. Particularly those OCed 4.9ghz or higher.

I don't know if anyone else is interested in seeing what kind of range of temps and averages we see. Also didn't know if the thread originator has any interest in adding that to the stats he is collecting. Just an inquiry. Not trying to tell anyone what to do! Just might be helpful to some.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> One thing we've only collected anecdotally in this thread is info about temperatures. It would be great to see people using AIOs, custom loops, and solid air coolers report back what kind of temps they get at full load. Particularly those OCed 4.9ghz or higher.
> 
> I don't know if anyone else is interested in seeing what kind of range of temps and averages we see. Also didn't know if the thread originator has any interest in adding that to the stats he is collecting. Just an inquiry. Not trying to tell anyone what to do! Just might be helpful to some.


Well, I am going from D14 to custom loop as I talked about earlier. I'm logging temps for comparison. I will post here when the time comes.

EDIT:

I have 2 thermometers, the testing will be done at similar ambients.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> cpu bound games tend to load the on-die IO more than gpu games. With SKL it is best to shoot for he highest frequency you can boot at then begin tightening timings. For dual channel, frequency rules.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> moist folks use any black silicon gasket material... but, sealing is optional and shoudl you ever nee d to redo the paste, some gasket material can be more difficult to pop. At most "tack" the 4 corners with a dab.


Some guy used super glue, lol. As far as materials go that one is pretty accessible.

I can't do much more until 4400 kits roll around, which Gskill has been 'releasing' since Sept 2015.

Oh yeah. Reason why I talked about read vs write on ram was because I was doing Aida benches and one setting gave me higher read but lower writes. But it could have been just a statistical fluke.


----------



## Asploit

Sup friends, fresh OC.net virgin here.
Just picked up a 7700k but the rest of my system won't be in for a week.
Batch # is X712C I was just wondering if there was any information I could extract from that based on other users' experiences with that group?
Or is it pointless to try and predict silicon quality via the batch number and those trying to do so have too much time on their hands?

Planning on cooling with a Arctic Liquid Freezer 360 AIO, can I forego delidding or is even that going to be inadequate?

Thanks in advance for the wisdom


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Sup friends, fresh OC.net virgin here.
> Just picked up a 7700k but the rest of my system won't be in for a week.
> Batch # is X712C I was just wondering if there was any information I could extract from that based on other users' experiences with that group?
> Or is it pointless to try and predict silicon quality via the batch number and those trying to do so have too much time on their hands?
> 
> Planning on cooling with a Arctic Liquid Freezer 360 AIO, can I forego delidding or is even that going to be inadequate?
> 
> Thanks in advance for the wisdom


Welcome to OCN







Batch number does come into it regarding potential overclock but it isn't always a reliable indicator, some batch numbers have consistently produced good chips whilst others have been inconsistent so make of that what you will. To get the best overclock possible in terms of frequency and heat you will more than likely need to delid as most of us have done.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Welcome to OCN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Batch number does come into it regarding potential overclock but it isn't always a reliable indicator, some batch numbers have consistently produced good chips whilst others have been inconsistent so make of that what you will. To get the best overclock possible in terms of frequency and heat you will more than likely need to delid as most of us have done.


Yup oldchool OC. More cooling, more vcore.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Or is it pointless to try and predict silicon quality via the batch number and those trying to do so have too much time on their hands?


Predicting is pointless. Making statistics for posterity may be useful.
Quote:


> Planning on cooling with a Arctic Liquid Freezer 360 AIO, can I forego delidding or is even that going to be inadequate?
> 
> Thanks in advance for the wisdom


Depends on the OC you want to achieve. General consensus is that delidding gives more thermal headroom than upgrading cooler tier (a sad state of affairs, that. Thanks Intel)

Fot running 7700K at stock clocks a high-end air cooler is more than sufficient.


----------



## Asploit

Alright thanks for the info, guys. Yeah it looks like I'll just have to wait til next week to assemble and test the components. Hopefully nothing comes in DOA. I'll make sure to throw my 7700k stats onto the pile with the Stock # for posterity when I do.


----------



## JunkaDK

Hey guys.

I just got some Trident Z RGB 4133 Mhz 2 x8 GB ram.

CPU is i7-7700k and motherboard is the Asus Z270G Micro ATX.

I was not expecting to reach 4133 mhz, but when i go above 2800 mhz i can it to post, but somehow the CPU multiplier is locked at x 8, so cpu never goes above 800 mhz.

I have never seen this problem before, and i have done quite a bit of overclocking before.

Has anyone seen this before?

Any help is much appreciated

Thanks.


----------



## MaKeN

Tried to clear Cmos?


----------



## JunkaDK

what good would that do?







It works fine when when im at 2800mhz.. If i go above cpu is stuck at 800mhz.

I yes i have loaded defaults several times to start over.


----------



## wholeeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JunkaDK*
> 
> what good would that do?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It works fine when when im at 2800mhz.. If i go above cpu is stuck at 800mhz.
> 
> I yes i have loaded defaults several times to start over.


It's a known bug with bios 0906. Don't use XMP and dial in system agent and vccio manually. Or downgrade bios.


----------



## JocaHC

I just built my first computer in while (15 years or so) and never did any OC. I OC'ed my 7700k @ 4.8 GHz / 1.29V with my RAM at 3200mhz (XMP 16-18-18-38 @ 1.35V). That's stable right now (8h Realbench) but I got temps around 75-78 C during the stress test with max of 82 C. I don't want to delid it for now. Do you guys think that I can push to 5.0 or I must delid to get a safe temp?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JocaHC*
> 
> I just built my first computer in while (15 years or so) and never did any OC. I OC'ed my 7700k @ 4.8 GHz / 1.29V with my RAM at 3200mhz (XMP 16-18-18-38 @ 1.35V). That's stable right now (8h Realbench) but I got temps around 75-78 C during the stress test with max of 82 C. I don't want to delid it for now. Do you guys think that I can push to 5.0 or I must delid to get a safe temp?


I would go up to 90c with stress testing. The i7 7700k Tjmax is 100c. Link: https://ark.intel.com/products/97129/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_50-GHz

I stress test my kaby lake up to 94c on air for 8 hours, it did just fine.


----------



## Kalpa

Frankly delid only if 1) you can afford to lose the CPU and 2) you really want that extra 200-400MHz out of the CPU.

Delidding only to lower your temps is nonsense IMO if your current OC is 1) stable and 2) performance is not limited by thermal throttling


----------



## BoredErica

I believe delidding with a delidding kit is pretty safe. I think we're past the old days of a guy getting a razor blade. Also with stress test I think about long term temps. If I get 90C on Prime for a few hours I don't care because that's just for a few hours, and when I use my computer, even if it's under 24/7 100% load it will not hit anywhere near that temperature. But if I'm getting 90C in Realbench, I expect to hit 90C doing any normal 100% cpu load task, possibly even over than on a very hot day. So I guess the question is which is worse: Short periods of 95C or long periods of 70-85C? (Just looking at temps alone.)

And lower temperatures chips tend to clock a bit better. With adjustable bclk that is pretty fine grain and doesn't make everything automatically unstable, a 0.05ghz headroom can be exploited.

If you reseal you just end up with a package that is just like a normal package, but performs with better temperature. I cannot fathom why that would hurt resale, in fact IMO it should boost resale value slightly. (Yes, I can think of reasons but it's hard to fathom.)

But hey, if it's not in the cards for now don't worry about it... you can always change your mind later. 5.0 is a number, it's not magically leagues better than 4.9 as I'm sure you know.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I believe delidding with a delidding kit is pretty safe. I think we're past the old days of a guy getting a razor blade. Also with stress test I think about long term temps. If I get 90C on Prime for a few hours I don't care because that's just for a few hours, and when I use my computer, even if it's under 24/7 100% load it will not hit anywhere near that temperature. But if I'm getting 90C in Realbench, I expect to hit 90C doing any normal 100% cpu load task, possibly even over than on a very hot day. So I guess the question is which is worse: Short periods of 95C or long periods of 70-85C? (Just looking at temps alone.)
> 
> And lower temperatures chips tend to clock a bit better. With adjustable bclk that is pretty fine grain and doesn't make everything automatically unstable, a 0.05ghz headroom can be exploited.
> 
> *If you reseal you just end up with a package that is just like a normal package, but performs with better temperature. I cannot fathom why that would hurt resale, in fact IMO it should boost resale value slightly. (Yes, I can think of reasons but it's hard to fathom.)*
> 
> But hey, if it's not in the cards for now don't worry about it... you can always change your mind later. 5.0 is a number, it's not magically leagues better than 4.9 as I'm sure you know.


I recently sold my delided 4790K and 6700K both purchased from Silicon Lottery, got pretty much what I paid for them so in my experience you dont lose any resale value by deliding


----------



## pcixopatt

I have 7700k and gigabyte aorus gaming 5.In 4/8 ghz I can play me andromedia.In 4/9 ghz I can play all games but in andromedia always crashes.In all variants ram was overclocked from 2400 to 2700.16x2 crucial dual ram.
What i must do with vciio,agent voltage,vcc substaines vcpll and vcpll oc/
I set voltage 1.295 and in game me and another games voltage like 1.311 sometimes 1.341.
When i set 1.3v temp in bench cpu throtles.Maybe someone had gigabyte setting for overclocking in bios.
In 4.8 i never seen crashes and it must be that i needn't configure vciio,agent voltage,vcc substaines vcpll and vcpll oc?


----------



## MaKeN

Same thing here in andromeda .... but for me not ram related...
just raised a tiny bit the cpu voltage , for exemple :
for stresstesting 1.41v is enough to pass
For games that i play and serfing internet i lowered to 1.37v and its fine till i play andromeda, ( it would crash) it needs 1.38
Now when i use Movavi video converter it crashes at 1.38 till i adjust to 1.4 v
So , see yourself what suits your cpu.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Same thing here in andromeda .... but for me not ram related...
> just raised a tiny bit the cpu voltage , for exemple :
> for stresstesting 1.41v is enough to pass
> For games that i play and serfing internet i lowered to 1.37v and its fine till i play andromeda, ( it would crash) it needs 1.38
> Now when i use Movavi video converter it crashes at 1.38 till i adjust to 1.4 v
> So , see yourself what suits your cpu.


ya know

the reason we stresstest is to find the lowest stable voltage settings for highest overclock

it's not a goal to run high in voltage while stresstesting so you can post a pretty picture online,
but undervolting in daily use and maybe running into stability problems eventually

a high voltage doesn't matter in gaming so much (compared to stresstesting) as the CPU gets used a lot less intense

if you need 1.41v to be stable you need 1.41v
if you want to be easier on you're CPU you have to drop down in frequency so you can run a lower voltage

running Asus RealBench and using the voltages needed to pass it (since IBT, or Prime would most likely need higher voltages) never gave me a crash in real life
not in video conversion, Photoshop or gaming (including Andromeda)

at the end of the day
if you're stresstesting and find you're "golden" voltage
but then use less voltage in daily use (although daily use is a lot less stressful) you're asking for problems

but then
it's you're system
but how can you know if the RAM is stable if the CPU isn't at all times
crashing in a modestly CPU heavy game isn't very stable
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcixopatt*
> 
> I have 7700k and gigabyte aorus gaming 5.In 4/8 ghz I can play me andromedia.In 4/9 ghz I can play all games but in andromedia always crashes.In all variants ram was overclocked from 2400 to 2700.16x2 crucial dual ram.
> What i must do with vciio,agent voltage,vcc substaines vcpll and vcpll oc/
> I set voltage 1.295 and in game me and another games voltage like 1.311 sometimes 1.341.
> When i set 1.3v temp in bench cpu throtles.Maybe someone had gigabyte setting for overclocking in bios.
> In 4.8 i never seen crashes and it must be that i needn't configure vciio,agent voltage,vcc substaines vcpll and vcpll oc?


you either need a delid to get some room temperature wise (so you can increase vcore again to be stable)

or

live with 4.8 (and need to test the overclock actually)

you test you're CPU first, with a tool from the first post

and when you passed enough times you go for the RAM and test that overclock again

seems slow and tedious
but there's a reason for this

and it's not VCCIO, system agent and so on

those settings can harm you're CPU, or can make you're system less stable (they have something to do with signal strength and more isn't always better)
those settings are interesting for 4000+ RAM speed
not really 3000 or less

how did you test you're overclock?
that it is stable?

kabylake overclocking is all about vcore, heat and a bit of luck

if you want to OC the RAM, then maybe increase the voltage for it
my 2400 rated RAM works with 1.4v to an overclock of 3200
but again
one needs to test those things


----------



## JocaHC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I believe delidding with a delidding kit is pretty safe. I think we're past the old days of a guy getting a razor blade. Also with stress test I think about long term temps. If I get 90C on Prime for a few hours I don't care because that's just for a few hours, and when I use my computer, even if it's under 24/7 100% load it will not hit anywhere near that temperature. But if I'm getting 90C in Realbench, I expect to hit 90C doing any normal 100% cpu load task, possibly even over than on a very hot day. So I guess the question is which is worse: Short periods of 95C or long periods of 70-85C? (Just looking at temps alone.)
> 
> And lower temperatures chips tend to clock a bit better. With adjustable bclk that is pretty fine grain and doesn't make everything automatically unstable, a 0.05ghz headroom can be exploited.
> 
> If you reseal you just end up with a package that is just like a normal package, but performs with better temperature. I cannot fathom why that would hurt resale, in fact IMO it should boost resale value slightly. (Yes, I can think of reasons but it's hard to fathom.)
> 
> But hey, if it's not in the cards for now don't worry about it... you can always change your mind later. 5.0 is a number, it's not magically leagues better than 4.9 as I'm sure you know.


Got it. I ran a overnight prime95 test last night (around 6 hrs) without a problem. I got lower 90's with 95C max. I will stick with 4.8 for now and delid when I have little more cash to buy the kit (TBH I spent all with graphics card







).

However, I ran into some crashes playing Witcher 3. I think that's from graphics card. I will back the GPU to stock speeds and test it.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JocaHC*
> 
> Got it. I ran a overnight prime95 test last night (around 6 hrs) without a problem. I got lower 90's with 95C max. I will stick with 4.8 for now and delid when I have little more cash to buy the kit (TBH I spent all with graphics card
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ).
> 
> However, I ran into some crashes playing Witcher 3. I think that's from graphics card. I will back the GPU to stock speeds and test it.


Post back what happens after running the GPU stock.


----------



## spddmn24

So I stumbled upon this video.

https://youtu.be/Z8nFdFpuVBg

Is there any reason not to set my vrm frequency to 500khz along with cpu power duty control and phase control to extreme? Motherboard is a maximus ix hero. I have an nh-d15 cooler so the vrm heatsink is seeing some airflow.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spddmn24*
> 
> So I stumbled upon this video.
> 
> https://youtu.be/Z8nFdFpuVBg
> 
> Is there any reason not to set my vrm frequency to 500khz along with cpu power duty control and phase control to extreme? Motherboard is a maximus ix hero. I have an nh-d15 cooler so the vrm heatsink is seeing some airflow.


Doesn't that increase vrm temp? At least with switching freq part, I believe I read that in bios.


----------



## encrypted11

Microcode 5E/M8I


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Forecast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> I doubt anyone remembers my post from a few weeks back, but I just built my first computer in almost 20 years. Last one before my 7700k was an AMD-K6. I have an Asrock Taichi, and I'm running at 5.0/4.6ghz stable with my RAM at 3333mhz at 13-14-14-28.
> 
> I have previously completed Realbench at 8 hours, but I didn't do the proper screenshots. I have to go back and check. I've completed 4+ hours of GSAT with the memory timings I listed with zero errors. I will get screenshots of that soon.
> 
> The reason for my post, however, is holy crap what a difference a delid makes. Previously 30 minutes of Realbench had me at 80-84 degrees if not higher. I was having to go down to 1.27 to 1.28 to not overheat anymore than that. I passed Realbench 8 hours once, but also had a crash after 5 hours.
> 
> I just delidded with a Rockit 88, and actually pushed my BIOS voltage up to 1.29 in BIOS .hitting 1.328 at load in HWMonitor. Temps are hovering in the 57-59 range with a max of 62. Over a 20 degree drop. I used Conductonaut on the die and IHS underneath, and then Gelid Extreme on the IHS meeting my H100i v2 AIO. Since my crashing may have been due to thermals I'm actually going to back the voltage down to 1.26/1.27 and see if I can get stable there, And pretty sure I can make a run for 5.1ghz now and if extremely lucky 5.2ghz.
> 
> If you've been too nervous previously to delid, the Rockit 88 makes it almost foolproof. Scraping the stock Intel glue off, applying the liquid metal, and then gluing the IHS back with gasket sealer was actually WAY tougher than the delid itself. Delid itself literally takes less than a minute.
> 
> Now I just need to delid my other 7700k and see how it performs. It is in a Plex server running on an air cooler @ 4.8ghz using 1.235 vcore. Excited to see which chip ends up best, but delidding is extremely easy and well worth it. If I can do it anyone can. Just 2 weeks ago I was extremely nervous installing a new video card. Been out of computers for a LONG time


Haven't had time to delid the other yet, but I'm 8hr Realbench stable at 5.2ghz. Ram is @ 3400 13-14-14-28. Max RB temp was around the lower 70s. However, I was doing a bit of BCLK overclocking just for fun so that run was with a 102mhz+ BCLK. Ram passed 4 hours of GSAT.

With the BCLK turned up I could only hit 4.6 GHz with the cache unless I wanted to push my vcore up higher than I want to for 5.2 GHz. I have to make an emergency trip out of town, but when I get back I will post screenshots of the 8hr Realbench and hit up the memory thread for GSAT proof.

I think if I push my BCLK back to normal I will have a real shot at 5.3 GHz with temps suitable for a daily driver. BCLK tweaking really pushed heat and stability very quickly compared to 5.2 GHz with a regular 100 BCLK. That's why I didn't even bother much with cache because it was getting angry at 4.7 so I put it at a stable 4.6. If like to get to 5.3/4.8 or 5.3/4.7 for daily use.

BTW, I know Passmark isn't the most liked Benchmark, but I'm representing Overclock with the #3 spot overall and # 1 7700K. If my 2D mark had been a little higher or I had used a RAM DISK (which Passmark allows in their rules) I think I, could have gotten to #1 overall.

Passmark Top 20: http://www.passmark.com/baselines/top.html

My system: http://www.passmark.com/baselines/V9/display.php?id=85463441251


----------



## pcixopatt

Thanks.But asus bench i was passed neither Andromeda.Pirated Andromeda very good like a stability test for my cpu.And can it be than my cpu can be 4/9 but 0/1 more 5ghz it will be only on high voltages


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Doesn't that increase vrm temp? At least with switching freq part, I believe I read that in bios.


Yeah it does, but I'm pretty sure it's not running hot. I think temp 2 reading is vrm temp on my motherboard, and if it is the temp maxed out in the mid-low 40c. I can still hold my finger on the vrm heatsink and the backside of the motherboard without being burnt.


----------



## MaKeN

Does hwinfo report that temps?

I beleve its called T1 in hwinfo?


----------



## spddmn24

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Does hwinfo report that temps?
> 
> I beleve its called T1 in hwinfo?


Pretty sure it's t2 on mine. It saw 43c peak in battlefield 1 last night.


----------



## coc_james

@Forecast

What's your vcore setup? I have a Taichi, so terminology is the same.


----------



## MaKeN

I dont have t2 here only T1... during Hci mem test its at 71c its what i do atm...
Interesting if i would ad vrm voltage , to see what temps would change.


----------



## Forecast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> @Forecast
> 
> What's your vcore setup? I have a Taichi, so terminology is the same.


Can't remember if 1.38 or 1.39 LLC1. LLC2 and Offset too unstable with BCLK ocing. Think I can get down to 1.37 or so. Had to make an emergency trip out of town, so won't be able to check until next week.


----------



## sdmf74

Anybody know why there is 2 drive temperatures for the Samsung 960 pro in HWINFO64? I assume one is for the controller but which one? "Drive #2" got pretty warm during a CDM benchmark, and the ssd is installed in the 2nd M.2 slot even and has plenty of airflow.


----------



## JocaHC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Post back what happens after running the GPU stock.


I played for several hours running the gpu stock and was way better. Only once the game closed but the OS and other software was fine. But I google and found a bunch of complains about this game stability. I will try a different one.

I added some more intake fans on my case and ran prime95 overnight again. The temperature dropped to something around 88C with 92C max. I'm very happy with that.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JocaHC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Post back what happens after running the GPU stock.
> 
> 
> 
> I played for several hours running the gpu stock and was way better. Only once the game closed but the OS and other software was fine. But I google and found a bunch of complains about this game stability. I will try a different one.
> 
> I added some more intake fans on my case and ran prime95 overnight again. The temperature dropped to something around 88C with 92C max. I'm very happy with that.
Click to expand...

Sounds good.







I have my temperature down to 94c maximum I'm very happy with that.


----------



## nonpolar

Hi everyone, I was hoping someone can help me out...

I've got a 7700K @ 5.2GHz, 1.42V that was able to pass Realbench for an hour, and Prime 28.10 for 10 hours. I am using an EVGA Z270 FTW motherboard. However, I'm having a bit of trouble in regard to the voltages..

When I look at HWmonitor and the like, I get CPU V Core and VID to be 0.600V and 1.435V respectively. I asked EVGA tech support, who essentially pointed the fingers all over the place. It could either be this specific motherboard, this brand of motherboard, and/or the software that can cause the inaccurate readings.

In addition, it seems that LLC/ring has a role in propagating the voltage value to be greater than what I applied to in the bios (It is in static mode)? I saw that this can be adjusted via levels in the ASUS bios, but I have yet to find how to do so in the EVGA motherboard's bios (I've added a link to the combination of pictures at the end). Is this a feature not present in the EVGA motherboard? If so, would it be wise to just swap this guy out for an ASUS PRIME? Thanks in advanced for your guys' help.

http://imgur.com/a/j7CRf (Ignore the values inputted - the AVX ratio is now set to 0, whilst the voltage has been increased to 1.42V)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nonpolar*
> 
> Hi everyone, I was hoping someone can help me out...
> 
> I've got a 7700K @ 5.2GHz, 1.42V that was able to pass Realbench for an hour, and Prime 28.10 for 10 hours. I am using an EVGA Z270 FTW motherboard. However, I'm having a bit of trouble in regard to the voltages..
> 
> When I look at HWmonitor and the like, I get CPU V Core and VID to be 0.600V and 1.435V respectively. I asked EVGA tech support, who essentially pointed the fingers all over the place. It could either be this specific motherboard, this brand of motherboard, and/or the software that can cause the inaccurate readings.
> 
> In addition, it seems that LLC/ring has a role in propagating the voltage value to be greater than what I applied to in the bios (It is in static mode)? I saw that this can be adjusted via levels in the ASUS bios, but I have yet to find how to do so in the EVGA motherboard's bios (I've added a link to the combination of pictures at the end). Is this a feature not present in the EVGA motherboard? If so, would it be wise to just swap this guy out for an ASUS PRIME? Thanks in advanced for your guys' help.
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/j7CRf (Ignore the values inputted - the AVX ratio is now set to 0, whilst the voltage has been increased to 1.42V)


Just use the CPU-Z or HWiNFO64 Vcore reference voltage. Some utilities don't work well on all motherboards. When you set LLC to the highest level the voltage will go higher than what you set in Bios. Don't use VID (Voltage identification) for Vcore reference.

My Gigabyte works well with all of them.


----------



## cjm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nonpolar*
> 
> Hi everyone, I was hoping someone can help me out...
> 
> I've got a 7700K @ 5.2GHz, 1.42V that was able to pass Realbench for an hour, and Prime 28.10 for 10 hours. I am using an EVGA Z270 FTW motherboard. However, I'm having a bit of trouble in regard to the voltages..
> 
> When I look at HWmonitor and the like, I get CPU V Core and VID to be 0.600V and 1.435V respectively. I asked EVGA tech support, who essentially pointed the fingers all over the place. It could either be this specific motherboard, this brand of motherboard, and/or the software that can cause the inaccurate readings.
> 
> In addition, it seems that LLC/ring has a role in propagating the voltage value to be greater than what I applied to in the bios (It is in static mode)? I saw that this can be adjusted via levels in the ASUS bios, but I have yet to find how to do so in the EVGA motherboard's bios (I've added a link to the combination of pictures at the end). Is this a feature not present in the EVGA motherboard? If so, would it be wise to just swap this guy out for an ASUS PRIME? Thanks in advanced for your guys' help.
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/j7CRf (Ignore the values inputted - the AVX ratio is now set to 0, whilst the voltage has been increased to 1.42V)


Seems like an issue with some EVGA boards where the vcore isn't correctly read by most utilities - https://forums.evga.com/m/tm.aspx?m=2458469&p=1

You do have an LLC settting though, on your board it is called "cpu vdroop"


----------



## nonpolar

That's... Unfortunate. Do you think it's something I should swap the motherboard out for?

And I thought LLC was to compensate for against the voltage dropping in Vdrop?


----------



## cjm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nonpolar*
> 
> That's... Unfortunate. Do you think it's something I should swap the motherboard out for?
> 
> And I thought LLC was to compensate for against the voltage dropping in Vdrop?


Yes that is what LLC is, but on your board the setting is called CPU vdroop. Although it will be hard to monitor the effect of changing the setting without getting an accurate vcore reading.

Your power consumption numbers are also way off, but that might be just another inaccurate reading from the board. My 7700k @5ghz pulls over 150w on p95 AVX small FFTs. I would run some benchmark and check that you are getting expected performance for a 5.2ghz 7700k.

Also maybe try HWInfo64 and see if it does any better with getting accurate data.


----------



## nonpolar

Right, but I'm saying that I think ASUS motherboards offer you to change both Vdrop and LLC, rather than EVGA, in which those are supposedly combined into one under Vdrop?


----------



## Scotty99

I still dont understand why people use LLC.

When i overclock i set my offset so it sits exactly where i want it to during load, there is none of this "voltage droop" i keep hearing people talk about. All llc does on my board is increase idle temps, as it narrows the gap between idle, and load volts.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nonpolar*
> 
> Right, but I'm saying that I think ASUS motherboards offer you to change both Vdrop and LLC, rather than EVGA, in which those are supposedly combined into one under Vdrop?


LL (load line) Is voltage droop. So load line calibration allows the adjustment of Vdroop. Your board has that adjustment.


----------



## cjm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nonpolar*
> 
> Right, but I'm saying that I think ASUS motherboards offer you to change both Vdrop and LLC, rather than EVGA, in which those are supposedly combined into one under Vdrop?


there is only 1 setting on ASUS also.


----------



## nonpolar

Ah, interesting. Thank you all. Aside from that one post from the EVGA forum, is this a one-off issue? Or are your guys' motherboards fine with reading out voltages?


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I still dont understand why people use LLC.
> 
> When i overclock i set my offset so it sits exactly where i want it to during load, there is none of this "voltage droop" i keep hearing people talk about. All llc does on my board is increase idle temps, as it narrows the gap between idle, and load volts.


Because LLC is a normal and necessary safety measure to prevent your CPU from killing itself under transient loading. Unless you can guarantee your board has a ridiculously fast voltage controller and your VRMs are running 1mhz+ switching frequencies. LLC is a good safety measure for most.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Because LLC is a normal and necessary safety measure to prevent your CPU from killing itself under transient loading. Unless you can guarantee your board has a ridiculously fast voltage controller and your VRMs are running 1mhz+ switching frequencies. LLC is a good safety measure for most.


Ive never heard of LLC being described this way, as a safety measure.

From what i understand it was introduced originally so when your CPU is under load the volts didnt drop (droop) from the setting you put in the bios.

Well for me when i overclock i use offset and multi, if i notice the volts are dropping any under a load scenario i simply up the offset one notch until it doesnt do that...

For me LLC makes no sense, all it does it increase my idle CPU volts and makes my idle temps higher.


----------



## Scotty99

Ya after a bit of googling not once did i see anything about a "safety measure" it was simply introduced at a time when adaptive voltage wasnt something people used when overclocking.

Old tech, no reason for it.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ive never heard of LLC being described this way, as a safety measure.
> 
> From what i understand it was introduced originally so when your CPU is under load the volts didnt drop (droop) from the setting you put in the bios.
> 
> Well for me when i overclock i use offset and multi, if i notice the volts are dropping any under a load scenario i simply up the offset one notch until it doesnt do that...
> 
> For me LLC makes no sense, all it does it increase my idle CPU volts and makes my idle temps higher.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8nFdFpuVBg

He gives you a pretty good explanation to what it is.

A lot of it makes more sense if you also have deeper understanding of how VRMs work

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDRHV3qtSWc


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nonpolar*
> 
> Ah, interesting. Thank you all. Aside from that one post from the EVGA forum, is this a one-off issue? Or are your guys' motherboards fine with reading out voltages?


My Gigabyte is perfect with reading voltages. Have you tried CPU-Z or HWiNFO64?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8nFdFpuVBg
> 
> He gives you a pretty good explanation to what it is.


Gonna be honest with ya, i dont care what that guy says.

I want you to explain why *you* think LLC is necessary when using a modern overclock with adaptive volts and P state or multiplier overclocking.

I actually made a thread on this a while back, and got no satisfactory responses.

Literally all it does is change where i need to put my offset to so my volts are where i want it under load. Its like two ways of getting to the same net result, and has a negative factor which is that it increases my idle cpu volts as well.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Gonna be honest with ya, i dont care what that guy says.
> 
> I want you to explain why *you* think LLC is necessary when using a modern overclock with adaptive volts and P state or multiplier overclocking.
> 
> I actually made a thread on this a while back, and got no satisfactory responses.
> 
> Literally all it does is change where i need to put my offset to so my volts are where i want it under load. Its like two ways of getting to the same net result, and has a negative factor in which is increases my idle cpu volts as well.


This stuff is happening faster than your software reading (or even some hardware probes) can tell you. The speeds that these transient loads + fluctuations are happening at can really only be caught with an Oscilloscope. The only reason you've gotten away with what your are doing is because your Motherboard has above average VRM + Voltage controller quality (and/or are extremely lucky) which is why you don't notice issues.

If your motherboard has exceptional regulation LLC does little, but saying LLC isn't necessary is not entirely correct as it IS very relevant for a lot of people.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> This stuff is happening faster than your software reading (or even some hardware probes) can tell you. The speeds that these transient loads + fluctuations are happening at can really only be caught with an Oscilloscope. The only reason you've gotten away with what your are doing is because your Motherboard has above average VRM + Voltage controller quality (and/or are extremely lucky) which is why you don't notice issues.
> 
> If your motherboard has exceptional regulation LLC does little, but saying LLC isn't necessary is not entirely correct as it IS very relevant for a lot of people.


I mean, the default setup for my board is LLC off.....i think a lot of boards are like that nowadays.

You are the first person ive ever heard say that this is a safety thing, google Load line calibration and its all articles from pre sandy bridge era when people were exclusively using fixed everything, and was introduced so voltage wasnt dropping under load.

Sorry, but your explanation is also not satisfactory for me.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya after a bit of googling not once did i see anything about a "safety measure" it was simply introduced at a time when adaptive voltage wasnt something people used when overclocking.
> 
> Old tech, no reason for it.


Load Line is set by Intel and AMD for Vcore overshoot with varying load. It is done to increase the longevity of the processor.

I use load line and my idle voltage has no load. I also use all the power saving features.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Load Line is set by Intel and AMD for Vcore overshoot with varying load. It is done to increase the longevity of the processor.
> 
> I use load line and my idle voltage has no load. I also use all the power saving features.


Let me give you a scenario:

LLC off:

.912v idle
1.376v load (does not fall under this number ever during load)

LLC medium (or whatever asrock calls it)
1.376v load (having to use a different offset number to get there)
1.2v idle

Now why exactly would i enable LLC if both of the above scenarios produce 1.376v under load with no vdroop, all i am getting with LLC enabled is higher idle volts and temps.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> This stuff is happening faster than your software reading (or even some hardware probes) can tell you. The speeds that these transient loads + fluctuations are happening at can really only be caught with an Oscilloscope. The only reason you've gotten away with what your are doing is because your Motherboard has above average VRM + Voltage controller quality (and/or are extremely lucky) which is why you don't notice issues.
> 
> If your motherboard has exceptional regulation LLC does little, but saying LLC isn't necessary is not entirely correct as it IS very relevant for a lot of people.
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, the default setup for my board is LLC off.....i think a lot of boards are like that nowadays.
> 
> You are the first person ive ever heard say that this is a safety thing, google Load line calibration and its all articles from pre sandy bridge era when people were exclusively using fixed everything, and was introduced so voltage wasnt dropping under load.
> 
> Sorry, but your explanation is also not satisfactory for me.
Click to expand...

Load Line has been around since the beginning. All boards default to load line set to intel's standard.

If you've ever overclocked a system, chances are that at some point or another you've had opportunity to become upset with your Vdroop "problem." Some users, confused as to why their system refuses to exactly match actual processor supply voltage to the value specified in BIOS, are quick to blame the quality their motherboard; still others find fault with the difference noted between their board's idle and full-load processor supply voltages. Actually, load line droop (Vdroop) is an inherent part of any Intel power delivery design specification and serves an important role in maintaining system stability. In most cases, comments regarding unacceptable power delivery performance are completely unfounded. To make matters worse, unjustified negative consumer perception surrounding this often misunderstood design feature eventually forced a few motherboard manufacturers to respond to enthusiasts' demands for action by adding an option in their BIOS that effectively disables this important function.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5


----------



## Scotty99

Actually no, not since pre sandy bridge has vdroop been a thing ive ever noticed.

Do you guys not use adaptive volts + clocks? When you do that, if you notice any sort of vdroop you simply tick up the offset so that doesnt happen...

That article is from two thousand SEVEN lol.

Again guys, to me this particular setting has no real value today with offset volts and clocks, until someone gives me a satisfactory response as to why im keeping it off.

Feel free to look at my example a page back and why i should be using LLC.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Load Line is set by Intel and AMD for Vcore overshoot with varying load. It is done to increase the longevity of the processor.
> 
> I use load line and my idle voltage has no load. I also use all the power saving features.
> 
> 
> 
> Let me give you a scenario:
> 
> LLC off:
> 
> .912v idle
> 1.376v load (does not fall under this number ever during load)
> 
> LLC medium (or whatever asrock calls it)
> 1.376v load (having to use a different offset number to get there)
> 1.2v idle
> 
> Now why exactly would i enable LLC if both of the above scenarios produce 1.376v under load with no vdroop, all i am getting with LLC enabled is higher idle volts and temps.
Click to expand...

When you turn the calibration of Load line is still there, my Gigabyte does the same with LLC on Auto using Dynamic DVID. When I use manual Vcore with LLC on Auto I can see the Vdroop.

Vcore AUTO, LLC AUTO, Prime95 v28.10 Min 1.200v, RealBench Min 1.164v, Web browsing Min 1.200 idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off Min 1.200v


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> *When you turn the calibration of Load line is still there*, my Gigabyte does the same with LLC on Auto using Dynamic DVID. When I use manual Vcore with LLC on Auto I can see the Vdroop.
> 
> Vcore AUTO, LLC AUTO, Prime95 v28.10 Min 1.200v, RealBench Min 1.164v, Web browsing Min 1.200 idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off Min 1.200v


Sorry can you try again in english lol.

Be honest with me here wingman, are you 100% sure why you enable LLC?

With LLC off (auto) i can run prime 95 for a year straight and it will never dip below 1.376v (as i set it to do this behavior with my offset...)


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I mean, the default setup for my board is LLC off.....i think a lot of boards are like that nowadays.
> 
> You are the first person ive ever heard say that this is a safety thing, google Load line calibration and its all articles from pre sandy bridge era when people were exclusively using fixed everything, and was introduced so voltage wasnt dropping under load.
> 
> Sorry, but your explanation is also not satisfactory for me.


Ahhh wait, my bad I was confusing Vdroop with LLC. Vdroop is the safety measure, LLC is the workaround.

Vdroop is normal, LLC counteracts Vdroop to prevent insufficient operational voltage. Zero LLC means max Intel rated Vdroop which can cause instability at transient loads. So your method applies a higher offset across the board so that the Vdroop doesn't destabilise the core. OK that makes sense now.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Actually no, not since pre sandy bridge has vdroop been a thing ive ever noticed.
> 
> Do you guys not use adaptive volts + clocks? When you do that, if you notice any sort of vdroop you simply tick up the offset so that doesnt happen...
> 
> That article is from two thousand SEVEN lol.
> 
> Again guys, to me this particular setting has no real value today with offset volts and clocks, until someone gives me a satisfactory response as to why im keeping it off.
> 
> Feel free to look at my example a page back and why i should be using LLC.


Yes it is from 2007 and the only thing that is changed is there is Load line (calibration) on a lot of motherboards and mine still only has the 2007 option of off = High, auto = standard.

So when I set mine to High the only option I have, it sets my Vcore to the same as load with manual voltage settings.

From my manual.


----------



## Scotty99

Right thats why it was introduced.

The thing is, i dont have any vdroop, neither would anyone if they set their offset to where they want it during load.

Again, i see no reason for LLC, literally all it does for me is increase idle volts and temps.

I know for sure this setting is misunderstood by many on here, because i was confused by it. To me its something thats still in the bios in case people decide to use fixed volts for overclocking, and it isnt loading exactly to where they set CPU volts in the bios.

For everyone else you just raise offset until it sits where you want it under load.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Ahhh wait, my bad I was confusing Vdroop with LLC.
> 
> Vdroop is normal, LLC counteracts Vdroop to prevent insufficient operational voltage. Zero LLC means max Intel rated Vdroop which can cause instability at transient loads. So your method applies a higher offset across the board so that the Vdroop doesn't destabilise the core. OK that makes sense now.


Exactly, and this is how it should be imo.

Why would you want 1.2idle volts when you can be stable with much lower?

All LLC effectively does is narrow the gap between idle and load voltages, for no apparent advantage.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> *When you turn the calibration of Load line is still there*, my Gigabyte does the same with LLC on Auto using Dynamic DVID. When I use manual Vcore with LLC on Auto I can see the Vdroop.
> 
> Vcore AUTO, LLC AUTO, Prime95 v28.10 Min 1.200v, RealBench Min 1.164v, Web browsing Min 1.200 idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off Min 1.200v
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry can you try again in english lol.
> 
> Be honest with me here wingman, are you 100% sure why you enable LLC?
> 
> With LLC off (auto) i can run prime 95 for a year straight and it will never dip below 1.376v (as i set it to do this behavior with my offset...)
Click to expand...

What is your idle voltage with all power saving features off?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is your idle voltage with all power saving features off?


No idea, why would i ever turn those off lol?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is your idle voltage with all power saving features off?
> 
> 
> 
> No idea, why would i ever turn those off lol?
Click to expand...

I disable and enable things to see what they do, that is why.
if you don't try turning off the powersavings features you can't see the Vdroop because of the idle voltage.

Like I said before, when we use VID offset overclocking there is minimum Vdroop with LLC on Auto. I just tested all configurations and when using DVID or manual voltage with LLC on High my Vdroop under load is 0.012v, so it is exactly the same.

From what I can tell when using VID offset, leave LLC on auto it is made for manual voltage not DVID/offset.

For 4.6GHz I run Vcore AUTO, LLC AUTO, Prime95 v28.10 Min 1.200v, RealBench Min 1.164v, Web browsing Min 1.200 idle ~ 1.032-0.132, idle power saving features off Min 1.200v.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Let me give you a scenario:
> 
> LLC off:
> 
> .912v idle
> 1.376v load (does not fall under this number ever during load)
> 
> LLC medium (or whatever asrock calls it)
> 1.376v load (having to use a different offset number to get there)
> 1.2v idle
> 
> Now why exactly would i enable LLC if both of the above scenarios produce 1.376v under load with no vdroop, all i am getting with LLC enabled is higher idle volts and temps.


I've skimmed the Actually Hardcore Overclocking channel videos on vrms but it doesn't really address what Scotty was saying.

Okay, you increase LLC, relying on motherboard vrms to better handle the transient load. Great, so... what does that mean in practice? Theory is just theory.

We want to use the easiest to understand language here... We've been around this subject multiple times and it never seems to get anywhere.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I've skimmed the Actually Hardcore Overclocking channel videos on vrms but it doesn't really address what Scotty was saying.
> 
> Okay, you increase LLC, relying on motherboard vrms to better handle the transient load. Great, so... what does that mean in practice? Theory is just theory.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Exactly, and this is how it should be imo.
> 
> Why would you want 1.2idle volts when you can be stable with much lower?
> 
> All LLC effectively does is narrow the gap between idle and load voltages, for no apparent advantage.


It basically means you will have less chance that Vdroop will cause transient instability on your OC. LLC raises the vdroop floor to maximise stability at the expense of voltage overshoot risk. Fast VRMs mitigate the voltage droop and overshoot risk at the expense of low efficiency.

Though if the mobo has decent voltage regulation, as scotty has done, raising the offset should have a similar effect to LLC.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> It basically means you will have less chance that Vdroop will cause transient instability on your OC. LLC raises the vdroop floor to maximise stability at the expense of voltage overshoot risk. Fast VRMs mitigate the viltage droop and overshoot risk at the expense of low efficiency.


Okay, I got part of that in the past but I think this one sentence sums it up better. So there are tradeoffs either way.

You think the typical idea of changing LLC such that load voltage is equal to bios voltage makes sense? I don't know exactly how well the vrms on my motherboard operate, and even if I had numbers it would be tough to figure out when the tradeoff for transient instability and voltage overshoot is worth it. So it seems higher LLC will increase overclocking stability at the expense of possibly CPU life. And the reason for it goes beyond just 'with LLC my vcore under load is higher as read in HWinfo'.

But so, how does overshoot risk compare with LLC vs simply jacking up vcore? Is that just dependent on vrm switching speed, etc? I thought either way vrms are going to do their job, so if I reach 1.4v via hefty LLC or 1.4v via jacking up Vcore with no LLC, the overshoot risk would be the same. But it feels like it's not (for example, Asus bios mentions high LLC or faster switching speed might benefit from airflow over vrms).

It seems complicated by the fact that software voltage readings are not as good as hardware voltage readings... IIRC (and I may not), a guy started measuring voltage and as LLC was applied the software vs hardware measured voltage started to be more different.

I don't know how confusing this is for most people, but this particular topic always confused me. Maybe because I have no electrical engineering background.



??

BTW, it's transient load right... So it's load that comes and goes. Are we talking about overshoot/undershoot being something that only occurs when the workload is not steady? If I'm having a steady 100% load that is consistent, does that mean I really only deal with the issue of overshoot or undershoot at the start or end of the workload?


----------



## Kalpa

Oh boy an LLC discussion.

For practical overclocking needs, here's my tip: go with whatever LLC setting that gives you the lowest voltage during stresstest you can keep the system stable at. Idle voltage is frankly rather unimportant.

As a case and point I'm currently running my system at 4.6GHz / ~1.16V during load, by using LLC setting of "standard" (which may or may not be following Intel spec, gigabyte BIOS settings are always such a mystery) - using either of the other two LLC settings (Auto, High) I'm unable to get the system stable without load voltages of ~1.2V or thereabouts.

Sure with standard LLC my idle voltage hovers around 1.24V, but I couldn't care less about that. It's the voltage under load that interests me.

Of course if your idle voltages are skyrocketing "dangerously high" (say 1.6V idle with some silly 150mV Vdroop putting you in 1.45V during load) this basic rule might not be worth adhering to...


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Load Line is set by Intel and AMD for Vcore overshoot with varying load. It is done to increase the longevity of the processor.
> 
> I use load line and my idle voltage has no load. I also use all the power saving features.
> 
> 
> 
> Let me give you a scenario:
> 
> LLC off:
> 
> .912v idle
> 1.376v load (does not fall under this number ever during load)
> 
> LLC medium (or whatever asrock calls it)
> 1.376v load (having to use a different offset number to get there)
> 1.2v idle
> 
> Now why exactly would i enable LLC if both of the above scenarios produce 1.376v under load with no vdroop, all i am getting with LLC enabled is higher idle volts and temps.
Click to expand...

Is it possible your software reading is wrong? Or is it possible your BIOS or MoBo is bugged? I have a Z270 Taichi, with my offset and LLC set to 1(which is the highest setting for ASRock), my max voltage is 1.396, with idle BELOW .90. I am using all power saving options, except ISS.

What I have found with my first ASRock board, is using the same offset, with different LLC settings, yields a higher maximum vcore, variance based on higher or lower LLC setting.


----------



## nonpolar

Was able to pass an overnight test of Realbench at 5.2GHz, 1.425V









My only concern is that I have no idea what the voltage readout throughout the stress test was, since either the software or motherboard is giving me false readouts. I tried updating the BIOS, taking out and putting back in the CMOS battery, using different softwares.... All to no avail. All I did before OC'ing was set the RAM settings to stock, and changed the multiplier and voltage levels to 52 and 1.425V respectively. Anything I should be worried about here? I'm thinking that LLC may have caused the voltage to be bumped up to 1.44-1.45 without my knowing, and I don't know how to change that in the BIOS.


----------



## BoredErica

Just to put this out there: I ran 5.1969ghz at 1.4v at the start of Kaby Lake, and past few months I had to run at 5.1 at 1.376v. I passed 12hr, and now at the old settings I can't pass 1 loop. And I have noticed this kind of behavior with Haswell and Skylake. Honestly I don't know how other people are running their chips and not 'degrading' at all whatsoever.

I loaded up my CPU far more with Haswell (and to some extent Skylake), but it still happened here.

Is it 'degradation' which progressively gets worse if left at the same voltage, or is it more akin to 'break in'? Hmm.

Other note: Debauer noted that having CPU current set to 100% instead of 140% on Asus mobos can cause throttling on x299 when running Prime. Obviously this is not x299 and we're dealing with now, very different platforms. But it's something I thought I would bring up.

Am I late to the party here? SVID screws up CPU package power reading in HWinfo.

At any rate, I will chart soon.









Happy overclocking.


----------



## nonpolar

Could it be a BIOS update since then? Different PSU? Not really sure - I have a friend who has OC'ed his 2500K since the day he bought it, and he hasn't had a need to change his voltage at all.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nonpolar*
> 
> Could it be a BIOS update since then? Different PSU? Not really sure - I have a friend who has OC'ed his 2500K since the day he bought it, and he hasn't had a need to change his voltage at all.


PSU has stayed the same. It's hard for me to keep track of when I updated my bios updates. But then it would be funny for bios updates to decrease my overclocking potential over 3 generations (which would be an epic fail on MSI and Asus' part).

When it comes to ram overclocking I have not noticed their overclocking abilities diminished through bios updates. Not that's serious evidence for anything though.

Maybe noteworthy: With all of my chips I set it to very high voltages for short periods of time for benching purposes (5.35ghz 1.52v). And it undergoes 95C temps for short periods of time (never more than an hour, for example). But past testing that's pretty much it.


----------



## nonpolar

That's a bummer, but a good thing to note at least. I will then probably go about the route of overclocking it 5.0GHz. That will at least keep the voltages at around 1.31-1.32V. Would like to see other people's input on this topic, especially with Skylake


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nonpolar*
> 
> That's a bummer, but a good thing to note at least. I will then probably go about the route of overclocking it 5.0GHz. That will at least keep the voltages at around 1.31-1.32V. Would like to see other people's input on this topic, especially with Skylake


Yeah. Unfortunately I expect people to speak up less when their overclocks have a problem than the other way around. It's human nature, and I it's not really me talking down anyone... It's hard for me to connect with the fact that my chips have acted this way for years now, and even I dragged my feet to report this here.

Also, in my experience after 'degradation' from a higher voltage and lowering a little bit, I have never noticed further 'degradation' since. Now, I don't keep my CPUs around for more than 2-3 years, so I'm not around 5-7 years later to see what happens. But it's not a cascading fall into the ground. It holds steady at the newer settings as far as I could tell.

For example based on past behavior I don't expect my 5.1ghz overclock to become unstable, at least before I get a new chip. But those are just my experiences.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Just to put this out there: I ran 5.1969ghz at 1.4v at the start of Kaby Lake, and past few months I had to run at 5.1 at 1.376v. I passed 12hr, and now at the old settings I can't pass 1 loop. And I have noticed this kind of behavior with Haswell and Skylake. Honestly I don't know how other people are running their chips and not 'degrading' at all whatsoever.
> 
> I loaded up my CPU far more with Haswell (and to some extent Skylake), but it still happened here.
> 
> Is it 'degradation' which progressively gets worse if left at the same voltage, or is it more akin to 'break in'? Hmm.
> 
> Other note: Debauer noted that having CPU current set to 100% instead of 140% on Asus mobos can cause throttling on x299 when running Prime. Obviously this is not x299 and we're dealing with now, very different platforms. But it's something I thought I would bring up.
> 
> Am I late to the party here? SVID screws up CPU package power reading in HWinfo.
> 
> At any rate, I will chart soon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy overclocking.


I mean, it's possible you're experiencing degradation of the VRM, but I doubt the processor. Here's the thing that I've found about your question. Most people spend a bit of time, up front, getting the easiest possible max safe/stable OC. After all of their testing yields a positive affect, they are done benching, forever. They will never use the same power levels with everyday use and gaming. That being said, even if there is degradation of the chip or VRM, they may never notice it.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I mean, it's possible you're experiencing degradation of the VRM, but I doubt the processor. Here's the thing that I've found about your question. Most people spend a bit of time, up front, getting the easiest possible max safe/stable OC. After all of their testing yields a positive affect, they are done benching, forever. They will never use the same power levels with everyday use and gaming. That being said, even if there is degradation of the chip or VRM, they may never notice it.


For example my own thread suggests 1.4v is okayish. So I ran with my own advice. Actually benching and testing is pretty rare on my part. I only re-ran x264 once I crashed in Premiere and chess. Those are 100% loads, but still nothing like Prime95.

How would I go about figuring out of the VRM is degraded? Unfortunately I don't have another z170/270 board to test with, I thought the power delivery demands of Skylake and Kaby Lake are lower than ever, and the airflow to my case is still good (Air 540).

For benching at 1.5v, that was a one time deal. (Not sure if that was clear, so I'll say it here to prevent confusion.)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nonpolar*
> 
> Right, but I'm saying that I think ASUS motherboards offer you to change both Vdrop and LLC, rather than EVGA, in which those are supposedly combined into one under Vdrop?


Vdrop is the voltage loss due to trace impedance and trace path/length. It is completely unrelated to Load Line Compensation and vdroop. Vdroop is incorporated into voltage-clamped power rails to mitigate "clamp" over and under shoot that will occur when the load (=current) on that rail changes (this is not the dynamic voltage change you see with adaptive or offset voltage). Over and under shoot specs are described in the Intel product specifications.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Gonna be honest with ya, i dont care what that guy says.
> I want you to explain why *you* think LLC is necessary when using a modern overclock with adaptive volts and P state or multiplier overclocking.
> I actually made a thread on this a while back, and got no satisfactory responses.
> Literally all it does is change where i need to put my offset to so my volts are where i want it under load. Its like two ways of getting to the same net result, and has a negative factor which is that it increases my idle cpu volts as well.


It is not _necessary_, but can be advantageous. For example, when benching, if your system bugs-out at the end of a high current run, this is usually from load line undershoot.. you can fix this by either raising the vcore with the same droop, or decrease the amount of droop. Old LLc just added vcore (as introduced on socket 775), modern LLC works a little different. The other side of the swing can really only be seen with an 10micro sec scope, and ideally while using Intel's socket tool. Transient load line overshoot is where INtel is pretty specific with regard to the mV "excusion" the board should control to. (for a 7700k at stock it's ~ 50mV). Basically the short story is.. vdroop is your friend. Use it wisely.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Let me give you a scenario:
> 
> LLC off:
> 
> .912v idle
> 1.376v load (does not fall under this number ever during load)
> 
> LLC medium (or whatever asrock calls it)
> 1.376v load (having to use a different offset number to get there)
> 1.2v idle
> 
> Now why exactly would i enable LLC if both of the above scenarios produce 1.376v under load with no vdroop, all i am getting with LLC enabled is higher idle volts and temps.


Just be aware that the without compensation, the overshoot will be as much as 200mV above your load value. Running a high Idle vcore that droops under high-current load is "normal".

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Just to put this out there: I ran 5.1969ghz at 1.4v at the start of Kaby Lake, and past few months I had to run at 5.1 at 1.376v. I passed 12hr, and now at the old settings I can't pass 1 loop. And I have noticed this kind of behavior with Haswell and Skylake. *Honestly I don't know how other people are running their chips and not 'degrading' at all whatsoever.*
> I loaded up my CPU far more with Haswell (and to some extent Skylake), but it still happened here.
> Is it 'degradation' which progressively gets worse if left at the same voltage, or is it more akin to 'break in'? Hmm.
> Other note: Debauer noted that having CPU current set to 100% instead of 140% on Asus mobos can cause throttling on x299 when running Prime. Obviously this is not x299 and we're dealing with now, very different platforms. But it's something I thought I would bring up.
> *Am I late to the party here? SVID screws up CPU package power reading in HWinfo.
> *
> At any rate, I will chart soon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy overclocking.


What LLC were y9ou using for [email protected], then [email protected] and now? it's all that small FFT stuff you do









Just leave SVID on Auto - should work fine (at least with aid64)
edit: very doubtful the vrm has degraded.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I mean, it's possible you're experiencing degradation of the VRM, but I doubt the processor. Here's the thing that I've found about your question. Most people spend a bit of time, up front, getting the easiest possible max safe/stable OC. After all of their testing yields a positive affect, they are done benching, forever. They will never use the same power levels with everyday use and gaming. That being said, even if there is degradation of the chip or VRM, they may never notice it.
> 
> 
> 
> For example my own thread suggests 1.4v is okayish. So I ran with my own advice. Actually benching and testing is pretty rare on my part. I only re-ran x264 once I crashed in Premiere and chess. Those are 100% loads, but still nothing like Prime95.
> 
> How would I go about figuring out of the VRM is degraded? Unfortunately I don't have another z170/270 board to test with, I thought the power delivery demands of Skylake and Kaby Lake are lower than ever, and the airflow to my case is still good (Air 540).
> 
> For benching at 1.5v, that was a one time deal. (Not sure if that was clear, so I'll say it here to prevent confusion.)
Click to expand...

I've no good advice on how to test the VRM other than a board swap.

With what you're saying about testing, is it possible your clock wasn't actually stable. Everyone gets on my ass about running P95 or OCCT overnight, but it's never let me down. I have never had to go back and adjust after I've solidified my clocks.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> What LLC were y9ou using for [email protected], then [email protected] and now?
> 
> Just leave SVID on Auto - should work fine (at least with aid64)
> edit: very doubtful the vrm has degraded.


LLC has always been level 3 on Kaby Lake. It has always been level 5 on Skylake. Haswell is too far back, I'm not sure what I did there. On Kaby Lake I estimate that I did about 10-24 hours of high stress load (Prime, OCCT, Linpack) total in its lifespan so far. That's a figure many people hit simply stress testing their system.

Oh, to be clear: Still 5.1 @ 1.376v going strong.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if your system bugs-out at the end of a high current run, this is usually from load line undershoot.. you can fix this by either raising the vcore with the same droop, or decrease the amount of droop.
> Personally I don't recall that kind of thing ever happening to me. And on the matter of higher idle vcore, I don't think that really matters at all... even living in a place where electricity is expensive (me).
> 
> If we're just talking about crashing with a load starting or ending, then hell, I'll just run no LLC/bare minimum LLC. So... is my picture correct then? I find it to be a handy dandy way to approach the LLC topic. Too much abstract text sometimes. Nothing like a picture to fix that.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I've no good advice on how to test the VRM other than a board swap.
> 
> With what you're saying about testing, is it possible your clock wasn't actually stable. Everyone gets on my ass about running P95 or OCCT overnight, but it's never let me down. I have never had to go back and adjust after I've solidified my clocks.


But we're talking pass 9 hours vs fail 10 minutes. Or fail 5 minutes. The difference here is too great. I'd expect to pass 9-12 hours again with 5-10 tries and I really do not see that happening. I don't think this is sporadic behavior, this was consistently passing many hours, and now consistently failing <15 min.

I don't really see people getting on other people's case for using too stringent of a test... I see it going the other way.

OKAY I'M DONE EDITING MY POST!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> LLC has always been level 3 on Kaby Lake. It has always been level 5 on Skylake. Haswell is too far back, I'm not sure what I did there. On Kaby Lake I estimate that I did about 10-24 hours of high stress load (Prime, OCCT, Linpack) total in its lifespan so far. That's a figure many people hit simply stress testing their system.
> 
> *Oh, to be clear: Still 5.1 @ 1.376v going strong.
> *
> But we're talking pass 9 hours vs fail 10 minutes. Or fail 5 minutes. The difference here is too great. I'd expect to pass 9-12 hours again with 5-10 tries and I really do not see that happening. I don't think this is sporadic behavior, this was consistently passing many hours, and now consistently failing <15 min.
> I don't really see people getting on other people's case for using too stringent of a test... I see it going the other way.
> OKAY I'M DONE EDITING MY POST!


you are correct - a higher idle vcore has little to no impact on electricity use, since there is near zero current flow at idle. you pay for watts, not volts. And yes, things do get confusing when talking LLC since each MB vendor treats this differently... best to talk in terms of how much vdroop the settings allow. So for example on 6 1151 processors and 3 1155 processors (all still running) each is set to at least 50mV vdroop for their 24/7 overclocks. Whether manual or dynamic vcore.
When using adaptive or offset, just set windows power plan to High and note the idle vcore... then load vcore. This gives you the vdroop in that configuration.
And.. lastly, just my observations over the years.. "stringent" stress testing degrades CPUs. May not be seen immediately (that's called damage) but will show up in a shorter time frame than more rational stability testing. Sure, you need to have a stability regime that reflects the use scenario. But IMO, many hours of p95 is a use scenario that very, very few users have, and certainly has nothing to do with gaming rig performance or stability. I stopped using that dinosaur long ago and have never, ever experienced a 101 or 124 bsod due to insufficient vcore unless I asked for it (serious benchmarking). Just my









the analogy is: I can't drive my car above the speed limit unless I run the motor for hours at redline.

these are from long ago, but tell the story nicely. Here "offset" = MB LLC effect.


lastly, we discussed this in the last few years:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1510001/asus-rampage-v-extreme-owners-thread/2000_20#post_23088546
http://www.overclock.net/t/1510001/asus-rampage-v-extreme-owners-thread/2020_20#post_23088741
http://www.overclock.net/t/1510001/asus-rampage-v-extreme-owners-thread/2020_20#post_23089414

and the near-by reading. Both Praz and Raja have posted load line traces with the appropriate equipment attached to ASUS boards.


----------



## Kalpa

I'm confident my system could give you a pass on overnight, or heck even 24 hours of prime95/videocard/memtest torture but I'm not confident it won't pop out another bluescreen two weeks from now while running my AFK workload ([email protected] + Cookie clicker on Firefox + Realm Grinder standalone)

There's always a limit for synthetic stability testing, at some point you just have to cross your fingers, proclaim stability and start with the real workload.

(That said I am an advocate for overnight stress run, it really eliminates a lot of the uncertainty)


----------



## coc_james

@Darkwizzie

Okay, I understand now. I doubbt it's the chip. Could be, but I doubt it. First I would try a different PSU. Problem with a bad board is its hard to tell without a doner. I know you probably have, but have you reset everything else and just tried your CPU OC, without overclocking the RAM?


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you are correct - a higher idle vcore has little to no impact on electricity use, since there is near zero current flow at idle. you pay for watts, not volts. And yes, things do get confusing when talking LLC since each MB vendor treats this differently... best to talk in terms of how much vdroop the settings allow. So for example on 6 1151 processors and 3 1155 processors (all still running) each is set to at least 50mV vdroop for their 24/7 overclocks. Whether manual or dynamic vcore.


Forgot to mention: My Skylake and Kaby Lake boards are one in the same... z170 Hero. For Haswell I used an MSI board.

So right now in bios I am at 1.4v LLC 3, 1.376v under normal 100% load (no Prime etc). And for Skylake LLC 5 was like 1.41/1.408 bios vcore vs vcore read under load.

Maybe I can dig that post up, the guy who did hardware readings of vcore with various levels of llc. I thought it showed that software readings drifted from actual vcore with llc turned on. But maybe that's just my bad memory talking.



> When using adaptive or offset, just set windows power plan to High and note the idle vcore... then load vcore. This gives you the vdroop in that configuration.
> And.. lastly, just my observations over the years.. "stringent" stress testing degrades CPUs. May not be seen immediately (that's called damage) but will show up in a shorter time frame than more rational stability testing. Sure, you need to have a stability regime that reflects the use scenario. But IMO, many hours of p95 is a use scenario that very, very few users have, and certainly has nothing to do with gaming rig performance or stability. I stopped using that dinosaur long ago and have never, ever experienced a 101 or 124 bsod due to insufficient vcore unless I asked for it (serious benchmarking). Just my


I do want to run thermal testing/etc for my threads though.









But yeah, doing benchmark runs and doing thermal testing (which takes a while for temps to even out and then for every single stress test) was something I did for all 3 chips (Haswell, Skylake, Kaby Lake). That, or I'm screwing up somewhere else apparently.



> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Okay, I understand now. I doubbt it's the chip. Could be, but I doubt it. First I would try a different PSU. Problem with a bad board is its hard to tell without a doner. I know you probably have, but have you reset everything else and just tried your CPU OC, without overclocking the RAM?


Yup. As for PSU, I may get that opportunity at the end of the year. The fan in my PSU sqeaks sometimes. It's not a big deal, but no use paying so much for a custom loop and having the PSU now be relatively loud.

But as for mobo, I can't think of where I would go to borrow a z170/270 mobo.



> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> I'm confident my system could give you a pass on overnight, or heck even 24 hours of prime95/videocard/memtest torture but I'm not confident it won't pop out another bluescreen two weeks from now while running my AFK workload ([email protected] + Cookie clicker on Firefox + Realm Grinder standalone)
> 
> There's always a limit for synthetic stability testing, at some point you just have to cross your fingers, proclaim stability and start with the real workload.
> 
> (That said I am an advocate for overnight stress run, it really eliminates a lot of the uncertainty)


Yeah... it's really hard to do any sort of rigorous long term testing as I'm sure everyone is aware.


----------



## coc_james

@Darkwizzie

Is your base/stock Vcore higher than it was when you first got it? If so, then I'd say it's the CPU. If it's the same, probably PSU, or MoBo.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> @Darkwizzie
> 
> Is your base Vcore higher than it was when you first got it? If so, then I'd say it's the CPU. If it's the same, probably PSU, or MoBo.


If by base vcore you mean vcore entered into bios, then no. It was 1.41v IIRC from the start... at most 1.42v.

Old:

5.2ghz 1.41v -> 1.392v

Then one day realized I wasn't stable, then I changed to new settings:

New:

5.1ghz 1.4v -> 1.376v

I lowered the multiplier so I wouldn't need to raise voltages anymore. But increasing LLC or voltage does help stabilize 5.2... I just hadn't bothered to figure out what voltage when I'm not going to run it long term anyways.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> @Darkwizzie
> 
> Is your base Vcore higher than it was when you first got it? If so, then I'd say it's the CPU. If it's the same, probably PSU, or MoBo.
> 
> 
> 
> If by base vcore you mean vcore entered into bios, then no. It was 1.41v IIRC from the start... at most 1.42v.
> 
> Old:
> 5.2ghz 1.41v -> 1.392v
> 
> Then one day realized I wasn't stable, then I changed to new settings:
> 
> New:
> 5.1ghz 1.4v -> 1.376v
> 
> I lowered the multiplier so I wouldn't need to raise voltages anymore. But increasing LLC or voltage does help stabilize 5.2... I just hadn't bothered to figure out what voltage when I'm not going to run it long term anyways.
Click to expand...

No, stock everything, with factory vcore. Do you know if your CPU has a higher stock Vcore now, than it did when it was new? I'm sure you did baseline testing when it was new?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> No, stock everything, with factory vcore. Do you know if your CPU has a higher stock Vcore now, than it did when it was new? I'm sure you did baseline testing when it was new?


Nope, never bothered. Never cared much for stock vcore.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Just to put this out there: I ran 5.1969ghz at 1.4v at the start of Kaby Lake, and past few months I had to run at 5.1 at 1.376v. I passed 12hr, and now at the old settings I can't pass 1 loop. And I have noticed this kind of behavior with Haswell and Skylake. Honestly I don't know how other people are running their chips and not 'degrading' at all whatsoever.
> 
> I loaded up my CPU far more with Haswell (and to some extent Skylake), but it still happened here.
> 
> Is it 'degradation' which progressively gets worse if left at the same voltage, or is it more akin to 'break in'? Hmm.
> 
> Other note: Debauer noted that having CPU current set to 100% instead of 140% on Asus mobos can cause throttling on x299 when running Prime. Obviously this is not x299 and we're dealing with now, very different platforms. But it's something I thought I would bring up.
> 
> Am I late to the party here? SVID screws up CPU package power reading in HWinfo.
> 
> At any rate, I will chart soon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy overclocking.


Probably more likely because they don't retest after the initial stability break-in.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Is it possible your software reading is wrong? Or is it possible your BIOS or MoBo is bugged? I have a Z270 Taichi, with my offset and LLC set to 1(which is the highest setting for ASRock), my max voltage is 1.396, with idle BELOW .90. I am using all power saving options, except ISS.
> 
> What I have found with my first ASRock board, is using the same offset, with different LLC settings, yields a higher maximum vcore, variance based on higher or lower LLC setting.


Nope, using any of the LLC setting from low (5) to high (2) my idle volts increase. Only when i have it disabled (auto, or 1) do my idle volts drop to the ~.912 number that resembles an out of the box (stock) idle voltage.

BTW this is on ryzen, but LLC should be universal. I just havent seen a good argument yet for enabling it when using offset volts and clocks.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Load Line is set by Intel and AMD for Vcore overshoot with varying load. It is done to increase the longevity of the processor.
> 
> I use load line and my idle voltage has no load. I also use all the power saving features.
> 
> 
> 
> Let me give you a scenario:
> 
> LLC off:
> 
> .912v idle
> 1.376v load (does not fall under this number ever during load)
> 
> LLC medium (or whatever asrock calls it)
> 1.376v load (having to use a different offset number to get there)
> 1.2v idle
> 
> Now why exactly would i enable LLC if both of the above scenarios produce 1.376v under load with no vdroop, all i am getting with LLC enabled is higher idle volts and temps.
Click to expand...

Does your motherboard say LLC off and what motherboard do you have? I have not seen that setting term since 2007 when Asus was the first to make the option to disable Intel's load line.


----------



## Scotty99

I also seen people talk about overshoot.....i dont have that lol. I set my offset so under load my CPU is getting 1.376v, it does not go above or below that number. I can run prime for as long as i would like, it does not fluctuate in the slightest.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I also seen people talk about overshoot.....i dont have that lol. I set my offset so under load my CPU is getting 1.376v, it does not go above or below that number. I can run prime for as long as i would like, it does not fluctuate in the slightest.


One more time... Erm... you will not _see_ any overshoot with the equipment you are looking for it with.








same on ryzen. SKL and Kaby LLC acts on vcore, HWE and BWE, LLC acts on VCCIN, not vcore.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Does your motherboard say LLC off and what motherboard do you have? I have not seen that setting term since 2007 when Asus was the first to make the option to disable Intel's load line.


There are 5 "levels" that my bios calls, 1 (or auto) is disabled. 5 i assume would be low, and 2 would be high.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> One more time... Erm... you will not _see_ any overshoot with the equipment you are looking for it with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> same on ryzen. SKL and Kaby LLC acts on vcore, HWE and BWE, LLC acts on VCCIN, not vcore.


So to tell these slight differences i would need a multimeter?

Guess im not 100% sure what you are saying.

All i know is when i tested this the only actual differences i could see between LLC on and LLC off is with it on (levels 2-5) all that happened was my idle voltage rose up, and that i had to put a different offset to get to the 1.376v i wanted for my 3.9ghz overclock.

Again i am not claiming i 100% know what im talking about, im looking for good reasoning as to why i should do LLC 2-5 compared to what i have it set to now, which is 1 or disabled.


----------



## Scotty99

This is what LLC looks like in my bios (not same board, but looks same):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjGWqTFultI#t=15m34s

You can just pause to see.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Does your motherboard say LLC off and what motherboard do you have? I have not seen that setting term since 2007 when Asus was the first to make the option to disable Intel's load line.
> 
> 
> 
> There are 5 "levels" that my bios calls, 1 (or auto) is disabled. 5 i assume would be low, and 2 would be high.
Click to expand...

I looked at the Video and what you are saying. When you have load line calibration on AUTO it is actually fully on, you just cant see the vdroop from using the powersaving features.
Load line is a specification that Intel added and it runs fully on Auto. Load line "calibration", the motherboard manufactures added calibration part of it.

When you run prime95 blend does the voltage go high and low? like mine is 1.212v to 1.260v running prime95 v28.10 Blend with Auto LLC.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I looked at the Video and what you are saying. When you have load line calibration on AUTO it is actually fully on, you just cant see the vdroop from using the powersaving features.
> Load line is a specification that Intel added and it runs fully on Auto. Load line "calibration", the motherboard manufactures added calibration part of it.
> 
> When you run prime95 blend does the voltage go high and low? like mine is 1.212v to 1.260v running prime95 v28.10 Blend with Auto LLC.


Nope, 1.376v whole time. Any stress test acts this way, during gaming it goes to 1.328 or 1.344 as the CPU does not need as much volts.

I still dont see a reason to use levels 2-5 lol. My CPU temps and VRM are well withing safe margins.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Does your motherboard say LLC off and what motherboard do you have? I have not seen that setting term since 2007 when Asus was the first to make the option to disable Intel's load line.
> 
> 
> 
> There are 5 "levels" that my bios calls, 1 (or auto) is disabled. 5 i assume would be low, and 2 would be high.
Click to expand...

Actually the way I understand and testing yields the same, is 1 off, but is is highest and 5 is lowest.


----------



## cjm

Very clear from the screenshot, level 1 is the most aggressive LLC, meaning it is the furthest from intel spec.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cjm*
> 
> Very clear from the screenshot, level 1 is the most aggressive LLC, meaning it is the furthest from intel spec.


Yet that is the bios default setting...

I just dont see a reason not to use it (or a reason to use 2-5), it produces exactly what i would expect from an overclock using adaptive volts and clocks. Low idle volts, and load volts that dont jump around when a stress test is going.

Again not trying to come off as a know it all, i am simply looking for a logically formed explanation of why using the auto setting is bad.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> There are 5 "levels" that my bios calls, 1 (or auto) is disabled. 5 i assume would be low, and 2 would be high.


on asrock, low numbers = little vdroop, high # = max (stock) vdoop (opposite to ASUS). Use 3 until you get familiar with it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> So to tell these slight differences i would need a multimeter?
> 
> Guess im not 100% sure what you are saying.
> 
> All i know is when i tested this the only actual differences i could see between LLC on and LLC off is with it on (levels 2-5) all that happened was my idle voltage rose up, and that i had to put a different offset to get to the 1.376v i wanted for my 3.9ghz overclock.
> 
> Again i am not claiming i 100% know what im talking about, im looking for good reasoning as to why i should do LLC 2-5 compared to what i have it set to now, which is 1 or disabled.


They are not necessarily "slight", only fast and a DMM (digital multimeter) will not show the transient spikes (too slow response) - only a fast (micro sec) oscilloscope can show the load-changed induced voltage over/under shoot. But, I'm sure the rig is fine with Auto LLC (expect no vdroop)









did you read this posts and the links? http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/3460_20#post_26207902


----------



## cjm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yet that is the bios default setting...
> 
> I just dont see a reason not to use it (or a reason to use 2-5), it produces exactly what i would expect from an overclock using adaptive volts and clocks. Low idle volts, and load volts that dont jump around when a stress test is going.
> 
> Again not trying to come off as a know it all, i am simply looking for a logically formed explanation of why using the auto setting is bad.


the shortest possible explanation of why you might not want to use it is because it completely eliminates the protection against voltage overshoot that intel designed into the spec for the CPU. it has little to do with idle voltage or the fact that you can see some change during a test. It has to do with how a VRM works, and what happens when your CPU transitions from a state where it is drawing small amounts of power, to one where it needs large amounts.

the video that was posted a few pages back is a good technical explanation if you really want the details.


----------



## Scotty99

I am actually slightly mistaken, i just went and reset my bios to default, what happens when i change my volt mode to offset it automatically changed LLC to level 1 (highest LLC).

So i wasnt running (auto) but level 1. I have no idea what auto setting is because i have only ever used offset volts.

So my comments regarding the auto behavior (which i like) is achieved with level 1 (highest LLC). Is there a negative to using the highest lvl of LLC, which is what it defaults to when settings volts to offset?. The only reason i really care about any of this is i dont like that my idle volts go so high when using any other level of LLC, i like the large gap between idle and load volts that LLC 1 is giving me, as this resembles closest to what a factory clocked CPU behaves like, i see no reason to alter that behavior.

And again my VRM and CPU are well within spec, after an hour of prime my CPU goes no higher than 70c, and vrm no higher than 78c.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I am actually slightly mistaken, i just went and reset my bios to default, what happens when i change my volt mode to offset it automatically changed LLC to level 1 (highest LLC).
> 
> So i wasnt running (auto) but level 1. I have no idea what auto setting is because i have only ever used offset volts.
> 
> So my comments regarding the auto behavior (which i like) is achieved with level 1 (highest LLC). Is there a negative to using the highest lvl of LLC, which is what it defaults to when settings volts to offset?. The only reason i really care about any of this is i dont like that my idle volts go so high when using any other level of LLC, i like the large gap between idle and load volts that LLC 1 is giving me, as this resembles closest to what a factory clocked CPU behaves like, i see no reason to alter that behavior.
> 
> And again my VRM and CPU are well within spec, after an hour of prime my CPU goes no higher than 70c, and vrm no higher than 78c.


run it as you like and enjoy... that;s what it's all about - right?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> run it as you like and enjoy... that;s what it's all about - right?


Well of course lol. Its just that LLC is seemingly a bit.....abstract. Its not 100% clear to me still why it even exists, it was introduced at a time when people were using fixed volts and clocks exclusively and was a way to make sure your CPU did not drop under the number you set in the bios so your overclock didnt become unstable during load situations.

Fast forward to sandy bridge and later with adaptive clocks and volts, i still dont understand why there are so many varying levels of LLC on boards. Yes i could set level 3 in bios for example, but now i need to set a different offset number to get to 1.376 which is fine, but in turn this raises my idle CPU volts for what overall gain?

The differing LLC levels to me just gives people different ways to reach the same goal (you need a set amount of volts at load for an overclock either way) but by varying the curve of how volts is applied this results in higher idle volts.

What id really like someone to explain is this, why would you want to use a medium LLC setting over the max setting of 1 (which closest resembles a voltage curve from a stock CPU)?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well of course lol. Its just that LLC is seemingly a bit.....abstract. Its not 100% clear to me still why it even exists, it was introduced at a time when people were using fixed volts and clocks exclusively and was a way to make sure your CPU did not drop under the number you set in the bios so your overclock didnt become unstable during load situations.
> 
> Fast forward to sandy bridge and later with adaptive clocks and volts, i still dont understand why there are so many varying levels of LLC on boards. Yes i could set level 3 in bios for example, but now i need to set a different offset number to get to 1.376 which is fine, but in turn this raises my idle CPU volts for what overall gain?
> 
> The differing LLC levels to me just gives people different ways to reach the same goal (you need a set amount of volts at load for an overclock either way) but by varying the curve of how volts is applied this results in higher idle volts.
> 
> What id really like someone to explain is this, why would you want to use a medium LLC setting over the max setting of 1 (which closest resembles a voltage curve from a stock CPU)?


there is no difference in the application of load line compensation to adaptive or offset vs fixed/manual. It only deals with the amount of vdroop the user permits under load.. So you did not read what I posted earlier.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> there is no difference in the application of load line compensation to adaptive or offset vs fixed/manual. It only deals with the amount of vdroop the user permits under load.. So you did not read what I posted earlier.


You misunderstood what i wrote.

Adaptive volts were not a thing when LLC was implemented, it was simply a way for the user to match what they manually set in the bios (for fixed cpu voltage) to what is happening in windows when a program is under load.

My sandy bridge and up comments are referencing the fact you dont need LLC to hit that number exactly, you simply go into the bios and move up your offset notch by notch until you get there.

Again, i have zero vdroop under load no matter what LLC setting i put in, given i put my offset to a point where it loads at the volts i tell it to.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well of course lol. Its just that LLC is seemingly a bit.....abstract. Its not 100% clear to me still why it even exists, it was introduced at a time when people were using fixed volts and clocks exclusively and was a way to make sure your CPU did not drop under the number you set in the bios so your overclock didnt become unstable during load situations.


That's why I felt a chart would explain the idea better. Too many words, a picture is better.

Anyways, on VRM temps: I don't know where the temp sensor is on z170 Hero, but I'm getting like 46, 47C highest vrm temp readings in HWinfo, lol. I touched the VRM heatsink (the metal heatpipe thing?), and it wasn't too hot to the touch. But I thought we'd expect higher temps than that.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You misunderstood what i wrote.
> 
> Adaptive volts were not a thing when LLC was implemented, it was simply a way for the user to match what they manually set in the bios (for fixed cpu voltage) to what is happening in windows when a program is under load.
> 
> My sandy bridge and up comments are referencing the fact you dont need LLC to hit that number exactly, you simply go into the bios and move up your offset notch by notch until you get there.
> 
> Again, i have zero vdroop under load no matter what LLC setting i put in, given i put my offset to a point where it loads at the volts i tell it to.


yeah... you shoud just enjoy the rig and not worry.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah... you shoud just enjoy the rig and not worry.


Im not .....worrying lol.

I couldnt care less if my board and CPU take a dump tomorrow ill just use my backup til coffee lake lol.

LLC is a confusing matter not only for me, but my guess is many on this board.....even those who think they understand it.

I don't get why people would ever used fixed volts overclocking in 2017, CPU's dont function that way from the factory, and the advanced overclocking software like asus employs uses adaptive volts as well (which they put millions into developing).

When you overclock the proper way, LLC is a far more confusing setting. Its benefits and negatives are hard to quantify.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> there is no difference in the application of load line compensation to adaptive or offset vs fixed/manual. It only deals with the amount of vdroop the user permits under load.. So you did not read what I posted earlier.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You misunderstood what i wrote.
> 
> Adaptive volts were not a thing when LLC was implemented, it was simply a way for the user to match what they manually set in the bios (for fixed cpu voltage) to what is happening in windows when a program is under load.
> 
> My sandy bridge and up comments are referencing the fact you dont need LLC to hit that number exactly, you simply go into the bios and move up your offset notch by notch until you get there.
> 
> Again, i have zero vdroop under load no matter what LLC setting i put in, given i put my offset to a point where it loads at the volts i tell it to.
Click to expand...

Your missing something LLC changes Vdroop off Auto. It is true to that increasing voltage will gain the same result as using LLC, however you are using LLC 1 not Auto, so your in that group. The different LLC steps gives people options to fool with, I don't have those options only High =1 for my motherboard and that sets the Vcore with no vdroop under load. I run Auto LLC and Auto Vcore for 4.6GHz.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Your missing something LLC changes Vdroop off Auto. It is true to that increasing voltage will gain the same result as using LLC, however you are using LLC 1 not Auto, so your in that group. The different LLC steps gives people options to fool with, I don't have those options only High =1 for my motherboard and that sets the Vcore with no vdroop under load. I run Auto LLC and Auto Vcore for 4.6GHz.


Ya my bios changed LLC to lvl 1 when i selected offset volts, something i hadn't noticed before. So i am on the highest or "extreme" LLC as some put. I have read that this is bad somehow, but to me this is how CPU's are supposed to function (low idle volts, no vdroop at load) when putting a load onto them. The funny part is many say the highest LLC setting is bad because of overshoot, well that is only if you cant do fine tuning adjustments with offset, and are cavemanning it with fixed volts....i get no overvoltage when setting my offset properly.

Again LLC was introduced when adaptive volts werent a thing, i think only people using fixed volts should be using the "medium" level LLC's (so you can fine tune your load volts better), if you are using offset/adaptive just put LLC on max and tune your volts with the offset. This way you can avoid higher than necessary idle voltages.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah... you shoud just enjoy the rig and not worry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im not .....worrying lol.
> 
> I couldnt care less if my board and CPU take a dump tomorrow ill just use my backup til coffee lake lol.
> 
> LLC is a confusing matter not only for me, but my guess is many on this board.....even those who think they understand it.
> 
> I don't get why people would ever used fixed volts overclocking in 2017, CPU's dont function that way from the factory, and the advanced overclocking software like asus employs uses adaptive volts as well (which they put millions into developing).
> 
> When you overclock the proper way, LLC is a far more confusing setting. Its benefits and negatives are hard to quantify.
Click to expand...

Well some CPU VIDs are high like the i7 7700k and using stock adaptive voltage is two high. So using negative offset to far gives stability trouble when the CPU is not in turbo mode. Negative offset lowers the stock idle voltage.

One of the reasons I went with a i5 7600k is the lower VID at 4.6GHz so I could use stock DVID voltage with all the power saving features.


----------



## Scotty99

Hmmm never considered people would have to use a negative offset, how is asus able to pull that off with their 5 way optimization software (which is all done with adaptive volts)? I know plenty have used that with great success on 7700k for example.

Actually i think i know the answer to above, (just from reading on here) you need to do additonal turbo voltages rather than mess with offset.

Also am i wrong at all with my assessment here?:
Quote:


> i think only people using fixed volts should be using the "medium" level LLC's (so you can fine tune your load volts better), if you are using offset/adaptive just put LLC on max and tune your volts with the offset. This way you can avoid higher than necessary idle voltages.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Your missing something LLC changes Vdroop off Auto. It is true to that increasing voltage will gain the same result as using LLC, however you are using LLC 1 not Auto, so your in that group. The different LLC steps gives people options to fool with, I don't have those options only High =1 for my motherboard and that sets the Vcore with no vdroop under load. I run Auto LLC and Auto Vcore for 4.6GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> Ya my bios changed LLC to lvl 1 when i selected offset volts, something i hadn't noticed before. So i am on the highest or "extreme" LLC as some put. I have read that this is bad somehow, but to me this is how CPU's are supposed to function (low idle volts, no vdroop at load) when putting a load onto them. The funny part is many say the highest LLC setting is bad because of overshoot, well that is only if you cant do fine tuning adjustments with offset, and are cavemanning it with fixed volts....i get no overvoltage when setting my offset properly.
> 
> Again LLC was introduced when adaptive volts werent a thing, i think only people using fixed volts should be using the "medium" level LLC's (so you can fine tune your load volts better), if you are using offset/adaptive just put LLC on max and tune your volts with the offset. This way you can avoid higher than necessary idle voltages.
Click to expand...

I agree. I can also get by not using fixed voltage. I use adaptive and Auto LLC and all power saving features since I only overclock 600mhz above stock.

What do you have for a processor?


----------



## Scotty99

Ya i keep all power savings active etc, my overclock is incredibly simple all i have to change is a P state (for load multiplier) and my offset volts. I dont even need to set overclock profiles as its so easy to recreate. I have a ryzen 1700.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Hmmm never considered people would have to use a negative offset, how is asus able to pull that off with their 5 way optimization software (which is all done with adaptive volts)? I know plenty have used that with great success on 7700k for example.
> 
> Actually i think i know the answer to above, (just from reading on here) you need to do additonal turbo voltages rather than mess with offset.
> 
> Also am i wrong at all with my assessment here?:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> i think only people using fixed volts should be using the "medium" level LLC's (so you can fine tune your load volts better), if you are using offset/adaptive just put LLC on max and tune your volts with the offset. This way you can avoid higher than necessary idle voltages.
Click to expand...

If you just use stock overclocking the voltage will be in specification, however it will be much higher than necessary some times depending on the CPU VID.

On ASUS if you want negative vcore using Adaptive, folks have to use negative offset.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If you just use stock overclocking the voltage will be in specification, however it will be much higher than necessary some times depending on the CPU VID.
> 
> On ASUS if you want negative vcore using Adaptive, folks have to use negative offset.


Don't some boards allow you just to increase the turbo frequency voltage, so you can avoid altering idle volts with offset?


----------



## BoredErica

I've looked more carefully and derbauer and AHC's videos and this is what I got from them (derbauer up top, ACH bottom):



So the overshoot is when the load is done, the undershoot is when the load begins.

In debauer's pictures, the left is setting 1.25v into bios and letting load go where-ever it may, the middle is increasing vcore in bios so vcore is 1.25v under load, and the right is 1.25v in bios but increasing LLC to h it 1.25v under load.

debauer's pictures do not show LLC mitigating undershoot (or causing less overshoot with faster switching vrms).

Okay how about this...


----------



## Scotty99

So basically, if you are using extreme LLC like i am, leave a bit of room for overshoot so you dont go over the max recommended VID? (not sure on kaby, but ryzen is recommended you dont go over 1.45v)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If you just use stock overclocking the voltage will be in specification, however it will be much higher than necessary some times depending on the CPU VID.
> 
> On ASUS if you want negative vcore using Adaptive, folks have to use negative offset.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't some boards allow you just to increase the turbo frequency voltage, so you can avoid altering idle volts with offset?
Click to expand...

ASUS allows increasing the turbo voltage without increasing the idle voltage. I don't think folks can decrease the adaptive voltage without decreasing the idle voltage on ASUS.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I've looked more carefully and derbauer and AHC's videos and this is what I got from them (derbauer up top, ACH bottom):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the overshoot is when the load is done, the undershoot is when the load begins.
> 
> In debauer's pictures, the left is setting 1.25v into bios and letting load go where-ever it may, the middle is increasing vcore in bios so vcore is 1.25v under load, and the right is 1.25v in bios but increasing LLC to h it 1.25v under load.
> 
> debauer's pictures do not show LLC mitigating undershoot (or causing less overshoot with faster switching vrms).
> 
> Okay how about this...


yeah you got it - it's a decaying oscillation of voltage with a load change in either direction. but the peak is as you noted. Undershoot is very difficult to control with poor damped vrms... eg, the compensation adjusts the operating voltage relative to the set vcore and/or VID.
It is important to note that the extent of over/under shoot really depends on the vcore running at the time the amperage (load) changes, so it's very hard to tell what the excursion is without measuring. Intel describes limits for MB manuf to "comply" with for what that is worth. You can mitigate most transient-spike degradation simply by permitting some vdroop (30-100 mV depending if we're talking vcore or vccin). I have a 2700K running 24/7/365 since launch at 4.8 w/ 1.425V - rock solid, 4960X, 5960x, 6950X, 7700K, 6600K, and a 1600x all OCd since the platforms launched running here right now (and on all the time) and many others that "lived" here for a while, all have "healthy" vdroop allowed, and all run dynamic - adaptive or offset - voltages (well, except x99 for which VCCIN is the rail with droop, not vcore).
Vdroop acts on a voltage rail for a reason.. LLC helps us control it, and to completely defeat vdroop if desired.

I have the links somewhere - Raja and Praz have posted real scope traces vs LLC for several ROG boards (x99, z170, 270 and the C6H). Best to see actual traces and not archival representations IMO.

Lastly, this is a discussion we've had here waaay too many times.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah you got it - it's a decaying oscillation of voltage with a load change in either direction. but the peak is as you noted. Undershoot is very difficult to control with poor damped vrms... eg, the compensation adjusts the operating voltage relative to the set vcore and/or VID.
> It is important to note that the extent of over/under shoot really depends on the vcore running at the time the amperage (load) changes, so it's very hard to tell what the excursion is without measuring. Intel describes limits for MB manuf to "comply" with for what that is worth. You can mitigate most transient-spike degradation simply by permitting some vdroop (30-100 mV depending if we're talking vcore or vccin). I have a 2700K running 24/7/365 since launch at 4.8 w/ 1.425V - rock solid, 4960X, 5960x, 6950X, 7700K, 6600K, and a 1600x all OCd since the platforms launched running here right now (and on all the time) and many others that "lived" here for a while, all have "healthy" vdroop allowed, and all run dynamic - adaptive or offset - voltages (well, except x99 for which VCCIN is the rail with droop, not vcore).
> Vdroop acts on a voltage rail for a reason.. LLC helps us control it, and to completely defeat vdroop if desired.
> 
> I have the links somewhere - Raja and Praz have posted real scope traces vs LLC for several ROG boards (x99, z170, 270 and the C6H). Best to see actual traces and not archival representations IMO.
> 
> Lastly, this is a discussion we've had here waaay too many times.


Yeah... it's just easier to draw straight lines in Paint than oscillating voltage, lol.

Are we really just looking at crashing with load starting up with undershoot? If so I feel like I can get away with LLC level 1...

Unless from the CPU's perspective even with a constant 100% load or gaming load voltage is constantly going up and down really quickly.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well of course lol. Its just that LLC is seemingly a bit.....abstract. Its not 100% clear to me still why it even exists, it was introduced at a time when people were using fixed volts and clocks exclusively and was a way to make sure your CPU did not drop under the number you set in the bios so your overclock didnt become unstable during load situations.
> 
> Fast forward to sandy bridge and later with adaptive clocks and volts, i still dont understand why there are so many varying levels of LLC on boards. Yes i could set level 3 in bios for example, but now i need to set a different offset number to get to 1.376 which is fine, but in turn this raises my idle CPU volts for what overall gain?
> 
> The differing LLC levels to me just gives people different ways to reach the same goal (you need a set amount of volts at load for an overclock either way) but by varying the curve of how volts is applied this results in higher idle volts.
> 
> What id really like someone to explain is this, why would you want to use a medium LLC setting over the max setting of 1 (which closest resembles a voltage curve from a stock CPU)?


I really wanted to stay out of this.

Vdroop was designed something in the Pentium 4 era (if I'm wrong it was designed in the original Core era, then), as the others said, to counteract the effects of overshoot (which will NOT SHOW UP ON BIOS OR MOTHERBOARD MONITORING), with processors that change power states fast, with new VRM and high current designs (VRM-DOWN). Vdroop didn't exist on Pentium 3 processors or older. They didn't have problems with being stable at idle and unstable at load (see below).

Vdroop was designed to decrease voltage to the processor (not sure if this was input voltage or vcore, but it resulted in lower vcore) as the load increased. This would allow the processor to maintain voltage specs in case of overshoots (which required an accurate oscilloscope to capture). While this was fine for processors running at spec, this was extremely bad for overclocking, because vdroop would be even higher at higher processor currents and voltages, causing the processor to drop FAR below its required stable voltage when overclocking. Thus you would have to set extremely high idle votlages in the Bios, just to get a decent load voltage after vdroop, which just caused large amounts of heat and current and simply helped degrade the processors faster (many Pentium 4 3.4+ Processors would degrade at 1.65+ voltage when overclocked, often quite quickly, even though this wasn't a large voltage increase over stock. But again I don't remember if vdroop existed on those yet).

This was before the days of adaptive or offset voltages, and was so detrimental to overclocking, that mobo makers started adding loadline calibration to help adjust for vdroop. But there was no standard for this, so results were all over the place (just go look at a joke of what the original Gigabyte "10 steps loadline" settings did on the P67 boards, when they added it when people needed more than the LLC1 and LLC2 settings in the original Bioses). These multi loadline step bioses would cause erratic readings and results as the VRM's were not originally designed for this (one reason you could NOT use offsets at the same time on those old Gigabyte Bioses), and also, the readings using a DMM tended to be more stable and exact than from the board sensors.

I don't know how this has changed today, as I'm still on my P67 board. my laptop has a 7820HK using adaptive voltage with -100mv offsets but that's besides the point.


----------



## Scotty99

That very may well be, but when you do a search for LLC in relation to overclocking all the results point to its ability to allow overclockers to hit windows load voltages where they set it to in the bios, to counteract that vdroop.

With offset overclocking you really dont need to mess with the varying levels of LLC, pick one and adjust your volts with the offset. I have now figured this out (if this was all obvious to you guys i do apologize for taking up so much of the thread) enough to where i am happy with being at the "extreme" LLC setting and adjusting my volts with offset, simply because i dont like how the other LLC settings raise my idle voltage for no apparent reason.


----------



## Hiikeri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bfe_vern*
> 
> Maybe I'm doing something wrong but my CPU-Z bench gave me this @4800 2396/10541 (s/m).


Old CPU-Z.

I got current (1.79.1.x64) Single Core points 642. Ryzen 1800X got a 400 points.









My 7700K is over 60% faster than stock 1800X. And someones still says a newbies > buy Ryzen.

7700K is currently the fastest gaming CPU on the world (if we OC both). dot.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> That very may well be, but when you do a search for LLC in relation to overclocking all the results point to its ability to allow overclockers to hit windows load voltages where they set it to in the bios, to counteract that vdroop.
> 
> With offset overclocking you really dont need to mess with the varying levels of LLC, pick one and adjust your volts with the offset. I have now figured this out (if this was all obvious to you guys i do apologize for taking up so much of the thread) enough to where i am happy with being at the "extreme" LLC setting and adjusting my volts with offset, simply because i dont like how the other LLC settings raise my idle voltage for no apparent reason.


I'd take less overshoot with higher idle voltage... saving 1w doesn't do anything for me.

It's a natural tendency to want voltage under load to equal the voltage you set into the bios, but I don't think it's an inevitable goal based purely on logic. It doesn't change the reasons why llc exists and its drawbacks/benefits. So what I am saying is, people might ask for and look for something, but that search might be based on incomplete information.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I'd take less overshoot with higher idle voltage... saving 1w doesn't do anything for me.
> 
> It's a natural tendency to want voltage under load to equal the voltage you set into the bios, but I don't think it's an inevitable goal based purely on logic. It doesn't change the reasons why llc exists and its drawbacks/benefits.


The power savings does not come into the equation for me btw, its simply based on the fact that stock CPU's have low idle voltage when power savings is enabled (same with the asus 5 way optimization, i do trust what they are doing with that software, and what constitutes a "proper" overclock), i want to keep that behavior similar.

And ya it does basically come down to overshoot vs idle volts, that is probably why people generally recommend a "medium" setting. I personally like the low idle volts for whatever reason, but i wont fault the next guy if he want to use the lowest level of LLC.

I will admit (sheepishly) that when i started this conversation it was based on the notion my LLC was off, but my bios pulled a fast one on me and put it to high LLC as soon as i switched to offset voltage mode. This is why i could not understand where people were getting this "vdroop" when i wasnt seeing it, well obviously that was because i had LLC on the whole time...

This happened to tech city in one of his videos that i just watched a couple mins ago, he called it a bug but apparently its intended behavior from asrock:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Tw-wcT7o4&t=3m01s

The "bug" happens at place i timestamped it, he describes this "bug" at about 3:45


----------



## Kalpa

Yes yes and my 7700K scores 550. So sad.


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *mamuf*





> Originally Posted by *clackersx*


Please more clearly state Prime version next time.

Wow, DDR3 on Kaby Lake lol.

The above have been charted.


     Sample Size54  Average OC5.04Median OC5.00 Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.38 


----------



## Scotty99

I know you guys are likely sick of me by now, but one more thing lol...

Does this overshoot actually matter? For the minute timespan that this is occuring are people worried about CPU failures? Not talking for me because i have a lot of headroom before i hit max recommended vid, i am just speaking in general. I know volts and temps kill CPU's, im just not convinced a short spike like that is going to do any real damage compared to, for example someone running a lower llc level but runs a stress test overnight.

Probably something some would wonder about if they read this conversation now knowing the real difference between high llc and low being balancing idle volts vs overshoot.

Thanks to everyone for the discussion btw, i know i learned some things and hopefully onlookers did as well.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I know you guys are likely sick of me by now, but one more thing lol...
> 
> Does this overshoot actually matter? For the minute timespan that this is occuring are people worried about CPU failures? Not talking for me because i have a lot of headroom before i hit max recommended vid, i am just speaking in general. I know volts and temps kill CPU's, im just not convinced a short spike like that is going to do any real damage compared to, for example someone running a lower llc level but runs a stress test overnight.
> 
> Probably something some would wonder about if they read this conversation now knowing the real difference between high llc and low being balancing idle volts vs overshoot.
> 
> Thanks to everyone for the discussion btw, i know i learned some things and hopefully onlookers did as well.


For Intel and AMD Load line runs stock so it is important for longevity.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I'd take less overshoot with higher idle voltage... saving 1w doesn't do anything for me.
> 
> It's a natural tendency to want voltage under load to equal the voltage you set into the bios, but I don't think it's an inevitable goal based purely on logic. It doesn't change the reasons why llc exists and its drawbacks/benefits. *So what I am saying is, people might ask for and look for something, but that search might be based on incomplete information*.


Wasn't exactly that, but close lol. As i said above the only reason i started posting in here was with the assumption i was running with LLC disabled, and for the life of me could not figure out why i was not seeing any vdroop at load. The video i posted above shows what happens when you switch voltage modes on asrock boards (auto sets LLC to lvl 1). I am sure many people miss this detail and assumed it was on auto vs level 1.


----------



## BoredErica

I updated the guide. Hey, I actually do my job in this thread once in a while, okay?











Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



7/6/2017
A while back some extra motherboard settings were added to the guide and explained.
Added info on delidding kits.
Improved info on LLC.
Improved info on SVID.
Added info on AC/DC Load Line.
Made a note on thermal transfer of mainstream CPUs in general.
Specifying small data set for Prime and OCCT in stress test difficulty hierarchy has been removed.
Renamed cache frequency spoiler.
More motherboard settings have been added.
Some typos fixed.
Removed 'to do list' since it was always empty.

3/19/2017
Chart's bottom link got fixed.

2/8/2017
Added post reference to chart.

2/6/2017
Fixed references to an old Prime version. Fixed "10" bclk typo, meant 101.

1/26/2017
Edited charting form again...

1/25/2017
Fixed an error in chart.
Fixed charting form.

1/24/2017
Fixed errors in chart.
Charting requirements revised.
Added HardOCP power draw data.
Removed some data that was too Skylake-specific.

1/20/2017

Thread is created.



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Does this overshoot actually matter? For the minute timespan that this is occuring are people worried about CPU failures? Not talking for me because i have a lot of headroom before i hit max recommended vid, i am just speaking in general. I know volts and temps kill CPU's, im just not convinced a short spike like that is going to do any real damage compared to, for example someone running a lower llc level but runs a stress test overnight.
> 
> Probably something some would wonder about if they read this conversation now knowing the real difference between high llc and low being balancing idle volts vs overshoot.
> 
> Thanks to everyone for the discussion btw, i know i learned some things and hopefully onlookers did as well.


I don't know... Actually Hardcore Overclocking and derbauer seem to say that the overshoot maters. (AHO actually said not to use extreme LLC settings multiple times in his video.) So we're talking maybe 1.5, 1.7v brief overshoot depending on how crappy the vrms are. And the other side to this is that running a stress test overnight can't be avoided sometimes (you've got to know if the overclock is stable), but just decreasing LLC, increasing VRM switching speed, etc, the overshoot can be minimized with just setting changes.

I can imagine a guy with a crappy motherboard setting extreme LLC, not knowing what's going on.

---

I have set VRM switching speed to 800khz. I doubt I will notice a difference, but yeah.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I updated the guide. Hey, I actually do my job in this thread once in a while, okay?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 7/6/2017
> 
> A while back some extra motherboard settings were added to the guide and explained.
> 
> Added info on delidding kits.
> 
> Improved info on LLC.
> 
> Improved info on SVID.
> 
> Added info on AC/DC Load Line.
> 
> Made a note on thermal transfer of mainstream CPUs in general.
> 
> Specifying small data set for Prime and OCCT in stress test difficulty hierarchy has been removed.
> 
> Renamed cache frequency spoiler.
> 
> More motherboard settings have been added.
> 
> Some typos fixed.
> 
> Removed 'to do list' since it was always empty.
> 
> 3/19/2017
> 
> Chart's bottom link got fixed.
> 
> 2/8/2017
> 
> Added post reference to chart.
> 
> 2/6/2017
> 
> Fixed references to an old Prime version. Fixed "10" bclk typo, meant 101.
> 
> 1/26/2017
> 
> Edited charting form again...
> 
> 1/25/2017
> 
> Fixed an error in chart.
> 
> Fixed charting form.
> 
> 1/24/2017
> 
> Fixed errors in chart.
> 
> Charting requirements revised.
> 
> Added HardOCP power draw data.
> 
> Removed some data that was too Skylake-specific.
> 
> 1/20/2017
> 
> Thread is created.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know... Actually Hardcore Overclocking and derbauer seem to say that the overshoot maters. (AHO actually said not to use extreme LLC settings multiple times in his video.) So we're talking maybe 1.5, 1.7v brief overshoot depending on how crappy the vrms are. And the other side to this is that running a stress test overnight can't be avoided sometimes (you've got to know if the overclock is stable), but just decreasing LLC, increasing VRM switching speed, etc, the overshoot can be minimized with just setting changes.
> 
> I can imagine a guy with a crappy motherboard setting extreme LLC, not knowing what's going on.
> 
> ---
> I have set VRM switching speed to 800khz. I doubt I will notice a difference, but yeah.


Yeah I ramped my switching frequency to 500khz as well. Just in case.


----------



## Scotty99

I wonder if my board even has that setting....

Anyways good chattin with ya fellas glad i wasnt shunned cause of the whole ryzen cpu thing









I havent made final decision where ill end up with LLC, but currently i am ok with the highest setting simply for my illogical? belief that an overclocked CPU should resemble the behavior of a stock one as closely as possible, like the asus tuning software does.


----------



## becks

Keep in mind when you switch VRM freq you need to monitor them for a while...just to make sure they can cope.
VRM over-heating can make all sorts of problems from throttling to BS and OC fails...
Stick 2 temp probes on them, one on the VRM and one on the back of the MB take the readings and make the average, that should be your VRM true temp.. (+/- 5 Celsius)

Maybe I am wrong but this is how I do it.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I wonder if my board even has that setting....
> 
> Anyways good chattin with ya fellas glad i wasnt shunned cause of the whole ryzen cpu thing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I havent made final decision where ill end up with LLC, but currently i am ok with the highest setting simply for my illogical? belief that an overclocked CPU should resemble the behavior of a stock one as closely as possible, like the asus tuning software does.


Yeah, I use an Asus board so some of the settings in the guide are Asus specific, or at least worded the Asus way.

I think at most like high LLC... And whether to go for high or low LLC depends on what that under shoot... When is under shoot relevant, only from idle to starting up a load? Or does it apply on a micro level even when gaming? So I think the benefit of less under shoot changes whether I would go for LLC Level 1 or 3 or 5.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Keep in mind when you switch VRM freq you need to monitor them for a while...just to make sure they can cope.
> VRM over-heating can make all sorts of problems from throttling to BS and OC fails...
> Stick 2 temp probes on them, one on the VRM and one on the back of the MB take the readings and make the average, that should be your VRM true temp.. (+/- 5 Celsius)
> 
> Maybe I am wrong but this is how I do it.


I'd do that, except I don't have temperature probes and I'm feeling lazy, lol.

I just wanna look at hwinfo sensor readings >.>

I just updated the guide AGAIN, because the formatting is a nightmare. It's like I'm making a mod in the Skyrim Creation Kit... Fun fact, at the start of this guide I actually had to submit bug reports more than once to get my thread fixed. It would just lock up Chrome.


----------



## MaKeN

What a thread .... so many interesting discussions and information.


----------



## pcixopatt

I need help with hdd and ssd.I have z270x aorus gaming 5.I have 2 hdd 1 sata ssd,1dvd rw and 1 m2 samsung ssd.I have 1 free m2 slot and if I insert another m2 ssd,it disable 4 sata ports?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Yeah, I use an Asus board so some of the settings in the guide are Asus specific, or at least worded the Asus way.
> 
> [snip]


Best to check the efect of the LLC settings on any board, including ASUS. For example, my z270 APEX, Bios 0906 set to 5.2/4.8 and 1.3V adaptive does some funny things with LLC. LLC1 is basically broke: vcore set to 1.30V in bios, it will run 1.472V, LLC2 runs 1.344V and droops to 1.312V under p95 small FFT or AID64 FPU test. LLC5 runs at 1.328 with no droop under load. LAstly, LLC7 idles at 1.376V and droops to 1.312V under load. I run LLC2 now, and had been at LLC 5 for a while.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcixopatt*
> 
> I need help with hdd and ssd.I have z270x aorus gaming 5.I have 2 hdd 1 sata ssd,1dvd rw and 1 m2 samsung ssd.I have 1 free m2 slot and if I insert another m2 ssd,it disable 4 sata ports?


After checking the guide for your board provided you use SATA ports 0-3 then none of those ports will be effected by running a second M.2 SSD


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Yeah. Unfortunately I expect people to speak up less when their overclocks have a problem than the other way around. It's human nature, and I it's not really me talking down anyone... It's hard for me to connect with the fact that my chips have acted this way for years now, and even I dragged my feet to report this here.


How often have you changed your paste? I'm always surprised how big of a difference new paste can make after a short duration like 3 months.

I remember how my predelid did 5 GHz very well and yesterday I was getting about the same results with my now delided chip. So I redid the paste and actually was going to attempt a relid but getting super glue off with acetone wasn't very fun and although I doubt I changed anything, maybe I allowed the IHS to sit closer to the die. Anyway, chip ran 20C cooler after like after initial delid. 5.1 1.328 to 1.344 for daily driving that tops out low 80C with a 28C ambient during real bench.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcixopatt*
> 
> I need help with hdd and ssd.I have z270x aorus gaming 5.I have 2 hdd 1 sata ssd,1dvd rw and 1 m2 samsung ssd.I have 1 free m2 slot and if I insert another m2 ssd,it disable 4 sata ports?


In your owners manula should be really good explained what port you can use after 2 x m.2's installed. I have 2 of them myself.


----------



## MaKeN

Need some help understanding things









I was playing andromeda game today and pc froze...
I restarted it and i get this :


Windows simply wont boot....
i have tried to lower ram freq from 3400 to auto still no boot
Then i lowered cpu freq from 5100 1.4v to 5000 and it boots
I raised again to 5.1 again, and again no boot in windows. I thought mb voltage or something , so all in all 5.1 even with 1.46 v core wont boot in to windows.
Im on 5.0 1.37 now ( still not tested stability on 5.0 yet )

Anyone had that issue before?
That means my cpu wont do 5.1 anymore?







or its windows related problem?

Thx for any input

Edit:

Realbench says instability detected after 20 sec of running even at 5.0 1.4v ...
Strange


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Need some help understanding things
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was playing andromeda game today and pc froze...
> I restarted it and i get this :
> 
> 
> Windows simply wont boot....
> i have tried to lower ram freq from 3400 to auto still no boot
> Then i lowered cpu freq from 5100 1.4v to 5000 and it boots
> I raised again to 5.1 again, and again no boot in windows. I thought mb voltage or something , so all in all 5.1 even with 1.46 v core wont boot in to windows.
> Im on 5.0 1.37 now ( still not tested stability on 5.0 yet )
> 
> Anyone had that issue before?
> That means my cpu wont do 5.1 anymore?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or its windows related problem?
> 
> Thx for any input


1.46v is a really really high voltage for your chip. What were your operating temperatures?


----------



## MaKeN

I know its really high , it was just for testing if it boots. Normally i run 5.1 1.4v temps max of 70 if stress testing, in games are like max 50c

Now at 5.0 1.4v im not even able to run cinabench.... idkn what happened


----------



## MaKeN

I guess my chip degrades....
installing a fresh windows now , will test it after its done


----------



## Asploit

Okay so quick update on my build - it appears my chip is able to go 5.0 @ 1.37v, but I'm out of thermal headroom (97 C !) even with a 360mm AIO so I've got a delid kit shipping in by next week.
I'm hitting 4.8 @ 1.25v going ~82C, is this kind of voltage/temp increase for only 200mhz increase normal? Did I get a chip with an _especially_ bad internal TIM/glue job?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Okay so quick update on my build - it appears my chip is able to go 5.0 @ 1.37v, but I'm out of thermal headroom (97 C !) even with a 360mm AIO so I've got a delid kit shipping in by next week.
> I'm hitting 4.8 @ 1.25v going ~82C, is this kind of voltage/temp increase for only 200mhz increase normal? Did I get a chip with an _especially_ bad internal TIM/glue job?


What stress test are you using to achieve 97c? Deliding will drop the temperature 15-20c.


----------



## Asploit

Well it averages mid/low 80's but HWInfo recorded more than one spike into the 90's.

So x264 (in OP's post) 5.0 @ 1.37v had high 80's throughout the entire test that spiked 94 briefly in one of the cores. It was a single pass the lasted a lil over ten minutes without RAM OC'd - just the multiplier and vcore was touched.

Cinebench R15 maintained 89-92 with a few spikes into high 90's (that's where I spiked 97) and scored like 1103 or something like that.

Currently sitting on 4.8 @ 1.296v (voltage in my above post was wrong), RAM up to 3600 CL16 @ 1.35v. Just now ran a single loop of x264 and settled on 83-87 avg across the cores but I've had a core momentarily spike 92C over a ten minute run. Are those random high peaks normal?

I'm using an Arctic Liquid Freezer 360mm AIO which I reseated/reapplied once thinking I might have planted the coldplate wrong, but considering I only have 4C variance between cores I guess that's not it?


----------



## blurp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Well it averages mid/low 80's but HWInfo recorded more than one spike into the 90's.
> 
> So x264 (in OP's post) 5.0 @ 1.37v had high 80's throughout the entire test that spiked 94 briefly in one of the cores. It was a single pass the lasted a lil over ten minutes without RAM OC'd - just the multiplier and vcore was touched.
> 
> Cinebench R15 maintained 89-92 with a few spikes into high 90's (that's where I spiked 97) and scored like 1103 or something like that.
> 
> Currently sitting on 4.8 @ 1.296v (voltage in my above post was wrong), RAM up to 3600 CL16 @ 1.35v. Just now ran a single loop of x264 and settled on 83-87 avg across the cores but I've had a core momentarily spike 92C over a ten minute run. Are those random high peaks normal?
> 
> I'm using an Arctic Liquid Freezer 360mm AIO which I reseated/reapplied once thinking I might have planted the coldplate wrong, but considering I only have 4C variance between cores I guess that's not it?


Temperature peaks are very well known with this platform. We have to live with it. Only was to get significantly better temps is a delid. I'm delidded 4.8 1,28v with a overkill watercooling and get 59-61C with x264.


----------



## Asploit

Thanks for the insight blurp, it's starting to look like the delid I've got on the way is going to be a wise move forward. It's not like I retain an Intel warranty after overclocking anyway







Any advice for the delid process other than the billions of videos/guides I've consumed already?


----------



## MaKeN

Heh...
So my cpu won do 5.1 at 1.4v like last 2 months
Wont do 5.0 at 1.4 v
Its some sort of stable at Only 4.9 at 1.35v and only if memory is at stock settings.as soon as i put 2800-3400 mem clock RB fails
I thought degradation is a slow process not a "next boot" one








Idkn it may be my ram ? Never had an issue as this one before


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Thanks for the insight blurp, it's starting to look like the delid I've got on the way is going to be a wise move forward. It's not like I retain an Intel warranty after overclocking anyway
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any advice for the delid process other than the billions of videos/guides I've consumed already?


Run some load on your cpu, till its still hot/warm remove it and dellid it with a one sided razor blade, do all 4 corners first, insert the blade in the middle of the glue or even closer as possible to the IHS , it takes like 1 min to remove the ihs ... cleaning takes longer.


----------



## Asploit

I'd do that but I literally JUST got into overclocking so I think I'll do the pedestrian method of getting a kit from Rockit 88. Besides, my new paste won't be arriving until next week O_O


----------



## Scotty99

Do you guys think liquid metal on a GPU is worth it?

Ive seen some videos where people get 8-10c drops, others marginal benefits.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Run some load on your cpu, till its still hot/warm remove it and dellid it with a one sided razor blade, do all 4 corners first, insert the blade in the middle of the glue or even closer as possible to the IHS , it takes like 1 min to remove the ihs ... cleaning takes longer.


NO!! don't do this, totally ignore this guy.

do NOT use the razor method/vice method on these chips. Excellent delid tools exist already, neither of these means should be necessary.

Holy crap, why do people still do this? are you trying to grief newer members?

The razor method was dangerous enough in well practiced hands, how do you think it will fare to someone who has never done it before?


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Do you guys think liquid metal on a GPU is worth it?
> 
> Ive seen some videos where people get 8-10c drops, others marginal benefits.


Definitely not worth it, I've tried.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Do you guys think liquid metal on a GPU is worth it?
> 
> Ive seen some videos where people get 8-10c drops, others marginal benefits.


It depends on how crap your contact your GPU has with the HSF.
If your contact is already good like the ASUS Strix 1080ti cards then the benefit is extremely marginal, while cards like Zotac have god awful contact so you will probably notice closer to 10C. That being said, whatever result you expect to get with Liquid metal, Kryonaut is not far behind, maybe 1-2C at most.

I also tried on my Aorus, damn well nearly killed the card on 3 occasions. Liquid metal is really really dangerous.


----------



## BoredErica

Yeah, I think we are past the days of a razor blade or vise. Use a delid kit.

As for liquid metal outside of delidding, I'm still not sure about that. It's a pain to handle, especially since it forms a layer onto the cold plate.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Heh...
> So my cpu won do 5.1 at 1.4v like last 2 months
> Wont do 5.0 at 1.4 v
> Its some sort of stable at Only 4.9 at 1.35v and only if memory is at stock settings.as soon as i put 2800-3400 mem clock RB fails
> I thought degradation is a slow process not a "next boot" one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Idkn it may be my ram ? Never had an issue as this one before


I find it strange that your CPU has degraded so quickly, I doubt it is your CPU.
1. Have you tried re-flashing your UEFI?
2. When you reinstalled Windows was your system stable ie: stock?
3. Have you tried using different memory or checked your current memory? Faulty memory will corrupt Windows
4. Perhaps your Motherboard has a faulty DIM slot?
5. Try your CPU in a different board with different memory


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Do you guys think liquid metal on a GPU is worth it?
> 
> Ive seen some videos where people get 8-10c drops, others marginal benefits.


CLU lowered my idle GPU temp about 5C, but load temp was exactly the same as gelid extreme. Not worth it.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I find it strange that your CPU has degraded so quickly, I doubt it is your CPU.
> 1. Have you tried re-flashing your UEFI?
> 2. When you reinstalled Windows was your system stable ie: stock?
> 3. Have you tried using different memory or checked your current memory? Faulty memory will corrupt Windows
> 4. Perhaps your Motherboard has a faulty DIM slot?
> 5. Try your CPU in a different board with different memory


I dont know what to think, i just picked up a new psu and a gpu just to teat the system.

Funny thing is that not only the cpu cant do 5.1 anymore, my gpu gives me artifacts in games, and in mass efect andromeda it will freeze the pc.

I also was thinking of a bad memory, but it would pass a hci memtest 8 windows till 150%
So its the psu or mb? Idkn ill test it now

Edit:
Its not the gpu , new one would also artifact and freeze

Next is the new psu testing....

Edit:
So its not the pau also....

3 things remain to test. New cpu , new ram, new mobo.

If its the cpu... ill go with ryzen instead , its a second 7700k that gives me problems.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I dont know what to think, i just picked up a new psu and a gpu just to teat the system.
> 
> Funny thing is that not only the cpu cant do 5.1 anymore, my gpu gives me artifacts in games, and in mass efect andromeda it will freeze the pc.
> 
> I also was thinking of a bad memory, but it would pass a hci memtest 8 windows till 150%
> So its the psu or mb? Idkn ill test it now
> 
> Edit:
> Its not the gpu , new one would also artifact and freeze
> 
> Next is the new psu testing....
> 
> Edit:
> So its not the pau also....
> 
> 3 things remain to test. New cpu , new ram, new mobo.
> 
> If its the cpu... ill go with ryzen instead , its a second 7700k that gives me problems.


Its not that CPUs degrade slowly, it actually happens rather abruptly. Working one minute then poof, BSOD and cannot reboot without lower clocks and/or voltage. I'm quite confident your problem is the CPU has been voltage degraded. Just bump it back to 5ghz and use from there.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Its not that CPUs degrade slowly, it actually happens rather abruptly. Working one minute then poof, BSOD and cannot reboot without lower clocks and/or voltage. I'm quite confident your problem is the CPU has been voltage degraded. Just bump it back to 5ghz and use from there.


I have done it at 5.0 no it wont do it with sam voltage...
i tried 4.9, 4.8
Now im on 4.7 1. 36 v and occt would pass 1 hour of stress... but again games would crash...
Its really interesting how that "poof" made my cpu go from 5.1 1.4v to 4.7 1.36 v stable in stress testing and not stable in games...
Mb my ram is the issue , even though it passes stress tests also


----------



## Delo

In the maximus code there is a setting called blck aware adaptive voltage. For now I have left this on it's default setting which is auto (it can also be enable or disable). I was just wondering what this is exactly, can't seem to find any info on it. Does this affect oc in any way if you are not messing with the blck?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Delo*
> 
> In the maximus code there is a setting called blck aware adaptive voltage. For now I have left this on it's default setting which is auto (it can also be enable or disable). I was just wondering what this is exactly, can't seem to find any info on it. *Does this affect oc in any way if you are not messing with the blck?[*


no. if running bclk 100 (or so) leave this on auto. It adjusts the auto rules to reflect the vcore offset needed if you were running adaptive vcore with say 150+ bclk (AFAIK)


----------



## sdmf74

Those of you running prime 95 overnight with temps exceeding 88-92°c is just crazy to me, you can determine 100% stability without putting your cpu through such torture.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Those of you running prime 95 overnight with temps exceeding 88-92°c is just crazy to me, you can determine 100% stability without putting your cpu through such torture.


I prime95 v28.10 all the time up to 94c for 8 hours at a time. The Intel CPU likes it that way.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Those of you running prime 95 overnight with temps exceeding 88-92°c is just crazy to me, *you can determine 100% stability without putting your cpu through such torture.*


Nah, there's no such thing as 100% stability testing. Only way to figure it out is to run your workload and adjust after next bluescreen event (and until you get one you've been stable for the time being, but that's not a guarantee your system won't crash the following second).

Also I got a bluescreen during last night. I had good 6 days of uptime already (running [email protected] whenever I'm not around). Increased VCCSA by another 5mV as I'm still fairly sure memory OC is the culprit. Next step will be giving 20mV extra juice to DRAM modules although I still like to believe it's more on the IMC side.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Those of you running prime 95 overnight with temps exceeding 88-92°c is just crazy to me, *you can determine 100% stability without putting your cpu through such torture.*
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, there's no such thing as 100% stability testing. Only way to figure it out is to run your workload and adjust after next bluescreen event (and until you get one you've been stable for the time being, but that's not a guarantee your system won't crash the following second).
> 
> Also I got a bluescreen during last night. I had good 6 days of uptime already (running [email protected] whenever I'm not around). Increased VCCSA by another 5mV as I'm still fairly sure memory OC is the culprit. Next step will be giving 20mV extra juice to DRAM modules although I still like to believe it's more on the IMC side.
Click to expand...

In 8 years with running Prime95 blend for 8 hours on different processors I have never ever had a issue after the stress test. I just run stress test for learning different settings and look at voltage to help in the forums when needed. The hole Idea of stress testing is to run the system harder than it's going to be used normally, that is why it's called stress test.


----------



## Delo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> no. if running bclk 100 (or so) leave this on auto. It adjusts the auto rules to reflect the vcore offset needed if you were running adaptive vcore with say 150+ bclk (AFAIK)


Cool good to know









Also what kind of vcore do you guys usually run at? I seen the chart and the recommended vcore being between 1.37v and 1.45v. For my cpu to get 5.1ghz I need to give it like 1.435 vcore in bios but hwinfo reading 1.424 (although at some point in testing it reach 1.44v but I never actually seen the number pop up while doing other test and gaming). I get like 77c peaks although the avg temps are lower than that during gaming but if I do longer term test like prime95 or something I suspect it'll reach close to 80c (I prefer lower fan noise to temps though) may be lower when summer is over. It is a delidded 7700k as well as custom cooled if you are wondering and to reach 5.0 ghz was like 1.385v in bios which was if I remember correctly (don't have my notes on hand atm) 1.374v (hwinfo). I feel like my voltage at 5.1ghz is good as well as temps since it's mostly around 70c when I game. Do you guys personally think that is too much? I want to keep this cpu until the next (or maybe even the one after that if differences aren't that much) launches so for one or two years. I don't think there would be degradation or small with those volts and temp right?


----------



## Asploit

Not quite sure what is wrong with HWInfo but it's reporting that I spontaneously broke frequency records on my 7700k at only 65.4% utilization


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Delo*
> 
> Cool good to know
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also what kind of vcore do you guys usually run at? I seen the chart and the recommended vcore being between 1.37v and 1.45v. For my cpu to get 5.1ghz I need to give it like 1.435 vcore in bios but hwinfo reading 1.424 (although at some point in testing it reach 1.44v but I never actually seen the number pop up while doing other test and gaming). I get like 77c peaks although the avg temps are lower than that during gaming but if I do longer term test like prime95 or something I suspect it'll reach close to 80c (I prefer lower fan noise to temps though) may be lower when summer is over. It is a delidded 7700k as well as custom cooled if you are wondering and to reach 5.0 ghz was like 1.385v in bios which was if I remember correctly (don't have my notes on hand atm) 1.374v (hwinfo). I feel like my voltage at 5.1ghz is good as well as temps since it's mostly around 70c when I game. Do you guys personally think that is too much? I want to keep this cpu until the next (or maybe even the one after that if differences aren't that much) launches so for one or two years. I don't think there would be degradation or small with those volts and temp right?


Any vcore/OC ceiling is gonna depend on the temperatures the chip sees. [email protected] 1.385V in bios with those temperatures is fine (depending on what pushed the temps that high). if during a 1h realbench stresstest you are hitting 70s on the core, the package is probably a bit higher. Just keep the vcore below 1.45V or so with a "healthy" amout of vdroop under load with peak temps below 80C and it should be fine. A rational stabilty regime for this generation processor is 6+ hours x264 (link), HCi memtest 500+% and if you need a high current synthetic, run IBT with 90% of ram committed (works the cache that way) for 5-10 loops and your system will be stable to most any use. I'd avoid p95 - all it does is force folks to run a much lower OC than the cpu is capable of simply because p95 hammers the FPU causing too much heat... 99% of p95 failures are due to high temps in the microenvironment and not a logic-flawed overclock.


----------



## Delo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Any vcore/OC ceiling is gonna depend on the temperatures the chip sees. [email protected] 1.385V in bios with those temperatures is fine (depending on what pushed the temps that high). if during a 1h realbench stresstest you are hitting 70s on the core, the package is probably a bit higher. Just keep the vcore below 1.45V or so with a "healthy" amout of vdroop under load with peak temps below 80C and it should be fine. A rational stabilty regime for this generation processor is 6+ hours x264 (link), HCi memtest 500+% and if you need a high current synthetic, run IBT with 90% of ram committed (works the cache that way) for 5-10 loops and your system will be stable to most any use. I'd avoid p95 - all it does is force folks to run a much lower OC than the cpu is capable of simply because p95 hammers the FPU causing too much heat... 99% of p95 failures are due to high temps in the microenvironment and not a logic-flawed overclock.


Cool thanks for all the info and I'll stop using prime then been using cinebench and realbench more recently anyways. I'll try x264 and see what my temps get at with the settings i have for 5.1ghz and adjust accordingly. Thank you for the help and this thread has been real informative


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Delo*
> 
> Cool good to know
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also what kind of vcore do you guys usually run at? I seen the chart and the recommended vcore being between 1.37v and 1.45v. For my cpu to get 5.1ghz I need to give it like 1.435 vcore in bios but hwinfo reading 1.424 (although at some point in testing it reach 1.44v but I never actually seen the number pop up while doing other test and gaming). I get like 77c peaks although the avg temps are lower than that during gaming but if I do longer term test like prime95 or something I suspect it'll reach close to 80c (I prefer lower fan noise to temps though) may be lower when summer is over. It is a delidded 7700k as well as custom cooled if you are wondering and to reach 5.0 ghz was like 1.385v in bios which was if I remember correctly (don't have my notes on hand atm) 1.374v (hwinfo). I feel like my voltage at 5.1ghz is good as well as temps since it's mostly around 70c when I game. Do you guys personally think that is too much? I want to keep this cpu until the next (or maybe even the one after that if differences aren't that much) launches so for one or two years. I don't think there would be degradation or small with those volts and temp right?
> 
> 
> 
> Any vcore/OC ceiling is gonna depend on the temperatures the chip sees. [email protected] 1.385V in bios with those temperatures is fine (depending on what pushed the temps that high). if during a 1h realbench stresstest you are hitting 70s on the core, the package is probably a bit higher. Just keep the vcore below 1.45V or so with a "healthy" amout of vdroop under load with peak temps below 80C and it should be fine. A rational stabilty regime for this generation processor is 6+ hours x264 (link), HCi memtest 500+% and if you need a high current synthetic, run IBT with 90% of ram committed (works the cache that way) for 5-10 loops and your system will be stable to most any use. I'd avoid p95 - all it does is force folks to run a much lower OC than the cpu is capable of simply because p95 hammers the FPU causing too much heat... 99% of p95 failures are due to high temps in the microenvironment and not a logic-flawed overclock.
Click to expand...

Prime 95 does not fail do to heat, I run it a 94c for 8 hours without a problem. Prime 95 fails do to it not being stable at the clock speed you overclocked to. When folks run prime95 the program runs mostly in FPU getting data and instructions from the fast CPU cache. Most stress tests are not running the CPU Clock speed because of the constant swapping with system memory like RealBench.

CPU performance is all about speed and feed of data. The CPU can run at the speed 5.0GHz and the data can feed to the CPU at less than 5.0GHz speed.


----------



## MaKeN

Quick update :
My cpu no longer boots on 5.1 , not stable at 5.0 and 4.9 and 4.8 anymore.
Stable in any stress tests ( including prime and occt) at stock voltage, but would cause artifacts and freezes in game at stock bios settings.

However it would run games stable at 4.7. With a massive 1.4 volts any lower voltage causes artifacts and freezes.

So i went down from 5.1 to 4.7 ghz at same voltage as before (1.4v)

What surprises me most is that at stock bios settings it passes all streres but, it freezes in games...
How come idkn isnt prime and occt much powerfull then games? Im talking of max 1 min till freeze in game vs 1 hour of prime or occt of successful passing


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Not quite sure what is wrong with HWInfo but it's reporting that I spontaneously broke frequency records on my 7700k at only 65.4% utilization


Congratulations! You win a prize!









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Quick update :
> My cpu no longer boots on 5.1 , not stable at 5.0 and 4.9 and 4.8 anymore.
> Stable in any stress tests ( including prime and occt) at stock voltage, but would cause artifacts and freezes in game at stock bios settings.
> 
> However it would run games stable at 4.7. With a massive 1.4 volts any lower voltage causes artifacts and freezes.
> 
> So i went down from 5.1 to 4.7 ghz at same voltage as before (1.4v)
> 
> What surprises me most is that at stock bios settings it passes all streres but, it freezes in games...
> How come idkn isnt prime and occt much powerfull then games? Im talking of max 1 min till freeze in game vs 1 hour of prime or occt


If it passes Prime but artifacts in games it's probably GPU. I don't recall ever having artifacts in games due to CPU instability.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Congratulations! You win a prize!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it passes Prime but artifacts in games it's probably GPU. I don't recall ever having artifacts in games due to CPU instability.


Same as i was thinking ....
Thats why i bought a new psu and gpu for test only.
I do get artifacts and freezes even with the new gpu in there and psu...
Artifacts / freezing would only go away with a big voltage increase on v core ...

Wel at 4.7 clock and 1.4v it plays

Lowering it to 1.35 it artifacts and freezes. Just by lowering the voltage.

May it be the motherboard problem ? Ram? Would a bad gpu slot be cpu voltage dependant?
Idkn what to think of


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Congratulations! You win a prize!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it passes Prime but artifacts in games it's probably GPU. I don't recall ever having artifacts in games due to CPU instability.
> 
> 
> 
> Same as i was thinking ....
> Thats why i bought a new psu and gpu for test only.
> I do get artifacts and freezes even with the new gpu in there and psu...
> Artifacts / freezing would only go away with a big voltage increase on v core ...
> 
> Wel at 4.7 clock and 1.4v it plays
> 
> Lowering it to 1.35 it artifacts and freezes. Just by lowering the voltage.
> 
> May it be the motherboard problem ? Ram? Would a bad gpu slot be cpu voltage dependant?
> Idkn what to think of
Click to expand...

After what you have tried, I would try a new CPU.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Quick update :
> My cpu no longer boots on 5.1 , not stable at 5.0 and 4.9 and 4.8 anymore.
> Stable in any stress tests ( including prime and occt) at stock voltage, but would cause artifacts and freezes in game at stock bios settings.
> 
> However it would run games stable at 4.7. With a massive 1.4 volts any lower voltage causes artifacts and freezes.
> 
> So i went down from 5.1 to 4.7 ghz at same voltage as before (1.4v)
> 
> What surprises me most is that at stock bios settings it passes all streres but, it freezes in games...
> How come idkn isnt prime and occt much powerfull then games? Im talking of max 1 min till freeze in game vs 1 hour of prime or occt of successful passing


are you running stock Cache or overclocked cache?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> are you running stock Cache or overclocked cache?


For now ita on auto, normally before the degratation happened after just a freeze in game, it was at 4.7


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> After what you have tried, I would try a new CPU.


Yeah man, im kinda thinking to get one for testing purposes... cuz this one behaves strange ...
I have to wait till Saturday to go to mc and grab one and test the system out... ill grab some memory also just in case...

If its the cpu, i beleve its just because i have ran it at its maximum of what it can , i mean 5.1 at 1.4v stable and 1.39 would not be stable, in other words it was on it maximum of it can do litterally on minimal voltage for 5.1 not a drop less in voltage. Or im wrong

But the fact that cpu degradet in like a Moment and so much ....
well anyway mb its not the cpu ( i doubt) kinda hope its my ram or mobo ( less expensive







)


----------



## Delo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Yeah man, im kinda thinking to get one for testing purposes... cuz this one behaves strange ...
> I have to wait till Saturday to go to mc and grab one and test the system out... ill grab some memory also just in case...
> 
> If its the cpu, i beleve its just because i have ran it at its maximum of what it can , i mean 5.1 at 1.4v stable and 1.39 would not be stable, in other words it was on it maximum of it can do litterally on minimal voltage for 5.1 not a drop less in voltage. Or im wrong
> 
> But the fact that cpu degradet in like a Moment and so much ....
> well anyway mb its not the cpu ( i doubt) kinda hope its my ram or mobo ( less expensive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Well if something happens to mine like that since I'm in a similar ish situation I'll let you guys know Lol Just with a bit more voltage xD

Also I did x264 16t for 5 loops and my max temp was 75c and it floating around 73c So I'm pretty happy with 5.1ghz 1.435v (bios) so I'll probably keep it there


----------



## MaKeN

I have made a short video of 3 mins , if you have time or interested in cpu degradation thing or what ever , take a look :
https://youtu.be/tob3a15SmkM
So at stock voltage and stock clocks not playable...freezing . But passes occt 1 hour or prime 95 easy.( i can prove it also)

At bumped vcore volts it would game and pass stress tests .
Max of frequency it does now is 4.7 at 1.4 stable .

Chip has like 2 moths only , all time under water cooling , has maximum at all in all maybe 4-5 hours of occt stressing and like 0 hours of prime till it failed.
Max W i saw in hwinfo was 106-110w drowing ... so its not that high ...assuming gaming takes less.

Dont consider this as im crying or something
Im just sharing , of what i think an expirience of a cpu degradation


----------



## Asploit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I have made a short video of 3 mins , if you have time or interested in cpu degradation thing or what ever , take a look :
> https://youtu.be/tob3a15SmkM


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*










)))))))))
Funny one
Thx for input ill consider it







lol


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I have made a short video of 3 mins , if you have time or interested in cpu degradation thing or what ever , take a look :
> https://youtu.be/tob3a15SmkM
> So at stock voltage and stock clocks not playable...freezing . But passes occt 1 hour or prime 95 easy.( i can prove it also)
> 
> At bumped vcore volts it would game and pass stress tests .
> Max of frequency it does now is 4.7 at 1.4 stable .
> 
> Chip has like 2 moths only , all time under water cooling , has maximum at all in all maybe 4-5 hours of occt stressing and like 0 hours of prime till it failed.
> Max W i saw in hwinfo was 106-110w drowing ... so its not that high ...assuming gaming takes less.
> 
> Dont consider this as im crying or something
> Im just sharing , of what i think an expirience of a cpu degradation


Looks like you just are unlucky with the CPU. Something went wrong inside the processor, it happens just the luck of it.

I prime95 v28.10 for 8 hours up to 94c with no problem.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> For now ita on auto, normally before the degratation happened after just a freeze in game, it was at 4.7


yeah - try leaving the cache multi's on auto but boost cpu vccio 2 or 3 notches. starting to look like a cache issue, maybe.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Looks like you just are unlucky with the CPU. Something went wrong inside the processor, it happens just the luck of it.
> 
> I prime95 v28.10 for 8 hours up to 94c with no problem.


is therE some reason you keep posting the same p95 run of a 7600K running at basically stock clocks? It's not even a 10% OC on a non-HT chip. MOst folks here are running 20+% overclocks. Heck, Maken was running his cache higher than your core.
Try overclocking that cpu - this is Overclock.net. Right?


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - try leaving the cache multi's on auto but boost cpu vccio 2 or 3 notches. starting to look like a cache issue, maybe.
> is therE some reason you keep posting the same p95 run of a 7600K running at basically stock clocks? It's not even a 10% OC on a non-HT chip. MOst folks here are running 20+% overclocks. Heck, Maken was running his cache higher than your core.
> Try overclocking that cpu - this is Overclock.net. Right?


He's obviously running out of thermal headroom to overlock any










On the subject we should clearly push for a sister forum for people like me with thermal problems, name it undervolt.net ?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> For now ita on auto, normally before the degratation happened after just a freeze in game, it was at 4.7
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - try leaving the cache multi's on auto but boost cpu vccio 2 or 3 notches. starting to look like a cache issue, maybe.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Looks like you just are unlucky with the CPU. Something went wrong inside the processor, it happens just the luck of it.
> 
> I prime95 v28.10 for 8 hours up to 94c with no problem.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> is therE some reason you keep posting the same p95 run of a 7600K running at basically stock clocks? It's not even a 10% OC on a non-HT chip. MOst folks here are running 20+% overclocks. Heck, Maken was running his cache higher than your core.
> Try overclocking that cpu - this is Overclock.net. Right?
Click to expand...

Stock on i5 7600k is 4.0GHz it's a 600Mhz overclock.







Can you run Prime 95 Blend for 8 hours.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Stock on i5 7600k is 4.0GHz it's a 600Mhz overclock.


wrong . stock turbo is 4.2.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Stock on i5 7600k is 4.0GHz it's a 600Mhz overclock.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wrong . stock turbo is 4.2.
Click to expand...

You are wrong, the i5 7600k 4 cores will only run at 4.0GHz do you know anything about overclocking with Intel. I have 600 MHz overclock when I game. Can you run prime95 for 8 hours or is your overclock to unstable?


----------



## encrypted11

There is a turbo multiplier table which can be read with Intel XTU & a proper Management Engine Interface driver installed.

42 is probably the 1 core turbo ratio. I'm not sure about the entire table since I don't own one of these.

7700Ks have a turbo mutiplier table of 45-44-44-44 (4 to 1 core ratio respectively)


----------



## Forecast

Had a bit of a scare. Delidded my other 7700K in my Plex server, and when I was applying Conductonaut I had a tiny dot fly over onto the PCB. I immediately mopped it up and then cleaned the area 4 or 5 times with 99% isopropyl alcohol. After I waited a few hours for my re-lid to set, I put it back in the socket and no post. I was getting weird IDE/SATA codes. I was pissed because my first delid was flawless. I decided to re-seat the CPU, and using my phone camera I zoomed into the socket to see if a pin somehow got bent. The pins were fine but I did notice a tiny, and I mean tiny, piece of debris sitting in the socket. I blew it out, re-seated, and all was well.

If I ever upgrade one of my machines to a 7900x I will buy it from Silicon Lottery. No way in hell I'd risk that sucker! I still think delidding is almost idiot proof, but everyone can make a mistake. In my case, it was something unrelated to the delid, and I'm still confused because I always immediately cover the socket. Plus, I inspected the bottom of the CPU as well before the install, so I know the debris didn't come from it.

This is my original chip from a Microcenter prebuild. Haven't been able to get 5.2Ghz stable at the same voltage as my other CPU. I'm using a different mobo (K6 Fatal1ty vs Taichi), but 5.0 is stable at around 1.31 in RB. I still need to provide screenshots for my other build, but I never remember and I'm always hitting up the forum from my phone at night once the kids are asleep.

5.0 Ghz is probably all I need for my Plex machine anyway especially if hardware decoding gets better.

Because I can't leave well enough alone I'm about to move the Plex server to my R5 Define case, and I'm moving the Taichi build to a new Define S with the new Fractal Design Celsius S36 AIO replacing my H100i V2. Wasn't planning two swaps, but the original Microcenter case for my Plex box won't fit the H100i V2, and I wanted to move it away from air for a more silent build. Not with 8 HDDs!!! Speaking of which... now I will have room for a few more WD Reds.


----------



## encrypted11

I believe there's misinformation around referencing TjMax and that it is acceptable to have an *overclocked/overvolted* chip run at 90+C on prime95 stress testing for a prolonged period and for the record, those TjMax figures are based the CPU's factory rating and shouldn't be conflated with temperature record observations with an OC - I don't think that's a good idea, at all.

Personally for an acid test, I use prime95 (FMA enabled, AVX disabled) only for testing transient loads (couple of minutes at most) and that if the adaptive voltage point + all c states + speedshift (HWP) and if they're sufficient for switching states without ACPI interrupts or DPC latency that are associated with insufficient voltage. If DPC latency doesn't spike on ACPI.sys with speedshift on that particular voltage point, it is likely that the system will fare decently in long term stability on the particular vCore.
(I normally run my system always powered on with a span of 2-4 weeks before my cyclical pc reboot). The rest of the stability test lies with normal daily usage.

But "OC stability" is subjective. I don't see a point in insinuating a particular stability test methodology is superior over another. It depends on a case by case basis. Something that works out for an individual may not apply for another.


----------



## Forecast

Who here is going to wait on upgrading to X299 until the platform is more mature, more mobos out, and perhaps some of the thermal issues get addressed? If I'm going to move over its for the 7900x. No other reason to switch just yet....


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forecast*
> 
> Who here is going to wait on upgrading to X299 until the platform is more mature, more mobos out, and perhaps some of the thermal issues get addressed? If I'm going to move over its for the 7900x. No other reason to switch just yet....


Personally im not going to bother with X299 does not really offer anything over Z270 in terms of chipset features and for my personal use scenario more slower cores is of no use to me


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Quick update :
> My cpu no longer boots on 5.1 , not stable at 5.0 and 4.9 and 4.8 anymore.
> Stable in any stress tests ( including prime and occt) at stock voltage, but would cause artifacts and freezes in game at stock bios settings.
> 
> However it would run games stable at 4.7. With a massive 1.4 volts any lower voltage causes artifacts and freezes.
> 
> So i went down from 5.1 to 4.7 ghz at same voltage as before (1.4v)
> 
> What surprises me most is that at stock bios settings it passes all streres but, it freezes in games...
> How come idkn isnt prime and occt much powerfull then games? Im talking of max 1 min till freeze in game vs 1 hour of prime or occt of successful passing


You degraded the CPU by running prime and stress tests with high vcore too much.
Not every CPU reacts the same but this type of degradation has been known ever since the sandy bridge days.

Pentium 4 Northwood 3.4's and EE's would degrade at 1.7v just by using the computer normally. Cost me over $1,000 in chips with that.
Sandy Bridge chips reacted differently,

However, using the "PLL Overvoltage" setting to unlock the +5 higher multipliers while running PRIME95 (or Linpack) on high vcore was VERY BAD. This WOULD degrade most processors and cause all lower clocks/volts (e.g. 4.5 ghz at 1.25v) to require more vcore. I'm at 4.9 ghz @ 1.452v now leaving it on 24/7 (the highest step before PLL Overvoltage has to be turned on) and I'm not getting any Stop 0x124 errors or strange things--I just can't run Prime small FFT AVX here though or it locks up. Everything normal is fine, including my 8 thread chess engine. Disabling AVX and using pentium 4 FFT is ok.

All of you guys are burning up MUCH LOWER micron chips with absurd CURRENT and temps. These aren't 28mm or 22mm chips we're talking about here.
Some of them ARE going to degrade if you torture them. Period. Not all, but enough to cause worries. Unless your day to day work requires super high levels of current like AVX instructions, I would really limit this type of testing. And this stuff about "1.52v is max safe limit" or "1.45v" is complete BS. Do you guys even know where those values came from?

They came from absolute MAXIMUM voltages. Intel designs these chips to be run with vdroop, and 1.52v is the absolute maximum voltage that the (Sandy bridge era) chips were able to take, but they were not 24/7 voltages, just like the lower voltages you guys claim are max on kaby lake (1.45v? That's not a safe 24/7 voltage even on water).

Just be careful with unrealistic high current stress tests when running high vcore and high overclocks!


----------



## BoredErica

I'd rather wait for Coffee Lake than go to x299.


----------



## Scotty99

Ive had BSOD's in games after overnight prime stable.

Sure run prime for half an hour or whatever, but stress test your PC in a way you actually use it.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ive had BSOD's in games after overnight prime stable.
> 
> Sure run prime for half an hour or whatever, but stress test your PC in a way you actually use it.


This should be put in everyone's sig on this group.
Not getting any more degradation after I stopped running Prime with AVX or FMA3. (Prime with AVX Disabled is as stressful as an 8 core chess engine).


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> This should be put in everyone's sig on this group.
> Not getting any more degradation after I stopped running Prime with AVX or FMA3. (Prime with AVX Disabled is as stressful as an 8 core chess engine).


The problem is, that i did not even had prime95 installed before degradation. I installed it after


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> The problem is, that i did not even had prime95 installed before degradation. I installed it after


Things like this just happen... I lost my 7700K in a similar way, degraded fast over a period of 4 days than it stopped working all together.
Luckily the store I bought it from gave me warranty even if it was delided and I got a replacement CPU..

**My Kaby dyed or degraded due to Bench runs....not stability tests..

The new CPU is an ongoing "problem" in it's own so I had not submitted the data for it to be charted yet (Strange enough it has the same serial as the first one but works completely utterly different)

@ 5.1 atm -1AVX 5.0 Cache 1.425V... just dropped temp 20-25 Celsius by adding some new cooling bits and having a max spike of 68 ( CPU Package - Individual Cores might be a bit hotter) now in a 8h RB run so that might allow me to either get lower volts or higher freq at same V, will have to see.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Things like this just happen... I lost my 7700K in a similar way, degraded fast over a period of 4 days than it stopped working all together.
> Luckily the store I bought it from gave me warranty even if it was delided and I got a replacement CPU..
> 
> **My Kaby dyed or degraded due to Bench runs....not stability tests..
> 
> The new CPU is an ongoing "problem" in it's own so I had not submitted the data for it to be charted yet (Strange enough it has the same serial as the first one but works completely utterly different)
> 
> @ 5.1 atm -1AVX 5.0 Cache 1.425V... just dropped temp 20-25 Celsius by adding some new cooling bits and having a max spike of 68 ( CPU Package - Individual Cores might be a bit hotter) now in a 8h RB run so that might allow me to either get lower volts or higher freq at same V, will have to see.


Yea i remember how you changed your cpu, actually how the store fixed the old one you had







 lol

I guess you are right, things like that just happen. Its first time for me though, i imagined degradation differently, more as a slow process.
I have watched Linus on youtube one time about degradation , where he was trying to prove that its a myth and degradation does not exist








Now i have some experience in that ,hah

Its my second 7700k that goes out, idkn what to do buy a 3rd one or just go into ryzen thing, wont be that much more expensive, well depends if my ram would work on ryzen i guess.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*


If I had to start from zero now...I'd go Ryzen....just because kaby platform has no continuity while am4 will be on the market for at least 2 more generations (...so they say...)
If it's time to sell everything, now's the time...as value has already plunged due to all the new releases.

AMD is not Intel and I would not see anywhere in the near future Ryzen going 3866+ on Mem
So the difference between incompatible RAM (2933 or whatever was the minimum) and compatible (3200) is so small that you won't see it anywhere in day by day applications and games.

EDIT: O yes....you will see a difference of 1-5 fps....when you already rocking 60-150 FPS...big deal..

(Can't really say how the platform has evolved for the past 2 months as I am banned on OCN on all AMD threads







)


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> If I had to start from zero now...I'd go Ryzen....just because kaby platform has no continuity while am4 will be on the market for at least 2 more generations (...so they say...)
> If it's time to sell everything, now's the time...as value has already plunged due to all the new releases.
> 
> AMD is not Intel and I would not see anywhere in the near future Ryzen going 3866+ on Mem
> So the difference between incompatible RAM (2933 or whatever was the minimum) and compatible (3200) is so small that you won't see it anywhere in day by day applications and games.
> 
> EDIT: O yes....you will see a difference of 1-5 fps....when you already rocking 60-150 FPS...big deal..
> 
> (Can't really say how the platform has evolved for the past 2 months as I am banned on OCN on all AMD threads
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Lol why your banned ?







))

See the threadriper is on about to lounch , who knows mb the price will be cheap on it , or idkn.

About the memory , i own a 3400 kit , if it would do a 3000 it would be ok, but i guess there a chance that the kit wont work at all??


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Lol why your banned ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ))
> 
> See the threadriper is on about to lounch , who knows mb the price will be cheap on it , or idkn.
> 
> About the memory , i own a 3400 kit , if it would do a 3000 it would be ok, but i guess there a chance that the kit wont work at all??


There is no such thing as "not working at all"..or not that I have heard of.
It will just work lower than the advertised speed / timings.

EDIT: Because apparently I was provoking members in their "safe place" having the guts to go there with my bench runs and provoking members to beat me....
The truth is...I was just curious on performance and as I stated here and elsewhere multiple times before I am thinking of going / supporting team Red.


----------



## Delo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Things like this just happen... I lost my 7700K in a similar way, degraded fast over a period of 4 days than it stopped working all together.
> Luckily the store I bought it from gave me warranty even if it was delided and I got a replacement CPU..
> 
> **My Kaby dyed or degraded due to Bench runs....not stability tests..
> 
> The new CPU is an ongoing "problem" in it's own so I had not submitted the data for it to be charted yet (Strange enough it has the same serial as the first one but works completely utterly different)
> 
> @ 5.1 atm -1AVX 5.0 Cache 1.425V... just dropped temp 20-25 Celsius by adding some new cooling bits and having a max spike of 68 ( CPU Package - Individual Cores might be a bit hotter) now in a 8h RB run so that might allow me to either get lower volts or higher freq at same V, will have to see.


What kind of cooling do you have? D: You run your cpu at the same speed and just a bit lower volt than me but get about 10c lower temps


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You are wrong, the i5 7600k 4 cores will only run at 4.0GHz do you know anything about overclocking with Intel. I have 600 MHz overclock when I game. Can you run prime95 for 8 hours or is your overclock to unstable?


https://ark.intel.com/products/97144/Intel-Core-i5-7600K-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz
getting ridiculous. OC your chip. Post back
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> There is a turbo multiplier table which can be read with Intel XTU & a proper Management Engine Interface driver installed.
> 42 is probably the 1 core turbo ratio. I'm not sure about the entire table since I don't own one of these.
> 7700Ks have a turbo mutiplier table of 45-44-44-44 (4 to 1 core ratio respectively)


Intel or ASUS core "enhancement" is only in effect at stock clocks. Once you overclock the system you would need to run per core multipliers to achieve the same effect. Otherwise Synch cores does just that, synchs all cores to the same multi. The max turbo multiplier will run on any core - all cores are capable of the same frequency.
Anyway - a per core oc is a great way to set the system up for games that use 1 or 2 cores.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Delo*
> 
> What kind of cooling do you have? D: You run your cpu at the same speed and just a bit lower volt than me but get about 10c lower temps


1x 240 EK SE Rad + 1x 240 EK XE Rad (60 mm thick) with a D5 pump going 4500+ Rpm and some Noctua 3000 Industrial fans.







CPU is delided with LM on dye and Gelid extreme between IHS and CPU Block (EK elite)



GPU not yet in the loop ***
The EK XE Rad not in this picture***


----------



## Delo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> 1x 240 EK SE Rad + 1x 240 EK XE Rad (60 mm thick) with a D5 pump going 4500+ Rpm and some Noctua 3000 Industrial fans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPU is delided with LM on dye and Gelid extreme between IHS and CPU Block (EK elite)
> 
> 
> 
> GPU not yet in the loop ***
> The EK XE Rad not in this picture***


Cool I'm doing 2 ek 360 (38mm) rads but I do have a gpu in my loop running 1200 rpm on fans and 2100 on pump. Even though I do have my gpu in it shouldn't be that much hotter right? D: I using condoctonaut between the die and ihs and noctua nt-h1 between ihs and block. I wonder what's making the difference... Did I apply the liquidmetal in correctly? I made sure there was a thin layer on the cpu and some on the ihs side. Any ideas?


----------



## becks

CPU to CPU comparison when it comes to temps even at same V is "mysterious" in many ways as it is very hard to reproduce same figures on 2 systems.
There are just too many variables that influence it...Ram OC, MB (VRM), layout, case air flow, quality of PSU current etc etc.
Depends on the GPU....1080 ti OC'ed can dump 300+ W of heat into the loop...
The pump can also make a HUGE difference, also the fans....2 different fans at same speed perform differently...

Even CPU at stock, assuming V are the same have different temps on same task...

Also your CPU might have a hard wall at 5.1 while mine, can push 5.2, 5.3 ...its just a matter of me being able to cool it....


----------



## ducegt

I've ran RealBench for more than 100 hours now and lots of other tests. No sign of degradation. 5.1 no AVX offset 8 hours RB 1.328v. My chip hits the wall at 5.4, but 5.2 requires above 1.42 and isn't able to consistently pass long tests.


----------



## mikailmohammed

So i will be getting this chip i would like to know if a custom loop with a thick 360 and 240 rad will be good enough to reach 5ghz and keep it cool without deliding?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mikailmohammed*
> 
> So i will be getting this chip i would like to know if a custom loop with a thick 360 and 240 rad will be good enough to reach 5ghz and keep it cool without deliding?


Depends on chip , i have bought 5 of them all in all, 2 of them were hiting 100c during stress test. Im also on water (400mm )
Oonly one would do 82c during test , and i kept it.


----------



## Asploit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mikailmohammed*
> 
> So i will be getting this chip i would like to know if a custom loop with a thick 360 and 240 rad will be good enough to reach 5ghz and keep it cool without deliding?


Nah see I had similar hopes, but the problem is not inadequate cooling from your primary cooling components but rather inadequate heat transfer from the CPU die to the IHS, which is why delidding is so frustratingly necessary with this generation of chip. When there's such a bad glue and TIM job between the die and the IHS, your cooling ceases to matter.

I hate to put on a tinfoil hat here but it certainly feels like this is a move from Intel to hedge their bets on their enthusiast-ish customers. They know we can't *not* chase the extra performance and that we'll voluntarily void our warranties in order to make them less liable, but at the same time they've shown time and again they're able to market that extra performance while simply absorbing bad press.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mikailmohammed*
> 
> So i will be getting this chip i would like to know if a custom loop with a thick 360 and 240 rad will be good enough to reach 5ghz and keep it cool without deliding?


Mate, you can have 2000mm+ of rad and it won't be enough if you don't delid.
That or you need to use active cooling (aka Phase change).


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> https://ark.intel.com/products/97144/Intel-Core-i5-7600K-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz
> getting ridiculous. OC your chip. Post back
> Intel or ASUS core "enhancement" is only in effect at stock clocks. Once you overclock the system you would need to run per core multipliers to achieve the same effect. Otherwise Synch cores does just that, synchs all cores to the same multi. The max turbo multiplier will run on any core - all cores are capable of the same frequency.
> Anyway - a per core oc is a great way to set the system up for games that use 1 or 2 cores.


I think you're missing wingman's point entirely. He's pointing out that at stock configuration Intel 7600K will run fully loaded 4 cores at 4.0GHz, while only really turboboosting to 4.2GHz if only one core is under load. Just like 7700K on its default configuration does only 4.4GHz on 4 cores, bumping up to 4.5GHz only during "1 core load". Remember, this is default configuration as specified by Intel. Random motherboard manufacturers easily have random BIOS options that override this, potentially by default (I've not had an ASUS mobo for ~15 years, I don't know what they default to)

Now then how do you want to define +%overclock? Do you compare default single core utilization clocks to the OC'd single core utilization, or default full processor load to OC'd full processor load configuration?

And yes, this is entirely splitting hairs. But I do strongly think wingman99 is fair to state his 4600MHz x 4 configuration is indeed "600MHz overclock" over Intel's default 4000MHz x 4 configuration.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You are wrong, the i5 7600k 4 cores will only run at 4.0GHz do you know anything about overclocking with Intel. I have 600 MHz overclock when I game. Can you run prime95 for 8 hours or is your overclock to unstable?
> 
> 
> 
> https://ark.intel.com/products/97144/Intel-Core-i5-7600K-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz
> getting ridiculous. OC your chip. Post back
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *encrypted11*
> 
> There is a turbo multiplier table which can be read with Intel XTU & a proper Management Engine Interface driver installed.
> 42 is probably the 1 core turbo ratio. I'm not sure about the entire table since I don't own one of these.
> 7700Ks have a turbo mutiplier table of 45-44-44-44 (4 to 1 core ratio respectively)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Intel or ASUS core "enhancement" is only in effect at stock clocks. Once you overclock the system you would need to run per core multipliers to achieve the same effect. Otherwise Synch cores does just that, synchs all cores to the same multi. The max turbo multiplier will run on any core - all cores are capable of the same frequency.
> Anyway - a per core oc is a great way to set the system up for games that use 1 or 2 cores.
Click to expand...

Stock Intel turbo running 4 cores on i5 7600k is 4.0Ghz. Stock one core turbo is 4.2Ghz. You need to learn the basics of Intel before overclocking. What you are saying here is overclocking with ASUS. I have gigabyte, then using the CPU upgrade option to 4.6GHz from stock default turbo 4.0GHz gives 4.6GHz with 600Mhz overclock from 4 core turbo of 4.0GHz.


----------



## wingman99

I even have a CPU upgrade option to overclock to i5 7600k 4.2GHz.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> This should be put in everyone's sig on this group.
> Not getting any more degradation after I stopped running Prime with AVX or FMA3. (Prime with AVX Disabled is as stressful as an 8 core chess engine).
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is, that i did not even had prime95 installed before degradation. I installed it after
Click to expand...

Prime 95 v28.10 is not a problem I run it for 8 hours at a time up to 94c without a problem ever.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Prime 95 v28.10 is not a problem I run it for 8 hours at a time up to 94c without a problem ever.


Bro its no problem for now.... you can learn on my exemple...
i also could state that there is no problem, till one moment
I hope that moment wont come to you but, as i saw cpu may degrade in a second ...


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Prime 95 v28.10 is not a problem I run it for 8 hours at a time up to 94c without a problem ever.


put in 1.4v and do a few sessions (I wouldn't recommend it)
that screenshot is not even doing 1.2v

testing with Prime is a problem, not because of Prime, but because of using high overclocks with high voltages and then testing with Prime
at less than 1.2v @4.6Ghz you're probably fine for the next deacde

hell it's not a challenge to pass it with 4.6Ghz
it becomes a challenge in trying to find the lowest voltage while doing so

but if one tries to save electricity it would be best not to run Prime as a hobby
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Just be careful with unrealistic high current stress tests when running high vcore and high overclocks!


if people come here, to a thread that says *guide* they should read the very first post

the recommended stress test is x264 loop or AsusRealbench

and that's it

it's even been stated that harder programs might at least hinder an overclock, while running Prime might not be good for the longevity of the CPU

just because wingman loves to post Prime screenshots doesn't mean we all do testing in Prime (see MaKeN, didn't use Prime before his CPU degraded)
just bad luck


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Bro its no problem for now.... you can learn on my exemple...
> i also could state that there is no problem, till one moment
> I hope that moment wont come to you but, as i saw cpu may degrade in a second ...


hunting Prime numbers as a hobby should be fine with voltages below 1.3v (max recommended voltage from Asus for testing with Prime is 1.35v, Asus Guide is in Jpmboy's sig)

would be interesting to see if lowering the caches multiplier does something in you're case


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> hunting Prime numbers as a hobby should be fine with voltages below 1.3v (max recommended voltage from Asus for testing with Prime is 1.35v, Asus Guide is in Jpmboy's sig)
> 
> would be interesting to see if lowering the caches multiplier does something in you're case


I think its more relevant to consider how much the CPU current draw is when running Prime 95 rather than voltage, Prime 95 has not been regarded as being a suitable stress test since Haswell


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Prime 95 v28.10 is not a problem I run it for 8 hours at a time up to 94c without a problem ever.
> 
> 
> 
> put in 1.4v and do a few sessions (I wouldn't recommend it)
> that screenshot is not even doing 1.2v
> 
> testing with Prime is a problem, not because of Prime, but because of using high overclocks with high voltages and then testing with Prime
> at less than 1.2v @4.6Ghz you're probably fine for the next deacde
> 
> hell it's not a challenge to pass it with 4.6Ghz
> it becomes a challenge in trying to find the lowest voltage while doing so
> 
> but if one tries to save electricity it would be best not to run Prime as a hobby
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Just be careful with unrealistic high current stress tests when running high vcore and high overclocks!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> if people come here, to a thread that says *guide* they should read the very first post
> 
> the recommended stress test is x264 loop or AsusRealbench
> 
> and that's it
> 
> it's even been stated that harder programs might at least hinder an overclock, while running Prime might not be good for the longevity of the CPU
> 
> just because wingman loves to post Prime screenshots doesn't mean we all do testing in Prime (see MaKeN, didn't use Prime before his CPU degraded)
> just bad luck
Click to expand...

Running prime95 28.10 blend at 4.6Ghz I need a significant amount of Vcore 1.212v minimum. Most folks here can't run prime95 v28.10 blend on there rig now. I prove it can be done overclocked 4.6Ghz with a Air cooler.


----------



## opt33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> I think its more relevant to consider how much the CPU current draw is when running Prime 95 rather than voltage, Prime 95 has not been regarded as being a suitable stress test since Haswell


Agree it is current issue. But as long as current isnt near max, and running prime for a short time, I can find stability points way faster with it than any other program, hence will always use it.

For example skylake X the max current is 165 amp (297W). The max <2ms spike current is 190 amps (342W). So if running prime at setting that draws near 165 amps, then yeah I wouldnt do that.

But since prime is harsher on more modern cpus, especially with avx, I now run prime 95 v28 for only an hour, bump vcore up 2 notches from that, and every cpu I have OCed that way will run stable, and easily run 24 hours of any other stress test, in fact can reduce the vcore and pass any other test.

Nothing wrong with using other programs. Nothing wrong with running closer to edge of stability, then bumping up vcore if needed. And nothing wrong with running short runs of prime, as long as you mind the current/w max. Or running longer runs if at low current. I have only had 1 issue with bsods in past 15 years, and that was a hard drive that went bad. Never had a cpu OC go unstable on me.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *opt33*
> 
> Agree it is current issue. But as long as current isnt near max, and running prime for a short time, I can find stability points way faster with it than any other program, hence will always use it.
> 
> For example skylake X the max current is 165 amp (297W). The max <2ms spike current is 190 amps (342W). So if running prime at setting that draws near 165 amps, then yeah I wouldnt do that.
> 
> But since prime is harsher on more modern cpus, especially with avx, I now run prime 95 v28 for only an hour, bump vcore up 2 notches from that, and every cpu I have OCed that way will run stable, and easily run 24 hours of any other stress test, in fact can reduce the vcore and pass any other test.
> 
> Nothing wrong with using other programs. Nothing wrong with running closer to edge of stability, then bumping up vcore if needed. And nothing wrong with running short runs of prime, as long as you mind the current/w max. Or running longer runs if at low current. I have only had 1 issue with bsods in past 15 years, and that was a hard drive that went bad. Never had a cpu OC go unstable on me.


Everybody has their own thoughts on stress testing, personally I run OCCT for an hour followed by Realbench for an hour that way Im combining synthetic loads with real world applications, like you I have never had any stability issues using this testing method at least not for the last few years, if I were to have a BSOD (due to overclock) running one of my programs I just bump up the Vcore 10-15mV which usually solves the problem


----------



## opt33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Everybody has their own thoughts on stress testing, personally I run OCCT for an hour followed by Realbench for an hour that way Im combining synthetic loads with real world applications, like you I have never had any stability issues using this testing method at least not for the last few years, if I were to have a BSOD (due to overclock) running one of my programs I just bump up the Vcore 10-15mV which usually solves the problem


yep to each their own...but you and I test nearly same, since both use prime 95 large ffts for an hour. OCCT:cpu uses prime 95 large ffts as its test, and I use Prime 95 blend only with large FFTs, same program different GUI. The power draw is identical between prime 28.5 and OCCT:cpu on mine.


----------



## MaKeN

Would hwinfo display correct W for cpu package power?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mikailmohammed*
> 
> So i will be getting this chip i would like to know if a custom loop with a thick 360 and 240 rad will be good enough to reach 5ghz and keep it cool without deliding?


Part of the problem is that if the thermal energy is not being transferred efficiently, then the improvements you'll see with better cooling will be limited.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Would hwinfo display correct W for cpu package power?


I believe so... well, accurate enough. Don't forget you can decrease sensor update time. And turn SVID on.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I've ran RealBench for more than 100 hours now and lots of other tests. No sign of degradation. 5.1 no AVX offset 8 hours RB 1.328v. My chip hits the wall at 5.4, but 5.2 requires above 1.42 and isn't able to consistently pass long tests.


nice chip!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mikailmohammed*
> 
> So i will be getting this chip i would like to know if a custom loop with a thick 360 and 240 rad will be good enough to reach 5ghz and keep it cool without deliding?


IMO, if you want to run 5.0 or higher as a 24/7, you really need to delid a 7700K. The Intel tim application is fairly inconsistent (as is the bond line) - you may get lucky.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Would hwinfo display correct W for cpu package power?


I get basically the same value from HWI and AID64 in back-toback runs. I'll have to plug in the watt meter to get an actual...



from a kill-a-watt meter R15 pulls (Tsystem load-idle)=: 175-82=93W Pretty close to aid and hwi.








correction.. idling at 800, the Tsystem = 70W... so HWI and AID are spot on.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> I think you're missing wingman's point entirely. He's pointing out that at stock configuration Intel 7600K will run fully loaded 4 cores at 4.0GHz, while only really turboboosting to 4.2GHz if only one core is under load. Just like 7700K on its default configuration does only 4.4GHz on 4 cores, bumping up to 4.5GHz only during "1 core load". Remember, this is default configuration as specified by Intel. Random motherboard manufacturers easily have random BIOS options that override this, potentially by default (I've not had an ASUS mobo for ~15 years, I don't know what they default to)
> 
> Now then how do you want to define +%overclock? Do you compare default single core utilization clocks to the OC'd single core utilization, or default full processor load to OC'd full processor load configuration?
> 
> And yes, this is entirely splitting hairs. But I do strongly think wingman99 is fair to state his 4600MHz x 4 configuration is indeed "600MHz overclock" over Intel's default 4000MHz x 4 configuration.


I and most OCers (say at HWBOT for instance) consider the overclock based on the stock max frequency (turbo boost or XFR), not on the base operating frequency. But it would make my 4.5GHz 6950X "look" better.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> I think you're missing wingman's point entirely. He's pointing out that at stock configuration Intel 7600K will run fully loaded 4 cores at 4.0GHz, while only really turboboosting to 4.2GHz if only one core is under load. Just like 7700K on its default configuration does only 4.4GHz on 4 cores, bumping up to 4.5GHz only during "1 core load". Remember, this is default configuration as specified by Intel. Random motherboard manufacturers easily have random BIOS options that override this, potentially by default (I've not had an ASUS mobo for ~15 years, I don't know what they default to)
> 
> Now then how do you want to define +%overclock? Do you compare default single core utilization clocks to the OC'd single core utilization, or default full processor load to OC'd full processor load configuration?
> 
> And yes, this is entirely splitting hairs. But I do strongly think wingman99 is fair to state his 4600MHz x 4 configuration is indeed "600MHz overclock" over Intel's default 4000MHz x 4 configuration.
> 
> 
> 
> I and most OCers (say at HWBOT for instance) consider the overclock based on the stock max frequency (turbo boost or XFR), not on the base operating frequency. But it would make my 4.5GHz 6950X "look" better.
Click to expand...

Agreed


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> I think you're missing wingman's point entirely. He's pointing out that at stock configuration Intel 7600K will run fully loaded 4 cores at 4.0GHz, while only really turboboosting to 4.2GHz if only one core is under load. Just like 7700K on its default configuration does only 4.4GHz on 4 cores, bumping up to 4.5GHz only during "1 core load". Remember, this is default configuration as specified by Intel. Random motherboard manufacturers easily have random BIOS options that override this, potentially by default (I've not had an ASUS mobo for ~15 years, I don't know what they default to)
> 
> Now then how do you want to define +%overclock? Do you compare default single core utilization clocks to the OC'd single core utilization, or default full processor load to OC'd full processor load configuration?
> 
> And yes, this is entirely splitting hairs. But I do strongly think wingman99 is fair to state his 4600MHz x 4 configuration is indeed "600MHz overclock" over Intel's default 4000MHz x 4 configuration.
> 
> 
> 
> I and most OCers (say at HWBOT for instance) consider the overclock based on the stock max frequency (turbo boost or XFR), not on the base operating frequency. But it would make my 4.5GHz 6950X "look" better.
Click to expand...

Overclocking is what you do to change stock default Bios settings clock. So I have 600Mhz more clock speed on air from default playing games.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I and most OCers (say at HWBOT for instance) consider the overclock based on the stock max frequency (turbo boost or XFR), not on the base operating frequency. But it would make my 4.5GHz 6950X "look" better.


Sure. You could probably disable all but one core on the 6950X to make it look even better.

I mean that is already what Intel practically does on their marketing brochures when they state 7600K to be "4.2ghz" and 7700K to be "4.5GHz" on turbo boost


----------



## mikailmohammed

Welp i am afraid of deliding. Anyone know of a site beside siliconlittery that sells delided chips??


----------



## mikailmohammed

Guys i am getting a 6800k with board and ram for the same price as a new 7700k setup. What do you think is a better buy? I will be doing gaming and working with vms.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mikailmohammed*
> 
> Welp i am afraid of deliding. Anyone know of a site beside siliconlittery that sells delided chips??


US and rest of the world SL....UK has overclockers.co.uk and some other websites.
If you do the mat you get cheaper buying it from SL and paying the custom.

On a side note @MaKeN @Jpmboy... had my DDR charted in the OC thread for ram....it's been running same settings fro 3..4.. months now..
All of the sudden I got code 55 on every boot...all day long no matter what...increasing V did not help at all (V_Dim, VSSA, VCIN, PCH bla bla)..... decided to try and lower** V and now it works....
Did not run Gsat or HCI as I was running low on patience but did gave it a good 5h + gaming, some restarts... google seems to be remembering when I leave tabs open instead of trowing the recover option so.... *** ?!

Everyone is having degrade I have upgrade ?!


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> US and rest of the world SL....UK has overclockers.co.uk and some other websites.
> If you do the mat you get cheaper buying it from SL and paying the custom.
> 
> On a side note @MaKeN @Jpmboy... had my DDR charted in the OC thread for ram....it's been running same settings fro 3..4.. months now..
> All of the sudden I got code 55 on every boot...all day long no matter what...increasing V did not help at all (V_Dim, VSSA, VCIN, PCH bla bla)..... decided to try and lower** V and now it works....
> Did not run Gsat or HCI as I was running low on patience but did gave it a good 5h + gaming, some restarts... google seems to be remembering when I leave tabs open instead of trowing the recover option so.... *** ?!
> 
> Everyone is having degrade I have upgrade ?!


Hah cool, what was the voltage and how much you had to lower it?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Sure. You could probably disable all but one core on the 6950X to make it look even better.
> 
> I mean that is already what Intel practically does on their marketing brochures when they state 7600K to be "4.2ghz" and 7700K to be "4.5GHz" on turbo boost


yep - you gotta read the fine print. Anyway, if that's the profile you want to run, use a per core OC, no need to disable cores, I never do even when running benchmarks. Click the little bot icon in a users profile to check hwbot.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> US and rest of the world SL....UK has overclockers.co.uk and some other websites.
> If you do the mat you get cheaper buying it from SL and paying the custom.
> 
> On a side note @MaKeN @Jpmboy... had my DDR charted in the OC thread for ram....it's been running same settings fro 3..4.. months now..
> All of the sudden I got code 55 on every boot...all day long no matter what...increasing V did not help at all (V_Dim, VSSA, VCIN, PCH bla bla)..... decided to try and lower** V and now it works....
> Did not run Gsat or HCI as I was running low on patience but did gave it a good 5h + gaming, some restarts... google seems to be remembering when I leave tabs open instead of trowing the recover option so.... *** ?!
> 
> Everyone is having degrade I have upgrade ?!


now that's the direction. which voltage? Several of these rails have an "inverted-U" phasing and alignment optimization curve.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


Strange indeed...everything changed after I dropped 20 Celsius with the WC upgrade and my chip was very sensitive since the beginning..
As in not stable at 1.415......stable at 1.420.... not stable at 1.425
Than I trowed in RAM and it was not stable anymore so had to change that some more....
But anyhow, back to the RAM

It was doing 1.430v SA 1.1375 IO 1.18 PCH 1.0325....now is stable at 1.415 SA 1.0625 IO 1.12 PCH 1.025

Starting to think that my system won't pass RB 8h anymore now as this CPU is really fluffy wings... but I wont bother with another week of testing just for everything to be scrapped again when I install and OC the new GPU so I will leave it in the mist for now.


----------



## fevion

Working with the overclock of my 7700k and i think I got an average-bad cpu.

Multiplier x51, 5.1ghz,vcore 1.42, hottest core 78c while under x264 test with 10 loop, 16 threads and normal.
Cpu is delidded (hope i did it correctly) and i mounted my first ever made custom loop with hard lines, 2 radiators.

What do you think about 1.42 vcore for daily use, i mean 12-16h turned on.

UUPDATE: and System crash :/


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fevion*
> 
> Working with the overclock of my 7700k and i think I got an average-bad cpu.
> 
> Multiplier x51, 5.1ghz,vcore 1.42, hottest core 78c while under x264 test with 10 loop, 16 threads and normal.
> Cpu is delidded (hope i did it correctly) and i mounted my first ever made custom loop with hard lines, 2 radiators.
> 
> What do you think about 1.42 vcore for daily use, i mean 12-16h turned on.
> 
> UUPDATE: and System crash :/


Depends, keep an eye on CPU Package Temp and W draw..if those 2 are in line with what Intel recommends as safe you have nothing to worry about.


----------



## fevion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Depends, keep an eye on CPU Package Temp and W draw..if those 2 are in line with what Intel recommends as safe you have nothing to worry about.


The problem is that i can't really find info about intel specs. The only things i read in the forum are: 7700k TDP is 91w so in OC never double that amount, and the package temp was 75c.
I'm not sure i did a good delid i mean i'm not 100% sure i applied the thermal paste good on the die, but i think that 75c on 1.42 is pretty good.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fevion*
> 
> The problem is that i can't really find info about intel specs. The only things i read in the forum are: 7700k TDP is 91w so in OC never double that amount, and the package temp was 75c.
> I'm not sure i did a good delid i mean i'm not 100% sure i applied the thermal paste good on the die, but i think that 75c on 1.42 is pretty good.


Don't go over 130 ish W id' say but if I am wrong someone will correct me..
Temp...stay under 85 Package
...What is the difference between cores when you stress test it ? if its smaller than 8 Celsius its fine. Also 75 at 1.42 (Bios or OS? ) is good.
What Cooling solution ? You might be having 2x 600 mm rads







you just said 2 rads...


----------



## fevion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Don't go over 130 ish W id' say but if I am wrong someone will correct me..
> Temp...stay under 85 Package
> ...What is the difference between cores when you stress test it ? if its smaller than 8 Celsius its fine. Also 75 at 1.42 (Bios or OS? ) is good.
> What Cooling solution ? You might be having 2x 600 mm rads
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you just said 2 rads...


Yea temp is smaller than 8c. 90% of times 2-3c.

I'm changing the parameters only in the BIOS.

My custom loop is: EK Supremacy EVO Gold (CPU waterblock), front RAD intake EK Coolstream XE360 5 fans Noctua 120mm NF-F12, top RAD exhaust EK Coolstream SE240 slim 2 fans Noctua 120mm, PUMP Xtop revo D5 PWM, ecc.

Thermal paste between die and IHS: Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut and between IHS and cpu waterblock Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut.

The loop cover: GPU (gtx 1080 ti overclocked at 2,1ghz), CPU and mobo mosfet.

PUMP: 100% speed (4800RPM)
Fans: 85% speed. 100% speed if temp go up to 90c.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Don't go over 130 ish W id' say but if I am wrong someone will correct me..
> Temp...stay under 85 Package
> ...What is the difference between cores when you stress test it ? *if its smaller than 8 Celsius its fine*. Also 75 at 1.42 (Bios or OS? ) is good.
> What Cooling solution ? You might be having 2x 600 mm rads
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you just said 2 rads...


Actually cores within 10 degrees C of each other is fine, keep in mind Intel spec for 7700K temp sensors is + or - 5 degrees C so up to 10 degrees C is Ok


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fevion*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Depends, keep an eye on CPU Package Temp and W draw..if those 2 are in line with what Intel recommends as safe you have nothing to worry about.
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that i can't really find info about intel specs. The only things i read in the forum are: 7700k TDP is 91w so in OC never double that amount, and the package temp was 75c.
> I'm not sure i did a good delid i mean i'm not 100% sure i applied the thermal paste good on the die, but i think that 75c on 1.42 is pretty good.
Click to expand...

Intel i7 7700k T junction is 100c here is the link. https://ark.intel.com/products/97129/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_50-GHz

TJUNCTION
Junction Temperature is the maximum temperature allowed at the processor die.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Actually cores within 10 degrees C of each other is fine, keep in mind Intel spec for 7700K temp sensors is + or - 5 degrees C so up to 10 degrees C is Ok


I have high standards







more than 8 and I re-delid ..10 is also fine I guess
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Intel i7 7700k T junction is 100c here is the link. https://ark.intel.com/products/97129/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_50-GHz
> 
> TJUNCTION
> Junction Temperature is the maximum temperature allowed at the processor die.


TJUNCTION has been designed with "default" values in mind...same as the new i9 where the TJunction has been raised to 105 Celsius..
Overclocking is another animal altogether


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fevion*
> 
> Working with the overclock of my 7700k and i think I got an average-bad cpu.
> 
> Multiplier x51, 5.1ghz,vcore 1.42, hottest core 78c while under x264 test with 10 loop, 16 threads and normal.
> Cpu is delidded (hope i did it correctly) and i mounted my first ever made custom loop with hard lines, 2 radiators.
> 
> What do you think about 1.42 vcore for daily use, i mean 12-16h turned on.
> 
> UUPDATE: and System crash :/


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fevion*
> 
> The problem is that i can't really find info about intel specs. The only things i read in the forum are: 7700k TDP is 91w so in OC never double that amount, and the package temp was 75c.
> I'm not sure i did a good delid i mean i'm not 100% sure i applied the thermal paste good on the die, but i think that 75c on 1.42 is pretty good.


table 7.2

7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-.pdf 1678k .pdf file

1.42 is not bad, but getting up there. It's a good cpu tho. Before running at a "max" I'd quickly explore the voltage needed for a few lower frequencies. like 4.8, 4.9 and 5.0. If you start seeing way more than 10-12mV per 100MHz per core, the sample may be getting out of it's sweetspot. Nothing wrong with running it higher, but knowing the sweetspot helps to define how far off the reservation the horse has wandered.


----------



## fevion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> table 7.2
> 
> 7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-.pdf 1678k .pdf file
> 
> 1.42 is not bad, but getting up there. It's a good cpu tho. Before running at a "max" I'd quickly explore the voltage needed for a few lower frequencies. like 4.8, 4.9 and 5.0. If you start seeing way more than 10-12mV per 100MHz per core, the sample may be getting out of it's sweetspot. Nothing wrong with running it higher, but knowing the sweetspot helps to define how far off the reservation the horse has wandered.


Yea i did some soft OC before trying the max. Not a super deep exploration but i find out some good spots. I have to try to find out how much power it will ask every 100mhz

Anyway, for now, my sample can achieve 5ghz without problems and I'm quite happy about this. Tomorrow i'll try to reduce the vcore. Now i'm using (testing) 1.37v / x50 ( 5.0ghz ), and it passed x264, prime95 and a variety of games.

It will be great to achieve 5.1 ghz without burning the cpu or the mobo in a fire pillar ahahaha


----------



## NeoandGeo

@jpmboy Was your Cinebench score of 1130 done at 5.2Ghz and ~4000Mhz RAM?


----------



## Asploit

Okay so finished my Delid today.

Before:
360mm push/pull > MX-4 > IHS > Literal bird droppings > 7700k die

5.0Ghz @ 1.37v = Thermal Throttle 100C in x264

AFter:

360mm push/pull > Kryonaut > IHS > Conductonaut > 7700k die

5.0Ghz @ 1.37v = max temp 75C in x264

Intel ***?

So I guess next step is to see if I lucked out and if I can hit 5.1, let alone 5.2! Wish me luck, gents.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Okay so finished my Delid today.
> 
> Before:
> 360mm push/pull > MX-4 > IHS > Literal bird droppings > 7700k die
> 
> 5.0Ghz @ 1.37v = Thermal Throttle 100C in x264
> 
> AFter:
> 
> 360mm push/pull > Kryonaut > IHS > Conductonaut > 7700k die
> 
> 5.0Ghz @ 1.37v = max temp 75C in x264
> 
> Intel ***?
> 
> So I guess next step is to see if I lucked out and if I can hit 5.1, let alone 5.2! Wish me luck, gents.


Despite this, the small die size is still a bottleneck, chucking huge cooling power (barring active heat pumping) won't actually get it much below 75C.

Imma try to experiment with a small vapor chamber/custom heatspreader to see if its possible to overcome this.


----------



## Asploit

Okay quick question regarding AVX here as I work on my overclock tonight:

Is it standard practive to have 5.0+ Overclocks AVX'd down to 5.0?
Like if I run 5.1 do I set AVX to 1,
5.2 AVX to 2, etc?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Okay quick question regarding AVX here as I work on my overclock tonight:
> 
> Is it standard practive to have 5.0+ Overclocks AVX'd down to 5.0?
> Like if I run 5.1 do I set AVX to 1,
> 5.2 AVX to 2, etc?


Short answer no


----------



## Asploit

Okay thanks for the info! It looks like I'm stable 5.1 @ 1.44v in BIOS (Actual VCore fluctuates between 1.408 and 1.424) with AVX 0 and LLC at 5.

Peak temp so far is 67C, Avg 60-64C highest/lowest core.

Are these results fairly typical? Are there non-AVX benchmarks that are reputable?

-edit-

Okay so 1.44v keyed in at Bios gives me between 1.408 and 1.424 actual VCore, but my thermal headroom feels huge at peak 67C.

Is my overvolt limited purely by Thermals and nothing else, or is it bad to put in more voltage for other reasons?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Okay thanks for the info! It looks like I'm stable 5.1 @ 1.44v in BIOS (Actual VCore fluctuates between 1.408 and 1.424) with AVX 0 and LLC at 5.
> 
> Peak temp so far is 67C, Avg 60-64C highest/lowest core.
> 
> Are these results fairly typical? Are there non-AVX benchmarks that are reputable?
> 
> -edit-
> 
> Okay so 1.44v keyed in at Bios gives me between 1.408 and 1.424 actual VCore, but my thermal headroom feels huge at peak 67C.
> 
> Is my overvolt limited purely by Thermals and nothing else, or is it bad to put in more voltage for other reasons?


That would be an above average CPU







the reason you have so much thermal headroom is because AVX is one of the instruction sets that produces most of the heat hence part of the reason why you have an AVX offset available if you need it.


----------



## Asploit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> the reason you have so much thermal headroom is because AVX is one of the instruction sets that produces most of the heat hence part of the reason why you have an AVX offset available if you need it.


Well right now I have my AVX set to zero and running x264 16T but my temps aren't peaking above 70C, though honestly I haven't noticed any temp difference between 1.44v and 1.40v at all, though realistically my vcore is anywhere between 1.440 and 1.376.

Do I venture up to 5.2 and just throw more voltage at it so long as I'm not cooking my CPU?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Well right now I have my AVX set to zero and running x264 16T but my temps aren't peaking above 70C, though honestly I haven't noticed any temp difference between 1.44v and 1.40v at all, though realistically my vcore is anywhere between 1.440 and 1.376.
> 
> Do I venture up to 5.2 and just throw more voltage at it so long as I'm not cooking my CPU?


You could try for 5.2Ghz but at 1.44V you already are at a point that personally I wouldn't be running 24/7 (most overclock guides and pro overclockers dont recommend more than 1.4V 24/7), you could try a bit more voltage to run certain benchmarks but not long term


----------



## Asploit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> You could try for 5.2Ghz but at 1.44V you already are at a point that personally I wouldn't be running 24/7 (most overclock guides and pro overclockers dont recommend more than 1.4V 24/7), you could try a bit more voltage to run certain benchmarks but not long term


Sound advice. I'm rock-solid doing 5.0 @ 1.37v, do you think I should just be happy with that? I guess I'm just feeling greedy because at 1.37v my temps skim just above 60 and I just feel like throwing a bag of volts at it and pushing for more.


----------



## BoredErica

x264 test isn't really that hot or that hard to pass... I see no reason to set avx offset for that. That's why 1 offset with 5ghz is recorded as 4.9ghz with 1 offset noted in comments on the chart.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> the reason you have so much thermal headroom is because AVX is one of the instruction sets that produces most of the heat hence part of the reason why you have an AVX offset available if you need it.
> 
> 
> 
> Well right now I have my AVX set to zero and running x264 16T but my temps aren't peaking above 70C, though honestly I haven't noticed any temp difference between 1.44v and 1.40v at all, though realistically my vcore is anywhere between 1.440 and 1.376.
> 
> Do I venture up to 5.2 and just throw more voltage at it so long as I'm not cooking my CPU?
Click to expand...

I would not go much higher with Vcore. 24/7 Vcore maximum would be 1.44v.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Sound advice. I'm rock-solid doing 5.0 @ 1.37v, do you think I should just be happy with that? I guess I'm just feeling greedy because at 1.37v my temps skim just above 60 and I just feel like throwing a bag of volts at it and pushing for more.


Perhaps stick with 5 Ghz @1.37V and try a stress test that does use AVX and see where your temps are at then


----------



## encrypted11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Sound advice. I'm rock-solid doing 5.0 @ 1.37v, do you think I should just be happy with that? I guess I'm just feeling greedy because at 1.37v my temps skim just above 60 and I just feel like throwing a bag of volts at it and pushing for more.


You should be pretty satisfied with the fact that your chip does 5GHz at acceptable voltages. About 3 in 5 chips does a minimum of 5GHz at daily use voltages according to SL binning stats.

My first chip was throttling at stock and creating system instability, wouldn't scale beyond 4.8GHz. There are people out there with these chips that I know of too.

Your chip's pretty decent.


----------



## BoredErica

My custom loop is hopefully getting built sometime next week...

Will upload thermal tests if so.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> My custom loop is hopefully getting built sometime next week...
> 
> Will upload thermal tests if so.


Looking forward to you posting some results.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NeoandGeo*
> 
> @jpmboy Was your Cinebench score of 1130 done at 5.2Ghz and ~4000Mhz RAM?


no. just day driver clocks. 5.2/3866 with lots of background processes running. it's all in the screenshots
here's a water cooled one at 5.5/4000: http://hwbot.org/submission/3438531_jpmboy_cinebench___r15_core_i7_7700k_1221_cb
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Okay quick question regarding AVX here as I work on my overclock tonight:
> 
> Is it standard practive to have 5.0+ Overclocks AVX'd down to 5.0?
> Like if I run 5.1 do I set AVX to 1,
> 5.2 AVX to 2, etc?


not standard, but maybe useful.


----------



## NeoandGeo

Hmm, think you're getting any throttling for some reason during that test? I score 1122 @5.0/4.6 Cache w/ 3600Mhz C16 RAM.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NeoandGeo*
> 
> Hmm, think you're getting any throttling for some reason during that test? I score 1122 @5.0/4.6 Cache w/ 3600Mhz C16 RAM.


certainly no temp throttling. keep pushing. like I showed, 5500 is only 1221
post up a screenshot with hwi .. how many watts?

a lot depends on the conditions. here's 5.3/5.0 after a restart. so the 5.2 runs posted with HWI and aid64 back to back runs are not "clean".


----------



## MaKeN

Guys , how do you think how much mu cpu would be worth to sell if is dellided and its 4.7 at 1.39 stable? ( not in prime or occt)
Im thinking like to ask about 150$? On ebay


----------



## Asploit

My friends I call upon your collective wisdom and experience once again!

Are there ways to stabilize an overclock on a 7700k other than adding more voltage? I'm questing for 24/7 5.1 without kicking my volts up.

My memory doesn't like clocking up even a hair over its rated 3600 CL16, so I guess that means toying with BCLK is out.

Also when people use the nomenclature, for example, "5.1 @ 1.4v" are they talking about the voltage they enter in the bios, or the actual VCore as measured by software, like HWInfo?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> My friends I call upon your collective wisdom and experience once again!
> 
> Are there ways to stabilize an overclock on a 7700k other than adding more voltage? I'm questing for 24/7 5.1 without kicking my volts up.
> 
> My memory doesn't like clocking up even a hair over its rated 3600 CL16, so I guess that means toying with BCLK is out.
> 
> Also when people use the nomenclature, for example, "5.1 @ 1.4v" are they talking about the voltage they enter in the bios, or the actual VCore as measured by software, like HWInfo?
> 
> Thanks in advance!


7700k is pretty oldschool. More vcore, and more cooling.

If you don't wanna use the Vcore side of the equation, I can suggest investing in either a chillbox, phase change or TEC cooling. The chip gains a lot of stability every 10C you drop, maybe perhaps even enough to run 5.1ghz at <1.4V semi-safely.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> 7700k is pretty oldschool. More vcore, and more cooling.
> 
> If you don't wanna use the Vcore side of the equation, I can suggest investing in either a chillbox, phase change or TEC cooling. The chip gains a lot of stability every 10C you drop, maybe perhaps even enough to run 5.1ghz at <1.4V semi-safely.


while you're right on the kaby being old school
I think it would be cheaper (or at least way easier) to buy a binned chip then








there is also no guarantee that it will actually clock meaningfully higher with better cooling
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> My friends I call upon your collective wisdom and experience once again!
> 
> Are there ways to stabilize an overclock on a 7700k other than adding more voltage? I'm questing for 24/7 5.1 without kicking my volts up.
> 
> My memory doesn't like clocking up even a hair over its rated 3600 CL16, so I guess that means toying with BCLK is out.
> 
> Also when people use the nomenclature, for example, "5.1 @ 1.4v" are they talking about the voltage they enter in the bios, or the actual VCore as measured by software, like HWInfo?
> 
> Thanks in advance!


there are no hidden secrets sadly








hmmm (maybe core cache ratio, maybe RAM speed)
it's all vcore, temps *and* luck

that being said
I've seen overclock being hindered by high(ish) RAM speeds

real world performance would favour 100Mhz more on the i7 than anything over 3000/3200 RAM speed

for fun maybe try a little slower RAM speed (like 3000)

it's a maybe
if it does something then maybe you could tighten the timings

you can also try reducing cache ratio to maybe 42 and see if it makes a difference
and if it does work you're may up

but like Dasboogieman said
vcore and temps

investing in more exotic cooling might do the trick too
but simply buying a binned chip might be easier/ less expensive

https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/7700k52g
530$ for 5.2
450$ for 5.1

considering you could sell you're "old" 7700k as a used one (maybe as 5Ghz stable, no idea if it is)
you could recover half the cost
a more exotic cooling solution would not be cheaper than 200 bucks or some thinks

around here (certainly in this thread)
@1.4v means the voltage the chip actually gets
at least in my mind it makes the most sense
it's overclock.net
not noob.net


----------



## Asploit

Yeah my chip is 5.0 stable at 1.37 (actual VCore 1.36 AVX=0 LLC=0) and honestly it holds 5.1 (AVX=0 LLC=5) but up at 1.45 (actual VCore 1.44)

Honestly tho the trouble of shipping my delidded chip out and purchasing another chip just sounds like too much hassle for a realistically small performance difference. How many chips even do 5.2 under 1.4v anyway? I don't need the fastest 7700k on the planet here, especially for my use-case LOL

-edit-

Also that link above is 5.2 with AVX=2 which means it's a 5.0Ghz card under AVX instruction, right? Isn't that technically just a 5.0 chip?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Yeah my chip is 5.0 stable at 1.37 (actual VCore 1.36 AVX=0 LLC=0) and honestly it holds 5.1 (AVX=0 LLC=5) but up at 1.45 (actual VCore 1.44)
> 
> Honestly tho the trouble of shipping my delidded chip out and purchasing another chip just sounds like too much hassle for a realistically small performance difference. How many chips even do 5.2 under 1.4v anyway? I don't need the fastest 7700k on the planet here, especially for my use-case LOL
> 
> -edit-
> 
> Also that link above is 5.2 with AVX=2 which means it's a 5.0Ghz card under AVX instruction, right? Isn't that technically just a 5.0 chip?


What do you use the PC for?


----------



## Scotty99

I dunno what he does on his PC, but man get a new monitor lol.


----------



## Asploit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> I dunno what he does on his PC, but man get a new monitor lol.


I ACTUALLY need a new monitor. I do illustration and graphic design, so as far as color-accuracy goes my Wacom Cintiq does just fine for work. I'm just waiting on G-Sync HDR to come out so I can pick up one of those monitors! With the 7700k and one heck of a 1080Ti lottery roll, I can easily hit 165Hz 1440p, but until then I'm running basic-***** 1080p60 LOL


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> I ACTUALLY need a new monitor. I do illustration and graphic design, so as far as color-accuracy goes my Wacom Cintiq does just fine for work. I'm just waiting on G-Sync HDR to come out so I can pick up one of those monitors! With the 7700k and one heck of a 1080Ti lottery roll, I can easily hit 165Hz 1440p, but until then I'm running basic-***** 1080p60 LOL


Hah ya ive only got a 1060 and im running a 165hz 1440p panel.

HDR and local dimming is awesome (have vizio tv with it) but these monitors are gonna be crazy expensive, 2k+. That is more than a 65" 4k HDR tv lol.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Yeah my chip is 5.0 stable at 1.37 (actual VCore 1.36 AVX=0 LLC=0) and honestly it holds 5.1 (AVX=0 LLC=5) but up at 1.45 (actual VCore 1.44)
> 
> Honestly tho the trouble of shipping my delidded chip out and purchasing another chip just sounds like too much hassle for a realistically small performance difference. How many chips even do 5.2 under 1.4v anyway? I don't need the fastest 7700k on the planet here, especially for my use-case LOL
> 
> -edit-
> 
> Also that link above is 5.2 with AVX=2 which means it's a 5.0Ghz card under AVX instruction, right? Isn't that technically just a 5.0 chip?


My chip and a few others here will do 5.2Ghz under 1.4V (no AVX offset) so there are some chips that will do 5.2Ghz under 1.4V though not many







. Keep in mind the 100Mhz higher clock speed is roughly a 2% gain in performance so its not huge by any stretch but usefull for benching. Im not sure what Silicon lottery are doing these days they seem to have changed the way they test their CPU's though their method seems a bit vague to me, I would not consider their 5.2Ghz chips to be 5.2Ghz if they have an AVX offset of 2 but they openly admit that they have done this to have more chips make the grade so to speak at least for Skylake X. It may be the case that some of their 5.2 chips may not require an AVX offset at all, they have also dropped their testing voltage from 1.44V to 1.425V and no longer use CLU on the die for their delided chips.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Yeah my chip is 5.0 stable at 1.37 (actual VCore 1.36 AVX=0 LLC=0) and honestly it holds 5.1 (AVX=0 LLC=5) but up at 1.45 (actual VCore 1.44)
> 
> Honestly tho the trouble of shipping my delidded chip out and purchasing another chip just sounds like too much hassle for a realistically small performance difference. How many chips even do 5.2 under 1.4v anyway? I don't need the fastest 7700k on the planet here, especially for my use-case LOL
> 
> -edit-
> 
> Also that link above is 5.2 with AVX=2 which means it's a 5.0Ghz card under AVX instruction, right? Isn't that technically just a 5.0 chip?


I think 5.2 was about 7% chips tested from silicon lottery

even then it's a bit over 1.4v as well

is it a 5.0Ghz chip?

well if you're testing with Prime and AVX it is best not to go higher than 1.35v already

to my mind silicon lottery is actually a bit soft in they're testing for binned chips
7% with only RealBench and AVX offset?
maybe there are less than 1% doing 5.2 without an offset and testing with Prime (with voltages that are not crazy)

but in the US it's like the only service I think

for me here it's CaseKing
binned 7700k's top out at 5.1Ghz
but tested with latest Prime

but still with AVX offset I think

AVX is just so much more harder *and* destructive on the CPU (when *overclocked a lot* and long testing sessions)

the feature seemed to be important enough for Intel to being it down from the HEDT line

also if it's too much of a hassle to get a new chip, then it will be definitly a too big hassle to go for more exotic cooling
just the way you have to make sure there's no condensation
not to mention the investment
also you're sweet spot is 5Ghz

the jump in voltage to reach 5.1 is big

that's you're sign it's out of you're chips comfort zone
when you really have to pour more and more voltage into the chip for just 100Mhz more
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> have also dropped their testing voltage from 1.44V to 1.425V and no longer use CLU on the die for their delided chips.


both are a good thing
less voltage is always good thing
especially on the x299 chips

and they're using Grizzly Conductonaut instead of CLU
better product (not in handling though)


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I think 5.2 was about 7% chips tested from silicon lottery
> 
> even then it's a bit over 1.4v as well
> 
> is it a 5.0Ghz chip?
> 
> well if you're testing with Prime and AVX it is best not to go higher than 1.35v already
> 
> to my mind silicon lottery is actually a bit soft in they're testing for binned chips
> 7% with only RealBench and AVX offset?
> maybe there are less than 1% doing 5.2 without an offset and testing with Prime (with voltages that are not crazy)
> 
> but in the US it's like the only service I think
> 
> for me here it's CaseKing
> binned 7700k's top out at 5.1Ghz
> but tested with latest Prime
> 
> but still with AVX offset I think
> 
> AVX is just so much more harder *and* destructive on the CPU (when *overclocked a lot* and long testing sessions)
> 
> the feature seemed to be important enough for Intel to being it down from the HEDT line
> 
> also if it's too much of a hassle to get a new chip, then it will be definitly a too big hassle to go for more exotic cooling
> just the way you have to make sure there's no condensation
> not to mention the investment
> also you're sweet spot is 5Ghz
> 
> the jump in voltage to reach 5.1 is big
> 
> that's you're sign it's out of you're chips comfort zone
> when you really have to pour more and more voltage into the chip for just 100Mhz more
> both are a good thing
> less voltage is always good thing
> especially on the x299 chips
> 
> and they're using Grizzly Conductonaut instead of CLU
> better product (not in handling though)


The thing about CLU is that it is known to last over a long period of time but with thermal grizzly the jury is still out, time will tell. Silicon lottery stats were 6% of [email protected] 1.44V with no AVX offset 1 hour realbench stable before they changed their testing procedure, which came about since Skylake X. Its not clear on their website exactly what their testing proceedure is now except now they are quoting an AVX offset unlike before. You can however ask them for a low voltage 5.2Ghz by special request if they find one, obviously at higher cost. They do now offer a 1 year warranty on delided CPU's which is always a good thing, previously it was 30 days.


----------



## Hiikeri

http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/950#post_25917295
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> As you get more comfortable, nothing is needed on bottom of chip. Some eraser in socket between chip and retainer after chip is installed is more than capable of keeping moisture out. It is really about knowing when to stop to prevent any damage. As long as the pot and board have a layer of insulation, there are no worries. -20 and warmer is the danger zone when the temps of pot and warmer ambient air can create condensation. Getting it cold and keeping it cold removes a lot of issues and worry. As soon as you end your session remember to unplug psu.
> It is prudent to remount and repaste between every session.


Yours old answer, but i use Phase Change on my 24/7 cooling system so it needs properly protections against condensation, on every day usage.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Quick update :
> My cpu no longer boots on 5.1 , not stable at 5.0 and 4.9 and 4.8 anymore.
> Stable in any stress tests ( including prime and occt) at stock voltage, but would cause artifacts and freezes in game at stock bios settings.
> 
> However it would run games stable at 4.7. With a massive 1.4 volts any lower voltage causes artifacts and freezes.
> 
> So i went down from 5.1 to 4.7 ghz at same voltage as before (1.4v)
> 
> What surprises me most is that at stock bios settings it passes all streres but, it freezes in games...
> How come idkn isnt prime and occt much powerfull then games? Im talking of max 1 min till freeze in game vs 1 hour of prime or occt of successful passing


About all this...
There is something that i cant explain now after testing stuff today,lol

So i went to microcenter to pic up a new cpu and ram ( i have tried a new pcu the other day)

First i just went and installed a new ram, and BOOM , 5.1 at 1.4v would boot again!!!! Made me happy , like , the issue was my ram not the cpu!

And then something that i cant explain, i have put my old ram in, and it boots 5.1 as it did before as nothing was wrong... it made into 1 h of RB so far .

So *** made my pc act this way? Idkn, i did relocate my old ram , i did try just a single stick in all 4 slots ,i did flash the bios again,cmos , all kinds of resets, even new windows, and just after installing different ram and back to old one fixed the problem...
so for today im back to my old settings, something strange


----------



## Asploit

That is some spooky **** MaKeN I have no idea what is up with that. Maybe it was some iffy BIOS setting that was defaulted back when the system detected new memory installed?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> That is some spooky **** MaKeN I have no idea what is up with that. Maybe it was some iffy BIOS setting that was defaulted back when the system detected new memory installed?


It kinda makes me think of that also, but thwn , i have reseted Bios , not just one time








I did shake all the electrical connections there , all i could think of.
But simply inserting a different ram and swap it back to original one , kinda fixed the problem ...i cant imagine why .
i did mess up with timings, voltage and all that stuff that is memory related, it passed HCi tests also .... there was simply no sighn of a bad memory stick

But then again i cant say that the memory went bad even now , cuz it works and works on lower voltage then before...
Feels like the system went in to a Virgin mode, needed a penetration, Lol


----------



## Hiikeri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> So *** made my pc act this way?


I know, a moon was a wrong position.









Actually, maybe your pc crashed and has some weird bios readings corruption, microcode faulted?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> About all this...
> There is something that i cant explain now after testing stuff today,lol
> 
> So i went to microcenter to pic up a new cpu and ram ( i have tried a new pcu the other day)
> 
> First i just went and installed a new ram, and BOOM , 5.1 at 1.4v would boot again!!!! Made me happy , like , the issue was my ram not the cpu!
> 
> And then something that i cant explain, i have put my old ram in, and it boots 5.1 as it did before as nothing was wrong... it made into 1 h of RB so far .
> 
> So *** made my pc act this way? Idkn, i did relocate my old ram , i did try just a single stick in all 4 slots ,i did flash the bios again,cmos , all kinds of resets, even new windows, and just after installing different ram and back to old one fixed the problem...
> so for today im back to my old settings, something strange


Sound to me like a motherboard issue possibly a dry joint on one of your dim slots, if it were me I would swap out the motherboard


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> About all this...
> There is something that i cant explain now after testing stuff today,lol
> 
> So i went to microcenter to pic up a new cpu and ram ( i have tried a new pcu the other day)
> 
> First i just went and installed a new ram, and BOOM , 5.1 at 1.4v would boot again!!!! Made me happy , like , the issue was my ram not the cpu!
> 
> And then something that i cant explain, i have put my old ram in, and it boots 5.1 as it did before as nothing was wrong... it made into 1 h of RB so far .
> 
> So *** made my pc act this way? Idkn, i did relocate my old ram , i did try just a single stick in all 4 slots ,i did flash the bios again,cmos , all kinds of resets, even new windows, and just after installing different ram and back to old one fixed the problem...
> so for today im back to my old settings, something strange


I suspect this is actually more common than admitted... usually it's just a re-seating of the ram after a complete power down and reset of the cmos. (NVRAM). And if using a DIMM2 slot like on the APEX, add in another potential seating issue.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Sound to me like a motherboard issue possibly a dry joint on one of your dim slots, if it were me I would swap out the motherboard


Yea, i guess so .... took me so much time today to pick one up and still cant figure out what motherboard to buy








Im in search of a mobo with preinstalled vrm liquid cooling, kinda the best ones from z170 , cuz its older and cheaper vs z270 ones same price mid range.

Looks like i stopped in between GA-Z170X-SOC FORCE or asus z170 formula...
Gigabyte has 22 phases on VRM's what makes me look at it...( not a fan of gigabyte but those vrms under water seems to be like a big thing)
Dint find out much info of asus formula one about VRMs
Anyway the price drop on high end z170 platforms in the end equals now to mid range z270 one....idkn

The price is about 250+- for a hight end z170 and my z270 msi gaming m7 is like 210+-


----------



## Asploit

Wow okay so another update on my 7700k adventure: I decided I would try and see how power efficient I could be just sitting on 5.0 core AVX0

Apparently if I just set my voltage to auto, it's got me sipping 1.328vCore under load and not breaking 63C. I was here thinking I needed 1.37 the whole time.

The mystery deepens though, as to why I need to jump my voltage all the way to 1.44 to get 5.1Ghz
Is that just the way my particular piece of silicon came together?

Other notes: Batch # X712C869 if you want to throw my data onto the table.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Yea, i guess so .... took me so much time today to pick one up and still cant figure out what motherboard to buy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im in search of a mobo with preinstalled vrm liquid cooling, kinda the best ones from z170 , cuz its older and cheaper vs z270 ones same price mid range.
> 
> Looks like i stopped in between GA-Z170X-SOC FORCE or asus z170 formula...
> Gigabyte has 22 phases on VRM's what makes me look at it...( not a fan of gigabyte but those vrms under water seems to be like a big thing)
> Dint find out much info of asus formula one about VRMs
> Anyway the price drop on high end z170 platforms in the end equals now to mid range z270 one....idkn
> 
> The price is about 250+- for a hight end z170 and my z270 msi gaming m7 is like 210+-


Get the ROG Formula board its a true 8 phase VRM design, I have one and have never had an issue with it except it took them a long time to release a Kaby lake UEFI for it, which they have now. Under OCCT load my VRM's reach no more than 50 degrees C


----------



## Kalpa

Ah, nice, looks like Gigabyte has finally released BIOS update for my board to address the sky/kabylake hyperthreading microcode bug. So I guess my free time for today just got rescheduled... bios flash + subsequent troubleshooting and reapplying OC


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Ah, nice, looks like Gigabyte has finally released BIOS update for my board to address the sky/kabylake hyperthreading microcode bug. So I guess my free time for today just got rescheduled... bios flash + subsequent troubleshooting and reapplying OC


I did not have any problem with the Gigabyte sky/kabylake hyperthreading microcode bug Bios update, they did not change the voltages.


----------



## Kalpa

Updated BIOS without a sudden power grid failure in the process -- always a relief.

With new BIOS my memory seems suddenly able to get itself to higher clocks... although it's more than likely it's only because the forced reset to BIOS defaults and me coming back up from defaults step by step, rather than there been any memory-related stealth updates in the BIOS update itself.

Let's see if I can get a sensible 3000MHz OC for these sticks or will I default back to my previous 2800MHz configuration.


----------



## Asploit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Updated BIOS without a sudden power grid failure in the process -- always a relief.
> 
> With new BIOS my memory seems suddenly able to get itself to higher clocks... although it's more than likely it's only because the forced reset to BIOS defaults and me coming back up from defaults step by step, rather than there been any memory-related stealth updates in the BIOS update itself.
> 
> Let's see if I can get a sensible 3000MHz OC for these sticks or will I default back to my previous 2800MHz configuration.


An uninterruptible power supply should calm your nerves a bit! A healthy 1500VA unit won't set you back much, especially considering it amounts to an insurance policy for your computer.


----------



## Kalpa

I don't even...

Memory overclocking is a complete mystery to me sometimes. Suddenly I'm rocking my memory at [email protected], although with the caveat of command rate of 2 instead of 1.

Still, I'll take this over the 14-15-15-31-1T @ 2800MHz configuration which I used previously.

Some kind of magic must have happened with the bios update, since I've also had my VCCSA at 1.065V the whole time (accidentally, by the way - I thought I'd set it to 1.165V which used to be what I ran the 2800MHz setup with) - I upped it to 1.100V after I noticed but ehh... whatever. Seems to be "initial stable", passing 60 minutes of stressapptest without a hiccup. Long term stability remains to be seen, as usual.

I'm getting the nagging feeling I could try lowering the voltage for the sticks as well - currently they are set for 1.360V in BIOS.

EDIT: It should be noted this is a Z170 board - as such it's possible the kabylake support for Z170 has been stealth-improved in the process; some supporting evidence for this might be that beforehand most of my stability problems with memory OC seemed indeed to be with IMC / bumping VCCSA up notch by notch, not the DRAM sticks themselves.

EDIT2: Also it's noteworthy the memory kit I have is rated for [email protected], frankly I'm already surprised I've managed [email protected] with these...


----------



## Asploit

Alright friends so I have two CPU states that I'm facing down right now: 5.0 @ 1.328vCore, and 5.1 @ 1.424vCore stable.

I decided I like the idea of saving power and running lower temps overall by running as low stable voltage as possible doing 5.0, so that includes enabling C-states and leaving Core voltage on auto and leaving my Windows power plan on "Balanced", and I have rock-solid stability doing 5.0 Ghz 24/7 (but allowing the cpu to downclock to 800Mhz at idle)

So why am I idling at 1.37v? The power delivery stabilizes at an unmoving 1.328v under load handling stress testing with flying colors, so why am I idling at such a high voltage? If I'm stable under load at 1.328v, should I just go into BIOS and set that as my manual 24/7 voltage?


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Alright friends so I have two CPU states that I'm facing down right now: 5.0 @ 1.328vCore, and 5.1 @ 1.424vCore stable.
> 
> I decided I like the idea of saving power and running lower temps overall by running as low stable voltage as possible doing 5.0, so that includes enabling C-states and leaving Core voltage on auto and leaving my Windows power plan on "Balanced", and I have rock-solid stability doing 5.0 Ghz 24/7 (but allowing the cpu to downclock to 800Mhz at idle)
> 
> So why am I idling at 1.37v? The power delivery stabilizes at an unmoving 1.328v under load handling stress testing with flying colors, so why am I idling at such a high voltage? If I'm stable under load at 1.328v, should I just go into BIOS and set that as my manual 24/7 voltage?


Because if your motherboard follows Intel spec it will decrease the CPU voltage as current increases as per Intel spec. This behavior is called 'Load Line' (and there's a fancy motherboard setting called 'Load Line Calibration' (LLC) which we can use to tweak the behavior, though it might not really be that needed nowadays)

This is normal operation, your CPU is idle -> there's no or very little current -> the voltage will be higher. CPU gets busy -> current increases -> voltage will drop.

There is absolutely no need to have your idle voltage equal your load voltage (in fact, I would argue it's likely detrimental in long-term use) - in your case, you'd likely need to up the LLC and the voltage, so you'd end up something like 1.35V on both load and idle (plus transient spikes who knows how high)

Idle voltage is pretty much an useless measurement (well, no it's not), not something people should be overly concerned about (yes, yes, *do* be concerned if it skyrockets to something silly like 1.6V, but 1.33 vs 1.37 is not worth mentioning) - it's really the voltage during load that matters.

If you want to take a look at the very basic idea, check this one out: https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/white-papers/ia-platform-basics-paper.pdf
If you want to understand the electrical engineering behind the term, knock yourself out at wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Load_line_(electronics)
If you want to know more about load line calibration, search the forums for one of the about a thousand discussions about it (heck, there's probably more than one within this kabylake megathread; I googled for http://www.overclock.net/t/1407901/cpu-load-line-calibration-llc/10#post_20370961 quickly)
Quote:


> *that includes enabling C-states and leaving Core voltage on auto*


My apologies. I totally missed this. I have absolutely no clue why your motherboard is not co-operating if all kinds of Intel(r) speedshifts, speedsteps, and c-states are enabled. Again apologies for the yet-another-introductory-speech-to-LLC. Which I now realize your post is not about at all. Only thing I can think of right now is to, uhh, well, double-check through every single related bios option you have and make sure you don't have any setting on which might cause the motherboard to stick to static voltage behavior.


----------



## syrinks

Hello,

Is there anyone who has ever tried to put a firmware rog on an asus prime z270-a?

Because I would like to access the extreme twerk menu to be able to modify the cpu pll oc to have less temperature on my i7 7700K .


----------



## MaKeN

I
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *syrinks*
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Is there anyone who has ever tried to put a firmware rog on an asus prime z270-a?
> 
> Because I would like to access the extreme twerk menu to be able to modify the cpu pll oc to have less temperature on my i7 7700K .


Lowering pll ov voltage works only on msi boards... as i know asus board wont benefit from it

And i beleve you pll oc voltage is already low , well lower then 1.2 as on msi boards by default


----------



## Asploit

Wow thank you for that wealth of information Kalpa! It's a relief to know that idle voltage (within sane ranges) is nothing to really concern myself about.

And yeah I think I found my problem, I disabled that one setting that allowed my CPU to communicate with power delivery to be efficient under lower load, forgot what it was called.


----------



## BoredErica

High voltage low current then CPU's not really doing much, no harm no foul.
Reverse can even be true: Lowish voltage but high current (Prime95) and CPU ages.

Maybe worth noting in guide.

edit:

What temps do you guys get overclocked on idle? Roughly temps and ambients please. Looking for air only answers but feel free to chime in with water for funsies.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*


Under Water - 2x 240 Rads (1x SE 25mm - 1x XE 60mm)- 2 Fans / Rad in Pull - speed 800 - 1000. Going @ 1800 when water 33 and 3000 with water over 35 (never going there, not even under 8h Prime)
CPU @ 5.1 / 4.8 - 1 Avx - 1.424 in OS

Ambient 25-26 atm.
Idle 28-30
Full load 65-68, Peak 72
Average Water temp under long load 31-32

Edit: Pump at 3700

System dead silent, will see if things change when I add GPU to the loop (Currently using a GTX 260 on Air)

Pic:


----------



## wingman99

I use prime95 all the time and I'm not even remotely concerned with melting or vaporizing the Silicon even at 94c running 4.6GHz. Running out of specification up at 5.0GHz+ ages the Silicon. It all depends how much folks run the Intel processor out of specifications and what they use the PC for.

There are processors out there running prime95 24/7 looking for prime numbers.







I have yet to see or hear about a CPU degrading from age alone overclocking is usually involved.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> edit:
> What temps do you guys get overclocked on idle? Roughly temps and ambients please. Looking for air only answers but feel free to chime in with water for funsies.


i7 7700K not delidded 4.6GHz @ ~1.25V idle (static voltage setting in BIOS) ~38C idle with ~25C ambient.

With dynamic voltage I'd expect idle temp to be roughly ambient+1-2C (that's what it was with 6700K; really at truly "idle" the modern CPUs don't use any power at all) - but I haven't tested with 7700K so can't say for sure


----------



## Asploit

So I decided to let Asus DIP5 have a crack at OC here, and it turned up a weird result: 5135.7 (100.7x51) OC @ 1.423v, peak temp 75C
But it only OC's two of the cores that way, the other two sit 4.9Ghz. It also didn't seem to overclock my memory very much, leaving them at 2999 instead of 3600.

Also it seems to have fixed the issue I had where I couldn't seem to enable C-states. Not sure what wizardry was at work, but maybe I'll use this result as a springboard for a more precise 24/7?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Under Water - 2x 240 Rads (1x SE 25mm - 1x XE 60mm)- 2 Fans / Rad in Pull - speed 800 - 1000. Going @ 1800 when water 33 and 3000 with water over 35 (never going there, not even under 8h Prime)
> CPU @ 5.1 / 4.8 - 1 Avx - 1.424 in OS
> 
> Ambient 25-26 atm.
> Idle 28-30
> Full load 65-68, Peak 72
> Average Water temp under long load 31-32
> 
> Edit: Pump at 3700
> 
> System dead silent, will see if things change when I add GPU to the loop (Currently using a GTX 260 on Air)
> 
> Pic:


I keep my fans at same rpms....

But the pump, idkn why but i feel its loud after 1800 rpms...
Same thing here , waiting for rx vega to come out and ad it to the loop, also interested how big the temp difference will be .


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*


Can't really hear any WC noise over the GPU fan's ...so it's dead silent to me, might not be for everyone else...
My flat has paper walls so I can't use any sort of speakers without starting Rome total war with my neighbors....confined with headphones at the moment...


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Can't really hear any WC noise over the GPU fan's ...so it's dead silent to me, might not be for everyone else...
> My flat has paper walls so I can't use any sort of speakers without starting Rome total war with my neighbors....confined with headphones at the moment...


Yea Gpu fans are loud, i have a h55 on the gpu so its also silent , and only the pump is audible .

You computer table .... so much stuff on it , as mine, lol , i guess thats common.
I whife always tells my room looks like a factory or there is a construction goin on all the time


----------



## JocaHC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> What temps do you guys get overclocked on idle? Roughly temps and ambients please. Looking for air only answers but feel free to chime in with water for funsies.


i7 7700K not delidded @ 4.8GHz / 1.29V. I got 36C idle in a 25C ambient. I use a AIO with 240 mm radiator tho.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Yea Gpu fans are loud, i have a h55 on the gpu so its also silent , and only the pump is audible .
> 
> You computer table .... so much stuff on it , as mine, lol , i guess thats common.
> I whife always tells my room looks like a factory or there is a construction goin on all the time










that is my desk "cleaned" for the picture...I have parts to build another 2 systems at least laying over or under it all the time.
I started this project in March and we are now in July ...it just never ends









P.S. My wife thinks I have a middle life crisis so she is pushing me to buy more and more and more...(So mine's special compared to some others around..


----------



## sic08869

Good morning all,
I am new to the forum, been a member for a while but mostly just enjoy the reading. I am wondering what needs to be uploaded for x264 stress testing? I ran a test for 30 hours and then killed the test. In the logs it doesn't show how many hours it was running but shows the list of loops.

Sorry adding this, does the country that is listed on the Label read the same as the stamp on the die?

For instance mine is Vietnam L715B548 This would be my correct batch and country?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sic08869*
> 
> I am wondering what needs to be uploaded for x264 stress testing? I ran a test for 30 hours and then killed the test. In the logs it doesn't show how many hours it was running but shows the list of loops.
> 
> Sorry adding this, does the country that is listed on the Label read the same as the stamp on the die?
> 
> For instance mine is Vietnam L715B548 This would be my correct batch and country?


Hi,

As noted in OP what you need is to run the test and run something like HWinfo, which would show vcore and how long Hwinfo has been open. If picture was taken right before test was stopped it proves how long the test was run along with the voltage used.

The batch and country should be the same on the label and on the IHS.


----------



## sic08869

Thank you


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Get the ROG Formula board its a true 8 phase VRM design, I have one and have never had an issue with it except it took them a long time to release a Kaby lake UEFI for it, which they have now. Under OCCT load my VRM's reach no more than 50 degrees C


Is it true what they say about asus formula, that this unique to this board shield holds/traps heat?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Is it true what they say about asus formula, that this unique to this board shield holds/traps heat?


It does retain some heat especially at low fan speeds but it is not anything to be concerned about


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> It does retain some heat especially at low fan speeds but it is not anything to be concerned about


I see, was thinking about those m.2 ssds under it .....cuz they get hot


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I see, was thinking about those m.2 ssds under it .....cuz they get hot


M.2 and chipset area does get warm but not warm enough to cause my 960 pro to throttle, Im running 2x 960 pro one on a riser card and one in the M.2 slot (Raid 0) and never had an issue. If you think this might be an issue for you and you only want to run 1x M.2 drive you could buy Maximus formula IX which has an M.2 slot that sits outside the motherboard shielding.


----------



## AGR-13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Under Water - 2x 240 Rads (1x SE 25mm - 1x XE 60mm)- 2 Fans / Rad in Pull - speed 800 - 1000. Going @ 1800 when water 33 and 3000 with water over 35 (never going there, not even under 8h Prime)
> CPU @ 5.1 / 4.8 - 1 Avx - 1.424 in OS
> 
> Ambient 25-26 atm.
> Idle 28-30
> Full load 65-68, Peak 72
> Average Water temp under long load 31-32
> 
> Edit: Pump at 3700
> 
> System dead silent, will see if things change when I add GPU to the loop (Currently using a GTX 260 on Air)
> 
> Pic:


more or less the similar values here - but if GPU added, then the water hit the 40C mark - CPU on 5GHz 1.35V

Ambient 29 atm.
Idle 30-35
Full load 60-66, Peak 71
Average Water temp under long load 32 CPU only - combined with GPU -> 40



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57uL6v-BXLY


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AGR-13*


Very nice build...i especially like the case







is that screen in the top an aquaero 6 xt ?
Also do you have 2 rads, saw the video on phone and can't really see in detail...

Again, a very nice build


----------



## AGR-13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Very nice build...i especially like the case
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> is that screen in the top an aquaero 6 xt ?
> Also do you have 2 rads, saw the video on phone and can't really see in detail...
> 
> Again, a very nice build


Thanks a lot - I really appreciate your nice words









the display screen below is a Aquaero 6 Pro, the screen in the top is a Alphacool LED display, witch I like because of it's retro feeling. I used LCDHype to create what's displayed on this screen.

I have one 360 rads with 3 fans on the top, and 2x120 rads in the back. It's cooling one GPU waterblock and one CPU waterblock.


----------



## sic08869

Username: sic08869
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 49
Core Frequency: 4.9
Cache Frequency: 4.5
Vcore in UEFI: 1.25
Vcore: 1.24
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Noctua D15S
Stability Test: RealBench 8 hours

Batch Number: Vietnam L715B548
Ram Speed: 3200 16-18-18-38
Ram Voltage: 1.35
VCCIO: 1.15
VCCSA: 1.20
Motherboard: MSI Z270 Gaming Pro Carbon
LLC Setting: Mode 5
AVX offset set to 0



Still working on this but it was my first time submitting


----------



## sic08869

I am pretty new to this and was hoping to get some more insight. Please let me know if there is anything in the settings that stands out that could be cleaned up. I just started testing a 5ghz build changing the vcore and multiplier only. Upped it to 1.32 vcore and 50. Passed 15 minutes on RB hitting 80C at max. Any help at all would be appreciated.









More changes: Vcore to 1.29 - LLC to mode 4 makes it almost flat in variance 1.282 - 1.296 which seems to allow the chip to stress on RB at max so far of 76C hopefully she makes the full 30 minutes.


----------



## SmackHisFace

Hey guys Im trying to OC my friends 7700k using an Asus Hero VIII. He doesn't plan on delidding the chip but we wanted to get the best OC possible without Delid. Obviously temps are high with a 280mm AIO. It seems pretty stable at 4.7 @ 1.225v using x264, my question is regarding AVX offset. Does x264 use AVX? Would it be possible to have it run at [email protected] for avx loads but higher for non AVX loads? What stress test can I use to test the stability for non AVX loads?


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmackHisFace*
> 
> Hey guys Im trying to OC my friends 7700k using an Asus Hero VIII. He doesn't plan on delidding the chip but we wanted to get the best OC possible without Delid. Obviously temps are high with a 280mm AIO. It seems pretty stable at 4.7 @ 1.225v using x264, my question is regarding AVX offset. Does x264 use AVX? Would it be possible to have it run at [email protected] for avx loads but higher for non AVX loads? What stress test can I use to test the stability for non AVX loads?


Prime95 26.6 seems to be the favorite pick for non-avx stress testing.


----------



## SmackHisFace

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Prime95 26.6 seems to be the favorite pick for non-avx stress testing.


Thanks for the reply. The cpu is going to be used for gaming and multi media. No encoding or anything like that. Is non AVX testing worthwhile? Should I even bother with AVX offset and testing like this or should I just find the best settings for x264? Do most users here set an offset if they only game?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmackHisFace*
> 
> Thanks for the reply. The cpu is going to be used for gaming and multi media. No encoding or anything like that. Is non AVX testing worthwhile? Should I even bother with AVX offset and testing like this or should I just find the best settings for x264? Do most users here set an offset if they only game?


Avx offset is only used to aid when pushing CPU to the limit.
Avx instructions are way harder on the CPU and produce lot of heat, compared to same workload non Avx that's why we use avx offset.
If you are fine (temp-wise / volts) don't use avx offset.
If you pass 3-4h x264 or / either 6-8h real bench you are fine (both use avx) but.. some modern game titles use Avx... so be careful of that and they might bring more and more games in the future that use avx


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmackHisFace*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Prime95 26.6 seems to be the favorite pick for non-avx stress testing.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reply. The cpu is going to be used for gaming and multi media. No encoding or anything like that. Is non AVX testing worthwhile? Should I even bother with AVX offset and testing like this or should I just find the best settings for x264? Do most users here set an offset if they only game?
Click to expand...

Chrome Browser uses AVX so I don't set offset.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *SmackHisFace*
> 
> Thanks for the reply. The cpu is going to be used for gaming and multi media. No encoding or anything like that. Is non AVX testing worthwhile? Should I even bother with AVX offset and testing like this or should I just find the best settings for x264? Do most users here set an offset if they only game?
> 
> 
> 
> Avx offset is only used to aid when pushing CPU to the limit.
> Avx instructions are way harder on the CPU and produce lot of heat, compared to same workload non Avx that's why we use avx offset.
> If you are fine (temp-wise / volts) don't use avx offset.
> If you pass 3-4h x264 or / either 6-8h real bench you are fine (both use avx) but.. some modern game titles use Avx... so be careful of that and they might bring more and more games in the future that use avx
Click to expand...

What modern games use AVX?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sic08869*
> 
> I am pretty new to this and was hoping to get some more insight. Please let me know if there is anything in the settings that stands out that could be cleaned up. I just started testing a 5ghz build changing the vcore and multiplier only. Upped it to 1.32 vcore and 50. Passed 15 minutes on RB hitting 80C at max. Any help at all would be appreciated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More changes: Vcore to 1.29 - LLC to mode 4 makes it almost flat in variance 1.282 - 1.296 which seems to allow the chip to stress on RB at max so far of 76C hopefully she makes the full 30 minutes.


Looks ok to me... but kinda hard to beleve its stable at that low vcore voltage, assuming your llc setting is even droping the voltage more down on load...
But hey, if it is stable, thats a good chip right there


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SmackHisFace*
> 
> Hey guys Im trying to OC my friends 7700k using an Asus Hero VIII. He doesn't plan on delidding the chip but we wanted to get the best OC possible without Delid. Obviously temps are high with a 280mm AIO. It seems pretty stable at 4.7 @ 1.225v using x264, my question is regarding AVX offset. *Does x264 use AVX? Would it be possible to have it run at [email protected] for avx loads but higher for non AVX loads? What stress test can I use to test the stability for non AVX loads?*


Sounds like you can run higher than 4.7 with 1.225V? if yes:
1) yes. x264 uses AVX.
2) set 4.8 with a voltage that is stable to the non-AVX loads you use. Cycle the image bench in realbech, disable AVX, FMA3 in any version of p95 (explained in the undoc.txt file in your p95 folder). etc. On light loads, a higher voltage will not generate much heat, so you should be good. No browzer applies AVX like a streesstest. Ignore silly comments to the contrary.
3) then set an AVX offset in bios to give 4.7.

also - the hero with new bios has the asus thermal control module built in. use this to set frequencies and voltages that are temp dependent. Eg, when the temp gets above x degrees C, run one freq/voltage, and when itr drops below that temperature, run a higher freq/voltage/ works great!


----------



## sic08869

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Looks ok to me... but kinda hard to beleve its stable at that low vcore voltage, assuming your llc setting is even droping the voltage more down on load...
> But hey, if it is stable, thats a good chip right there


It failed the test after 4 hours unfortunately. Thanks for help. I am going to try slightly higher voltage but really not wanting to get into the 80ish range. If at all possible.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sic08869*
> 
> It failed the test after 4 hours unfortunately. Thanks for help. I am going to try slightly higher voltage but really not wanting to get into the 80ish range. If at all possible.


Dont bump the voltage, change lls to lvl3, this way your vcore wont drop lower then its set in bios( i beleve so), or drop vcore to 1.28 and change llc to lvl2 so you will get like 1.31v under load

In other words it looks for me that you need about 1.31 v for stability, so instead of bumping vcore , change the llc till vcore under load gets to 1.31.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*


And I quote:
Quote:


> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/chuckw/archive/2015/06/03/directxmath-avx2.aspx
> 
> It is there in DirectX Math. Any instructions up to FP128 is supported across the board. With the latest game compiler from Microsoft. If it supports DX12, it is required to use SSE2 on wards rather than GP Vector.


Quote:


> It being available is far from it being mandated...


Example of games with AVX enabled but work on non AVX cpu-s as well (as Pentiums...as far as I know)
Grid 2
Ashes
BF1
The witcher ? not sure about this one
There are many others out there "rumoured" to be running AVX...some even blame Ryzen poor game performance on Intel superior AVX bla bla..

Happy reading


----------



## sic08869

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Dont bump the voltage, change lls to lvl3, this way your vcore wont drop lower then its set in bios( i beleve so), or drop vcore to 1.28 and change llc to lvl2 so you will get like 1.31v under load
> 
> In other words it looks for me that you need about 1.31 v for stability, so instead of bumping vcore , change the llc till vcore under load gets to 1.31.


Thank you MaKeN, going to give that a go, it just passed at 1.3 LLC level 3. Dropping it to 1.29 LLC level 3 for a 30 minute to see how it goes.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sic08869*
> 
> Thank you MaKeN, going to give that a go, it just passed at 1.3 LLC level 3. Dropping it to 1.29 LLC level 3 for a 30 minute to see how it goes.


Well if it had passed 4 hours on 1.29 -1.28 llc4
Now 1.3-1.29 ll3 it would for sure pass same 4 hours mb 6 or maybe full 8 hours.
But anyway its better to drop vcore in bios to 1.29 and change llc to 2 level so youll get your 1.3 only at load . Idkn its just the way i think, i maybe wrong.

Nice chip ! If not that heat , i bet it would do 5.1 easy

You arent into delliding right? Max temps are 80c now?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> 
> 
> And I quote:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/chuckw/archive/2015/06/03/directxmath-avx2.aspx
> 
> It is there in DirectX Math. Any instructions up to FP128 is supported across the board. With the latest game compiler from Microsoft. If it supports DX12, it is required to use SSE2 on wards rather than GP Vector.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> It being available is far from it being mandated...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Example of games with AVX enabled but work on non AVX cpu-s as well (as Pentiums...as far as I know)
> Grid 2
> Ashes
> BF1
> The witcher ? not sure about this one
> There are many others out there "rumoured" to be running AVX...some even blame Ryzen poor game performance on Intel superior AVX bla bla..
> 
> Happy reading
Click to expand...

I gave BF1 and DX12 also DX11 a try with AVX offset set to 6 and it did not clock down from 4.6GHz.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*


Some user encounter it, some don't..
As said before, It being available is far from it being mandated...
Its present in DX12 and gives some performance boost so we might see it more in the future..


----------



## sic08869

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Well if it had passed 4 hours on 1.29 -1.28 llc4
> Now 1.3-1.29 ll3 it would for sure pass same 4 hours mb 6 or maybe full 8 hours.
> But anyway its better to drop vcore in bios to 1.29 and change llc to 2 level so youll get your 1.3 only at load . Idkn its just the way i think, i maybe wrong.
> 
> Nice chip ! If not that heat , i bet it would do 5.1 easy
> 
> You arent into delliding right? Max temps are 80c now?


Sorry missed the bottom part, havent delidded yet. Still considering. As of right now its peaking at 80c to 82c still trying to tweak it a little more and running more tests.

Running a 30 right now LLC 3 1.3 vcore in bios, windows is showing 1.319 average and peaked so far at 82c.

Would it help to adjust the SA or IO at all? These and the PLL confuse me a little, I was reading a post and they had suggested putting the SA to 1.2 for my board because of the fact that it defaults over 1.3 with auto settings.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sic08869*
> 
> Sorry missed the bottom part, havent delidded yet. Still considering. As of right now its peaking at 80c to 82c still trying to tweak it a little more and running more tests.
> 
> Running a 30 right now LLC 3 1.3 vcore in bios, windows is showing 1.319 average and peaked so far at 82c.
> 
> Would it help to adjust the SA or IO at all? These and the PLL confuse me a little, I was reading a post and they had suggested putting the SA to 1.2 for my board because of the fact that it defaults over 1.3 with auto settings.


Yea put them to 1.25 v and 1.20 v for now( its a default value) those are ram related , you can find that you need even lower volts there on IOand SA by running memory stability tests
But it would not influence you cpu temps i guess.
Anyway running 5.0 at 1.3v and getting 80c is a good to see resoult, i had some chips i tested that would hit about 100c at 4.9 ....

Btw are the fans at 100%? Or you run them as you would run them at your preferable speeds?

delid it, you would be happy about it .

But first, try to push it , 5.1 at 1.36-1.38v not for long , just to see if your chip will do 5.1 and what are the temp differences.


----------



## sic08869

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Yea put them to 1.25 v and 1.20 v for now( its a default value) those are ram related , you can find that you need even lower volts there on IOand SA by running memory stability tests
> But it would not influence you cpu temps i guess.
> Anyway running 5.0 at 1.3v and getting 80c is a good to see resoult, i had some chips i tested that would hit about 100c at 4.9 ....
> 
> Btw are the fans at 100%? Or you run them as you would run them at your preferable speeds?
> 
> delid it, you would be happy about it .
> 
> But first, try to push it , 5.1 at 1.36-1.38v not for long , just to see if your chip will do 5.1 and what are the temp differences.


LOL they were not at 100% on previous attempts. I am manually setting them now during testing.

Took your advice and tried a few things.
This is a 5.0 ghz 1 hour RB Test set at 1.29 vcore bios, LLC 2 , HWINFO was showing 1.325 @ max 81C
I am going to test this one for 8 hours tonight



The second screenshot is a 5.1ghz test which passed a 15 min RB test vcore set to 1.36 in bios LLC 4 HWINFO showed avg 1.367 vcore, changed sa to 1.25 and io to 1.2 temps in hwinfo maxed at 85C but showed 86 on RB. I did leave the cache freq at 4.6 on this one though.



I think I am going to have to delid. Seems like the chip is a pretty good chip.

forgot to add, Thank you for your help on this. Learning a lot!


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What modern games use AVX?


Witcher 3 is the classic example. I'm sure there are others, but this is a big popular title that utilizes AVX instructions extensively while playing (I believe: in its main gameworld update loop; going into menus jerks your CPU to non-AVX speed levels)

Of the other titles I play, I've seen Hearts of Iron 4 give me my AVX offset CPU speed occasionally as well, but it could also be regular inactivity throttling I'm misinterpreting for AVX. I guess I should test it out with a ridiculously high AVX offset value. HoI4 is not very well multithreaded so it's hard to get a good reading on it (solution: for testing purposes I should also disable 3/4 cores and HT... EDiT: A brilliant idea struck me just like a bolt of lightning: disable speedstep for testing purposes, that should make spotting things a ton easier







)

Would be nice if there were a software that showed us whether 'avx throttling' is in effect or not; alas it's probably not implemented in kabylake as easily readable flag, so only way to know is to observe the clockspeeds?

EDIT2:

The idea was so brilliant I acted on it immediately. With CPU set to 46x, avx offset of 8 (resulting in 38x when throttling down), speedstep disabled Witcher 3 runs at 3800MHz continuously while in game world, jumping to 4600MHz when in menus. Hearts of Iron 4 bounces intermittenly between 3800MHz and 4600MHz making me think there's sometimes AVX instructions involved, sometimes not. Interestingly when HoI4 is *paused* the CPU settles for 3800MHz... which made me wonder how exactly AVX offset is implemented and whether this is not just "idling behavior", ie. without load the CPU tries to get into the lowest possible speed setting, although speedstep is disabled, but perhaps AVX offset still enables one other setting and the CPU tries to settle for that --- on the other hand, idling @ Windows tends to keep CPU at 4600MHz, however I seem to see occasional 3800MHz drops, did anyone else ever realize Windows has some background processes which utilize AVX? (Anyway knowing HoI4 developers, I wouldn't be surprised there's some random low-intensity loop running while the game is paused, which utilizes AVX and causes CPU to throttle)

Running Cities: Skylines for example results in constant 4600MHz across all cores, the game is very cpu intensive and this comes as no particular surprise.

TL;DR: Disabling speedstep, enabling AVX offset causes some funky behavior. More testing is required.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What modern games use AVX?
> 
> 
> 
> Witcher 3 is the classic example. I'm sure there are others, but this is a big popular title that utilizes AVX instructions extensively while playing (I believe: in its main gameworld update loop; going into menus jerks your CPU to non-AVX speed levels)
> 
> Of the other titles I play, I've seen Hearts of Iron 4 give me my AVX offset CPU speed occasionally as well, but it could also be regular inactivity throttling I'm misinterpreting for AVX. I guess I should test it out with a ridiculously high AVX offset value. HoI4 is not very well multithreaded so it's hard to get a good reading on it (solution: for testing purposes I should also disable 3/4 cores and HT... EDiT: A brilliant idea struck me just like a bolt of lightning: disable speedstep for testing purposes, that should make spotting things a ton easier
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> Would be nice if there were a software that showed us whether 'avx throttling' is in effect or not; alas it's probably not implemented in kabylake as easily readable flag, so only way to know is to observe the clockspeeds?
> 
> EDIT2:
> 
> The idea was so brilliant I acted on it immediately. With CPU set to 46x, avx offset of 8 (resulting in 38x when throttling down), speedstep disabled Witcher 3 runs at 3800MHz continuously while in game world, jumping to 4600MHz when in menus. Hearts of Iron 4 bounces intermittenly between 3800MHz and 4600MHz making me think there's sometimes AVX instructions involved, sometimes not. Interestingly when HoI4 is *paused* the CPU settles for 3800MHz... which made me wonder how exactly AVX offset is implemented and whether this is not just "idling behavior", ie. without load the CPU tries to get into the lowest possible speed setting, although speedstep is disabled, but perhaps AVX offset still enables one other setting and the CPU tries to settle for that --- on the other hand, idling @ Windows tends to keep CPU at 4600MHz, however I seem to see occasional 3800MHz drops, did anyone else ever realize Windows has some background processes which utilize AVX? (Anyway knowing HoI4 developers, I wouldn't be surprised there's some random low-intensity loop running while the game is paused, which utilizes AVX and causes CPU to throttle)
> 
> Running Cities: Skylines for example results in constant 4600MHz across all cores, the game is very cpu intensive and this comes as no particular surprise.
> 
> TL;DR: Disabling speedstep, enabling AVX offset causes some funky behavior. More testing is required.
Click to expand...

Iv'e done a lot of AVX testing and prime95 v28.10 with AVX runs steady at the AVX offset speed I set at 4.0GHz from 4.6GHz. Also I have seen the same things you have seen with windows using AVX in the background sometimes reducing the clock. Also chrome browser uses AVX and RealBench.


----------



## Kalpa

The thing we should remember with the AVX offset feature is that in a mixed workload the CPU is likely throttling itself up and down hundreds/thousands/millions/billions times a second (if someone has good idea on the actual implementation please share) - what monitoring software shows us is ...probably... the most used frequency during the polling interval.

Anyway regarding HoI4 and the pause/unpause, this is what I wrote elsewhere few minutes ago (copypasting):

Interweb is filled with rumours about DX12 and AVX instructions and some mysterious connection... so, anyway, I'm thinking if HoI4 would DX12 then while paused only UI rendering related stuff is active, if those are mostly AVX instructions then the apparent AVX throttling while paused would make sense.

And once you unpause you get additional game logic that needs to be computed and most of that probably is non-AVX and then your monitoring software will show CPU freq jumping between base and AVX intermittently depending on which kind of workload is in the majority.

Any thoughts?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> The thing we should remember with the AVX offset feature is that in a mixed workload the CPU is likely throttling itself up and down hundreds/thousands/millions/billions times a second (if someone has good idea on the actual implementation please share) - what monitoring software shows us is ...probably... the most used frequency during the polling interval.
> 
> Anyway regarding HoI4 and the pause/unpause, this is what I wrote elsewhere few minutes ago (copypasting):
> 
> Interweb is filled with rumours about DX12 and AVX instructions and some mysterious connection... so, anyway, I'm thinking if HoI4 would DX12 then while paused only UI rendering related stuff is active, if those are mostly AVX instructions then the apparent AVX throttling while paused would make sense.
> 
> And once you unpause you get additional game logic that needs to be computed and most of that probably is non-AVX and then your monitoring software will show CPU freq jumping between base and AVX intermittently depending on which kind of workload is in the majority.
> 
> Any thoughts?


Well for games I think you proved that Witcher 3 has AVX since it ran steady at 3.8GHz. I ran Battlefield 1 in DX12 mode and the was no AVX offset reduction and it ran steady 3.6GHz.

I think the fluctuation we see is windows AVX background tasks that run on a timer call from the OS. When playing a game it would be either AVX instruction or not while playing.

I think windows AVX does interfere with the games, I will have to test.


----------



## BoredErica

I'd test thermals but my fans are in custom loop hell right now. Sort of a long story. Hopefully when I can test again ambient temps will be closeish to 27C which I used to test air cooling.


----------



## sic08869

New Entry









Username: sic08869
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5.0
Cache Frequency: 4.6
Vcore in UEFI: 1.29
Vcore: 1.328
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Noctua N15S
Stability Test: RealBench 8 hours

Batch Number: Vietnam L715B548
Ram Speed: 3200 16-18-18-38
Ram Voltage: 1.35
VCCIO: 1.15
VCCSA: 1.20
Motherboard: MSI Z270 Gaming Pro Carbon
LLC Setting: Mode 2
AVX offset set to 0


----------



## Asploit

On the topic of thermals, I'm having some curious behavior with my 7700k delidded with TGC under Arctic Liquid Freezer 360mm (push-pull intake through sparse metal grate + a few unfiltered vents, clean and virgin):

On load it doesn't seem to rise above 74C doing 5.0 @ 1.33vCore (1.35UEFI, LLC6, AVX0, C-States enabled but it doesn't seem to utilize it), but averages 41C idle (Or with just some very lightweight background programs open)

Ambient fluctuates 24-27C

So load temps don't seem bad, but I figured idle temps under 360mm and six fans (11 case fans total) would be a lot lower than this? Like normally I'd assume there was a problem with heat interface, but my peak temps under stress test are well within safe. So what could be my problem?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> On the topic of thermals, I'm having some curious behavior with my 7700k delidded with TGC under Arctic Liquid Freezer 360mm (push-pull intake through sparse metal grate + a few unfiltered vents, clean and virgin):
> 
> On load it doesn't seem to rise above 74C doing 5.0 @ 1.33vCore (1.35UEFI, LLC6, AVX0, C-States enabled but it doesn't seem to utilize it), but averages 41C idle (Or with just some very lightweight background programs open)
> 
> Ambient fluctuates 24-27C
> 
> So load temps don't seem bad, but I figured idle temps under 360mm and six fans (11 case fans total) would be a lot lower than this? Like normally I'd assume there was a problem with heat interface, but my peak temps under stress test are well within safe. So what could be my problem?


Well this is what i get with my custom loop also:
Idle is normaly at 30-33c (atm)
Watter temps are 29-30c (atm)
Spikes are to 41-44c but they are like for 1 sec


----------



## sic08869

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Well this is what i get with my custom loop also:
> Idle is normaly at 30-33c (atm)
> Watter temps are 29-30c (atm)
> Spikes are to 41-44c but they are like for 1 sec


I wish I could see those temps, wife would have my hide though if I told her I wanted to put a radiator on my computer


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sic08869*
> 
> I wish I could see those temps, wife would have my hide though if I told her I wanted to put a radiator on my computer


Tell her your wanting to buy a new CPU, but you can make your existing one last longer by running it faster, but it generates more heat; and to cool the heat, the fans need to be super loud and annoying; and that a cheaper option is to water cool the computer







Worked for me


----------



## scracy

My temps delided with an Ambient of 17 degrees C custom loop in signature


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> My temps delided with an Ambient of 17 degrees C custom loop in signature


oooooh that looks good, what temps do you get with Prime95 AVX small FFT?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> oooooh that looks good, what temps do you get with Prime95 AVX small FFT?


With OCCT large temps peak at 80 degrees C with an ambient of 27 degrees C, could be better with a case that has better air flow than the evolve.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> My temps delided with an Ambient of 17 degrees C custom loop in signature


Thats old screenshot or your ambients are really 17c now in the summer?


----------



## Asploit

It's Winter in Australia.

So anyway is a difference of only ~35C between idle and load typical?


----------



## deathroll

Hey all! I have a 7700K chip that runs 4.9 GHz at about 1.31 Volts. I tested it with Realbech for a couple hours so far, average temp is at mid 80s and chip is not delidded. I am aiming to get 5 GHz. Do you think is it worth delidding? Does delidding help me with gaining another 100-200 MHz or you say swap the chip?


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> 
> 
> And I quote:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/chuckw/archive/2015/06/03/directxmath-avx2.aspx
> 
> It is there in DirectX Math. Any instructions up to FP128 is supported across the board. With the latest game compiler from Microsoft. If it supports DX12, it is required to use SSE2 on wards rather than GP Vector.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> It being available is far from it being mandated...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Example of games with AVX enabled but work on non AVX cpu-s as well (as Pentiums...as far as I know)
> Grid 2
> Ashes
> BF1
> The witcher ? not sure about this one
> There are many others out there "rumoured" to be running AVX...some even blame Ryzen poor game performance on Intel superior AVX bla bla..
> 
> Happy reading
Click to expand...

Funny how earlier in the thread I tried explaining this and I was told DX doesn't have anything to do with AVX... Even though I read that it does.

This is why I set my max OC dependant on AVX null. I play all of those games and compile video and raw images. Sure would suck if my 5.1 was only 4.6


----------



## Asploit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deathroll*
> 
> Hey all! I have a 7700K chip that runs 4.9 GHz at about 1.31 Volts. I tested it with Realbech for a couple hours so far, average temp is at mid 80s and chip is not delidded. I am aiming to get 5 GHz. Do you think is it worth delidding? Does delidding help me with gaining another 100-200 MHz or you say swap the chip?


Delidding helps purely with temps, which will help your overclocking headroom and overall stability and lifespan. It doesn't really improve the behavior of the silicon beyond alleviating heat-related problems. That being said, the age-old argument here is that you're already out of warranty in that you're overclocking (Even though the K-sku chips are obviously meant to overclock, I know) so you might as well delid it and get the most out of your purchase. People have reported temp improvements of 15-35C depending on how **** their initial state was.

My chip was HARD throttling at 5.0 and now doesn't even spike past 75C, so it's a 25+ degree C improvement.

You won't even know the upper limit of your silicon's overclock because on stock TIM and glue, you'll probably hit thermal limit before you hit stability limit.

Of course I'll let the more experienced and smarter members of the forum chime in here, but I think that's the general agreement.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *deathroll*
> 
> Hey all! I have a 7700K chip that runs 4.9 GHz at about 1.31 Volts. I tested it with Realbech for a couple hours so far, average temp is at mid 80s and chip is not delidded. I am aiming to get 5 GHz. Do you think is it worth delidding? Does delidding help me with gaining another 100-200 MHz or you say swap the chip?
> 
> 
> 
> Delidding helps purely with temps, which will help your overclocking headroom and overall stability and lifespan. It doesn't really improve the behavior of the silicon beyond alleviating heat-related problems. That being said, the age-old argument here is that you're already out of warranty in that you're overclocking (Even though the K-sku chips are obviously meant to overclock, I know) so you might as well delid it and get the most out of your purchase. People have reported temp improvements of 15-35C depending on how **** their initial state was.
> 
> My chip was HARD throttling at 5.0 and now doesn't even spike past 75C, so it's a 25+ degree C improvement.
> 
> You won't even know the upper limit of your silicon's overclock because on stock TIM and glue, you'll probably hit thermal limit before you hit stability limit.
> 
> Of course I'll let the more experienced and smarter members of the forum chime in here, but I think that's the general agreement.
Click to expand...

Can you imagine if Intel said overclocking is covered under warranty. We would all see what it is like frying billions of CPUs.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> That is some spooky **** MaKeN I have no idea what is up with that. Maybe it was some iffy BIOS setting that was defaulted back when the system detected new memory installed?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hiikeri*
> 
> I know, a moon was a wrong position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, maybe your pc crashed and has some weird bios readings corruption, microcode faulted?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Sound to me like a motherboard issue possibly a dry joint on one of your dim slots, if it were me I would swap out the motherboard


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I suspect this is actually more common than admitted... usually it's just a re-seating of the ram after a complete power down and reset of the cmos. (NVRAM). And if using a DIMM2 slot like on the APEX, add in another potential seating issue.


So after some time , after my pc went to 5.1 back again just by inserting different ram and switching to old one back .
Now my pc iagain for no reason went into a non boot situation at 5.1, i have tried all but not tried new MoBo
Today ive picked gb gaming 8 and hero 9 apex. Ill try them now . Interesting to see the resoults .
First one that i opened was the gb gaming 8 ....
question:
If gb gaming 8 performs ok, i mean that if it does 5.1 at 1.4v as i had on msi board, is it worth to open the apex board and try it?will there be more gains OC based?


----------



## MaKeN

New mobo installed... same thing ... so its not the mobo...
its really inferesting ... why would a cpu work at 5.1 then suddenly it wont boot till you lower it to 4.7. Then it will work at 5.1 again for 2 weeks, and ahain get down to now 4.5 .... even on a new mobo....i guess i need to pick up a memory kit another time ...


----------



## jlp0209

Would love some input here. Just bought a 7700K and delidded + relidded with Rockit88 kit. Previously delidded a 6700K and had no issues. Using Liquid Ultra on the die and then MX-4 on IHS. Cooler is H100i v2. I tried running Prime95 28.10 rather than 26.xx to see absolute stability / instability. I have an Asus Z170 Mark 1 board, latest BIOS.

After some preliminary testing I've settled in at 5 ghz at 1.300 Vcore in BIOS, LLC5, adaptive voltage, resulting in actual Vcore of 1.312. Have not touched AVX or any other setting.

My core temps are 86, 76, 86, 82. These seem insanely high to me considering I delidded. I've removed all traces of glue, etc., during my delid. I used as little Liquid Ultra as possible, just enough to cover the die. Maybe I should've applied more. It is also possible I just have a really bad re-lid. Assuming I'm stable at 5 ghz at 1.312 it would seem my CPU is pretty good. Should I just redo my delid? So frustrating, lol.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> Would love some input here. Just bought a 7700K and delidded + relidded with Rockit88 kit. Previously delidded a 6700K and had no issues. Using Liquid Ultra on the die and then MX-4 on IHS. Cooler is H100i v2. I tried running Prime95 28.10 rather than 26.xx to see absolute stability / instability. I have an Asus Z170 Mark 1 board, latest BIOS.
> 
> After some preliminary testing I've settled in at 5 ghz at 1.300 Vcore in BIOS, LLC5, adaptive voltage, resulting in actual Vcore of 1.312. Have not touched AVX or any other setting.
> 
> My core temps are 86, 76, 86, 82. These seem insanely high to me considering I delidded. I've removed all traces of glue, etc., during my delid. I used as little Liquid Ultra as possible, just enough to cover the die. Maybe I should've applied more. It is also possible I just have a really bad re-lid. Assuming I'm stable at 5 ghz at 1.312 it would seem my CPU is pretty good. Should I just redo my delid? So frustrating, lol.


Assuming your AIO is actually working, I'd agree with the idea you had a bad delid.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> Would love some input here. Just bought a 7700K and delidded + relidded with Rockit88 kit. Previously delidded a 6700K and had no issues. Using Liquid Ultra on the die and then MX-4 on IHS. Cooler is H100i v2. I tried running Prime95 28.10 rather than 26.xx to see absolute stability / instability. I have an Asus Z170 Mark 1 board, latest BIOS.
> 
> After some preliminary testing I've settled in at 5 ghz at 1.300 Vcore in BIOS, LLC5, adaptive voltage, resulting in actual Vcore of 1.312. Have not touched AVX or any other setting.
> 
> My core temps are 86, 76, 86, 82. These seem insanely high to me considering I delidded. I've removed all traces of glue, etc., during my delid. I used as little Liquid Ultra as possible, just enough to cover the die. Maybe I should've applied more. It is also possible I just have a really bad re-lid. Assuming I'm stable at 5 ghz at 1.312 it would seem my CPU is pretty good. Should I just redo my delid? So frustrating, lol.


Mmmm actually that sounds a bit like a bad delid because one core has a pretty large gap with the neighbour. This means that the IHS contact with the die is lopsided.


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> Assuming your AIO is actually working, I'd agree with the idea you had a bad delid.


Yeah the H100i V2 is working. My 6700K was at 4.5ghz and core max was 60-62 at 1.296V during Prime95 28.10. I just redid the delid and used a very tiny bit more CLU on the die similar to my 6700K. I could not completely remove all of the super glue at the corners of the IHS during my 2nd delid attempt. I filed it down almost flat so hopefully it won't matter.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Mmmm actually that sounds a bit like a bad delid because one core has a pretty large gap with the neighbour. This means that the IHS contact with the die is lopsided.


That's what I thought so I figured to just redo the delid. I made sure to really secure the large center bolt on the relid kit and will let the glue dry overnight. I may not have tightened it enough during the 1st attempt. If my 2nd attempt still doesn't work I guess I should get some super glue remover.

Thanks both of you for your input, hopefully a 2nd delid + relid will work.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> New mobo installed... same thing ... so its not the mobo...
> its really inferesting ... why would a cpu work at 5.1 then suddenly it wont boot till you lower it to 4.7. Then it will work at 5.1 again for 2 weeks, and ahain get down to now 4.5 .... even on a new mobo....i guess i need to pick up a memory kit another time ...


When it comes to degradation the CPU is usually the faulty part. When you see the correct voltage for Vcore the motherboard is working as it should.


----------



## BoredErica

Sigh

Custom loop fans is currently going through purgatory.

Temps not too bad considering there are no fans I guess.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> Yeah the H100i V2 is working. My 6700K was at 4.5ghz and core max was 60-62 at 1.296V during Prime95 28.10. I just redid the delid and used a very tiny bit more CLU on the die similar to my 6700K. I could not completely remove all of the super glue at the corners of the IHS during my 2nd delid attempt. I filed it down almost flat so hopefully it won't matter.
> That's what I thought so I figured to just redo the delid. I made sure to really secure the large center bolt on the relid kit and will let the glue dry overnight. I may not have tightened it enough during the 1st attempt. If my 2nd attempt still doesn't work I guess I should get some super glue remover.
> 
> Thanks both of you for your input, hopefully a 2nd delid + relid will work.


What's your PLL Voltage at? The lower it is than 1.2 the farther the core differences will be. I have 2 cores that vary from the others and it was like this before delidding as well. Chip still clocks great. I'm skeptical a relid will change your situation but only one way to find out...


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> What's your PLL Voltage at? The lower it is than 1.2 the farther the core differences will be. I have 2 cores that vary from the others and it was like this before delidding as well. Chip still clocks great. I'm skeptical a relid will change your situation but only one way to find out...


After 2nd delid attempt my results are nearly identical. After 5 minutes of Prime95 28.10 my core temps are 84, 76, 84, 83. At idle with HWinfo and 1 tab of Chrome my temps are 30-33 which seems normal.

My PLL voltage is set to auto in the BIOS. My only other idea is to buy some glue remover and wipe off any build up around the corners of the IHS. And then do a 3rd attempt. I'm positive this time my liquid ultra is applied well. Maybe I just have a crooked IHS from the delid.

Edit- Tried starting with PLL set to 1.20. Got an error and freeze after 1 min of Prime95 but my temps were still high at 83 max. Something has to be wrong with my delid. I will either get some glue remover and try again or just deal with it.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> After 2nd delid attempt my results are nearly identical. After 5 minutes of Prime95 28.10 my core temps are 84, 76, 84, 83. At idle with HWinfo and 1 tab of Chrome my temps are 30-33 which seems normal.
> 
> My PLL voltage is set to auto in the BIOS. My only other idea is to buy some glue remover and wipe off any build up around the corners of the IHS. And then do a 3rd attempt. I'm positive this time my liquid ultra is applied well. Maybe I just have a crooked IHS from the delid.
> 
> Edit- Tried starting with PLL set to 1.20. Got an error and freeze after 1 min of Prime95 but my temps were still high at 83 max. Something has to be wrong with my delid. I will either get some glue remover and try again or just deal with it.


Make sure you did CPU PLL and not CPU PLL OC... the naming may vary depending on mobo. 1.2 is Intel's rating so it shouldn't cause any problems. You must have set the other one.

Are you aiming to remove SuperGlue gel control? I entertained that idea with acetone and an extacto knife, but I gave up in fear of not removing some contact between the IHS and PCB that the delid tool would rip apart.


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Make sure you did CPU PLL and not CPU PLL OC... the naming may vary depending on mobo. 1.2 is Intel's rating so it shouldn't cause any problems. You must have set the other one.
> 
> Are you aiming to remove SuperGlue gel control? I entertained that idea with acetone and an extacto knife, but I gave up in fear of not removing some contact between the IHS and PCB that the delid tool would rip apart.


Thanks, will try that next. Running at stock now with just LLC at 5 still. My actual Vcore is 1.168 and core temps (Prime95 28.10) are 68, 61, 68, 66. Still high I feel.

In my BIOS there is only 1 option under "tweakers paradise" for internal PLL voltage. That's what I set to 1.200. I have an Asus Z170 Mark 1 board.

I am thinking of starting completely over and removing the IHS again. Will wipe away the super glue on the PCB with acetone or other glue remover. I just used the super glue that Rockit88 sent with the kit.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> Thanks, will try that next. Running at stock now with just LLC at 5 still. My actual Vcore is 1.168 and core temps (Prime95 28.10) are 68, 61, 68, 66. Still high I feel.
> 
> In my BIOS there is only 1 option under "tweakers paradise" for internal PLL voltage. That's what I set to 1.200. I have an Asus Z170 Mark 1 board.
> 
> I am thinking of starting completely over and removing the IHS again. Will wipe away the super glue on the PCB with acetone or other glue remover. I just used the super glue that Rockit88 sent with the kit.


You can have up to +/-5 degrees C variance between cores according to Intel spec so a 10 degree C variance between cores is possible


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> Thanks, will try that next. Running at stock now with just LLC at 5 still. My actual Vcore is 1.168 and core temps (Prime95 28.10) are 68, 61, 68, 66. Still high I feel.
> 
> In my BIOS there is only 1 option under "tweakers paradise" for internal PLL voltage. That's what I set to 1.200. I have an Asus Z170 Mark 1 board.
> 
> I am thinking of starting completely over and removing the IHS again. Will wipe away the super glue on the PCB with acetone or other glue remover. I just used the super glue that Rockit88 sent with the kit.


I've never owned an asus board, but that sounds like it could be correct. When it's on auto, what do you see for PLL anything in hwinfo?

That's probably the same glue I used. I'm curious how the removal goes and wish you the best of luck.

I just did a quick cinebench on high priority and the max temps on my cores were 61,76,69, and 68. So 15C spread for me, but chip still 5.1 @ ~1.328.. and that's with PPLL 1.2v


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> You can have up to +/-5 degrees C variance between cores according to Intel spec so a 10 degree C variance between cores is possible


I am delidded w/ Liquid Ultra on the die and a H100i V2 AIO + MX-4 on the IHS, my temps are very high looking at everyone else's results, while at lower voltage.

I tried removing the H100i and replaced it with my NH-U14S air cooler to explore possible AIO issues. My temps are still not acceptable but they are actually a tad cooler than with the H100i, LOL. My cores after 5 mins of Prime95 at 5 ghz again Vcore 1.312 are 83, 73, 83, 80. The NH-U14S really is incredible. Will switch back to it full time.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I've never owned an asus board, but that sounds like it could be correct. When it's on auto, what do you see for PLL anything in hwinfo?
> 
> That's probably the same glue I used. I'm curious how the removal goes and wish you the best of luck.
> 
> I just did a quick cinebench on high priority and the max temps on my cores were 61,76,69, and 68. So 15C spread for me, but chip still 5.1 @ ~1.328


Funny, I must have disabled PLL monitoring within HWInfo because there is a red X next to it. I think I was trying to eliminate tabs I never viewed with my old CPU, lol. Will have to change that, a dumb thing for me to have done.

I bought some Goof Off and a tiny paint brush from my local shop. Will definitely post my results, I am nervous I'll ruin the PCB but have been told it is safe to use and will just use a really small amount directly on the glue spots. It should work with Loctite control gel. Your temps are my target, something is just off with my delid I'm fairly sure considering I get the same results with my air cooler. Hopefully 3rd time will be a charm.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> Thanks, will try that next. Running at stock now with just LLC at 5 still. My actual Vcore is 1.168 and core temps (Prime95 28.10) are 68, 61, 68, 66. Still high I feel.
> 
> In my BIOS there is only 1 option under "tweakers paradise" for internal PLL voltage. That's what I set to 1.200. I have an Asus Z170 Mark 1 board.
> 
> I am thinking of starting completely over and removing the IHS again. Will wipe away the super glue on the PCB with acetone or other glue remover. I just used the super glue that Rockit88 sent with the kit.
> 
> 
> 
> I've never owned an asus board, but that sounds like it could be correct. When it's on auto, what do you see for PLL anything in hwinfo?
> 
> That's probably the same glue I used. I'm curious how the removal goes and wish you the best of luck.
> 
> I just did a quick cinebench on high priority and the max temps on my cores were 61,76,69, and 68. So 15C spread for me, but chip still 5.1 @ ~1.328.. and that's with PPLL 1.2v
Click to expand...

The maximum temperature per specific cores change with different programs.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> I am delidded w/ Liquid Ultra on the die and a H100i V2 AIO + MX-4 on the IHS, my temps are very high looking at everyone else's results, while at lower voltage.
> 
> I tried removing the H100i and replaced it with my NH-U14S air cooler to explore possible AIO issues. My temps are still not acceptable but they are actually a tad cooler than with the H100i, LOL. My cores after 5 mins of Prime95 at 5 ghz again Vcore 1.312 are 83, 73, 83, 80. The NH-U14S really is incredible. Will switch back to it full time.
> Funny, I must have disabled PLL monitoring within HWInfo because there is a red X next to it. I think I was trying to eliminate tabs I never viewed with my old CPU, lol. Will have to change that, a dumb thing for me to have done.
> 
> I bought some Goof Off and a tiny paint brush from my local shop. Will definitely post my results, I am nervous I'll ruin the PCB but have been told it is safe to use and will just use a really small amount directly on the glue spots. It should work with Loctite control gel. Your temps are my target, something is just off with my delid I'm fairly sure considering I get the same results with my air cooler. Hopefully 3rd time will be a charm.


Actually try this for me. Sometimes when you do a second delid+relid, the liquid metal doesn't wet the Nickel heatspreader properly, you will see a lot of balling no matter how much cotton bud pressure you do. What I did was to throughly clean off the area, then get some really fine grit toothpaste (the no fluoride, minimal additives gel type if possible) and gently rub the surface of the heatspreader which mates with the die, then wash off again vigorously. This removes the previous oxidized/infiltrated layer which allows your fresh liquid metal to wet properly.


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> What's your PLL Voltage at? The lower it is than 1.2 the farther the core differences will be. I have 2 cores that vary from the others and it was like this before delidding as well. Chip still clocks great. I'm skeptical a relid will change your situation but only one way to find out...


So I tried again, HWInfo says my PLL voltage max is 1.300. I previously set this to 1.200 and froze. Should I try 1.25?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Actually try this for me. Sometimes when you do a second delid+relid, the liquid metal doesn't wet the Nickel heatspreader properly, you will see a lot of balling no matter how much cotton bud pressure you do. What I did was to throughly clean off the area, then get some really fine grit toothpaste (the no fluoride, minimal additives gel type if possible) and gently rub the surface of the heatspreader which mates with the die, then wash off again vigorously. This removes the previous oxidized/infiltrated layer which allows your fresh liquid metal to wet properly.


Too late sorry, I finished the 3rd delid attempt and with it all the Liquid Ultra (pathetic only 4-5 uses per syringe). The Goof Off didn't really work but I didn't use a lot of it for fear of killing the chip. I was able to scrape away all of the glue from the edges of the IHS and most of it from the PCB. I did notice ever so slight unevenness / wobble of the IHS when I placed it onto the CPU prior to putting on the LU. This is 99.99% likely the root of the problem and probably was the result of my initial delid using the Rockit88 tool. No idea what else could possibly warp the IHS or PCB.

Regardless I decided to go through with the relid, all is secure and doesn't budge, and reinstalled the H100i. Slightly better temps I suppose.

At 5 ghz and 1.328 Vcore during Prime 95 28.10 small ffp my core temps were 83, 74, 83, 80.

Same settings but running Prime 95 26.6 small ffp my core temps were 73, 66, 73, 71.

My temps using 26.6 are in line with what most people post here I guess.

10 minutes of Aida64 stability test my core max is 77.

Oh well, this is the risk I take with delidding. At least I didn't kill the CPU through 3 delids and can safely run at 5 ghz, albeit a little warmer than I'd like.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> After 2nd delid attempt my results are nearly identical. After 5 minutes of Prime95 28.10 my core temps are 84, 76, 84, 83. At idle with HWinfo and 1 tab of Chrome my temps are 30-33 which seems normal.
> 
> My PLL voltage is set to auto in the BIOS. My only other idea is to buy some glue remover and wipe off any build up around the corners of the IHS. And then do a 3rd attempt. I'm positive this time my liquid ultra is applied well. Maybe I just have a crooked IHS from the delid.
> 
> Edit- Tried starting with PLL set to 1.20. Got an error and freeze after 1 min of Prime95 but my temps were still high at 83 max. Something has to be wrong with my delid. I will either get some glue remover and try again or just deal with it.


it's very unlikely (like 100% unlikely) that the IHS deformed during delid with the rocket tool... or even using the hammer and vice method for that matter. Some cpus just run hot (depends on the amount of leakage). IF you do delid again, be sure to clean the IHS and PCB thoroughly to remove any residual glue or sealant. And when applying LM be sure to paint the die and underside of the IHS. I mean you can experiment on the IHS... you will see that it takes a bit of "massaging" to get the LM to adhere to (form an effective bondline) with the surface - so imagine the poor bondline that can result from just painting only the die. LM-to-LM forms a near perfect interface, LM-to-IHS when we onl;y paint the die is actually pretty poor..


----------



## sic08869

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Tell her your wanting to buy a new CPU, but you can make your existing one last longer by running it faster, but it generates more heat; and to cool the heat, the fans need to be super loud and annoying; and that a cheaper option is to water cool the computer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Worked for me


This might be the solution!


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's very unlikely (like 100% unlikely) that the IHS deformed during delid with the rocket tool... or even using the hammer and vice method for that matter. Some cpus just run hot (depends on the amount of leakage). IF you do delid again, be sure to clean the IHS and PCB thoroughly to remove any residual glue or sealant. And when applying LM be sure to paint the die and underside of the IHS. I mean you can experiment on the IHS... you will see that it takes a bit of "massaging" to get the LM to adhere to (form an effective bondline) with the surface - so imagine the poor bondline that can result from just painting only the die. LM-to-LM forms a near perfect interface, LM-to-IHS when we onl;y paint the die is actually pretty poor..


Thank you for your input as well. I made sure to clean the underside of the IHS thoroughly with rubbing alcohol before relidding, it was squeaky clean except for the residual rectangle stain the size of the die. I did my best to clean the old super glue off the PCB, didn't want to go to town on it and destroy it. I got enough off so that it did not interfere with placement of the IHS back onto the PCB.

I did not put LM on the underside of the IHS- I didn't do this with my 6700K and it worked perfectly, but 7700K is a different beast when it comes to heat I see. I will definitely do this if I decide to try for a 4th time. I didn't do it because I was scared I'd apply it a little off of center and kill the chip as soon as I powered it on. I will do some searching to see how much difference this will make re: load temps.

Note to self, just buy from silicon lottery next time!


----------



## Dasboogieman

Just got this bad boy fabricated and installed. Custom CnC machined Copper IHS by Bartek. Cost me $50 AUD overall + free shipping for 2 units, about 10 day lead time and delivery.





Observations:
from my examination, it seems the custom IHS is almost perfectly flat (because it is machined as opposed to stamped on the stock Intel one) and has a much larger base contact surface area with the PCB (thus much less chance of PCB warping).
The IHS is also a floater design, from my communication with Bartek, there is too much variance in the Z height to risk making full length due to the performance loss from having a thicker interface vs a float design similar to the stock IHS. Be sure to re-seal with RTV or 0.2mm electrical tape shim to prevent PCB warp.

Performance:

So far with standard delid + relid protocols on my 7700k (conductonaut, 0.2mm tape shim, Kryonaut) I got 1-2C reduction at idle and 3-4C reduction under load. Very unexpected, I suspect the massive reduction is a combination of:
1. my stock IHS is too bowed
2. the stock IHS nickel prevents good Conductonaut wetting beyond the very first application (I've redone it 3 times already)
3. The usual 1-2C variance in XSPC Raystorm Pro mounting performance.

I am overall very satisfied with the result, sure it doesn't get massive gains (but I didn't expect such) but I now can keep my stock IHS in a safe place and abuse the Copper IHS I have with confidence. Next up, I might do Conductonaut between the copper and the waterblock.

Unfortunately, my search in to creating a vapor chamber IHS was fruitless, unless I mount the motherboard horizontal, the thermal engineers at Thermacore are sure the performance will not match a solid copper IHS due to the convection pattern of the liquid.

If you guys are interested in Bartek's work, fire him an email at, [email protected], I believe he also makes other stuff like Ln2 accessories on demand.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> So I tried again, HWInfo says my PLL voltage max is 1.300. I previously set this to 1.200 and froze. Should I try 1.25?
> Too late sorry, I finished the 3rd delid attempt and with it all the Liquid Ultra (pathetic only 4-5 uses per syringe). The Goof Off didn't really work but I didn't use a lot of it for fear of killing the chip. I was able to scrape away all of the glue from the edges of the IHS and most of it from the PCB. I did notice ever so slight unevenness / wobble of the IHS when I placed it onto the CPU prior to putting on the LU. This is 99.99% likely the root of the problem and probably was the result of my initial delid using the Rockit88 tool. No idea what else could possibly warp the IHS or PCB.
> 
> Regardless I decided to go through with the relid, all is secure and doesn't budge, and reinstalled the H100i. Slightly better temps I suppose.
> 
> At 5 ghz and 1.328 Vcore during Prime 95 28.10 small ffp my core temps were 83, 74, 83, 80.
> 
> Same settings but running Prime 95 26.6 small ffp my core temps were 73, 66, 73, 71.
> 
> My temps using 26.6 are in line with what most people post here I guess.
> 
> 10 minutes of Aida64 stability test my core max is 77.
> 
> Oh well, this is the risk I take with delidding. At least I didn't kill the CPU through 3 delids and can safely run at 5 ghz, albeit a little warmer than I'd like.


Lower PLL will show lower temps although the actual temp may not vary.

I just put mine at 1.3 and after 5 minutes p95 26.6 has mine at 90, 85, 85, 81 so your results don't look bad to me







Dropping to PLL 1.1 gives 67,72, 53, 55. Glad to hear you pulled the relid off.


----------



## austinmrs

Im thinking of delidding my 7700k.

Will use the delid die mate 2, and then use thermal grizzly conductonaut liquid metal to apply on the IHS and the Die.

What should i use the remove the glue from the IHS and the Die? Can i use my nails and then apply alchool on the die and cpu pcb without a problem?

Will then use UHU Black Silicone to re glue the ihs to the die


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Lower PLL will show lower temps although the actual temp may not vary.
> 
> I just put mine at 1.3 and after 5 minutes p95 26.6 has mine at 90, 85, 85, 81 so your results don't look bad to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dropping to PLL 1.1 gives 67,72, 53, 55. Glad to hear you pulled the relid off.


I already ordered another tube of Liquid Ultra and will do it a 4th time. I will try the suggestion of applying it on the die and also the bottom of the IHS.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> Im thinking of delidding my 7700k.
> 
> Will use the delid die mate 2, and then use thermal grizzly conductonaut liquid metal to apply on the IHS and the Die.
> 
> What should i use the remove the glue from the IHS and the Die? Can i use my nails and then apply alchool on the die and cpu pcb without a problem?
> 
> Will then use UHU Black Silicone to re glue the ihs to the die


I used a combo of my finger nail and a credit card to do the initial removal. My delidding kit came with a wood pick to chip away at the corners of the IHS. I assume a toothpick will be just as good. After getting most of the stuff off you could use alcohol with coffee filters for the die and other sensitive areas. There was a brillo type of pad with the Liquid Ultra and that wiped away everything else quite easily. I should've gotten some black silicone to relid rather than the super glue gel, prob would've been much cleaner.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> I already ordered another tube of Liquid Ultra and will do it a 4th time. I will try the suggestion of applying it on the die and also the bottom of the IHS.
> I used a combo of my finger nail and a credit card to do the initial removal. My delidding kit came with a wood pick to chip away at the corners of the IHS. I assume a toothpick will be just as good. After getting most of the stuff off you could use alcohol with coffee filters for the die and other sensitive areas. There was a brillo type of pad with the Liquid Ultra and that wiped away everything else quite easily. I should've gotten some black silicone to relid rather than the super glue gel, prob would've been much cleaner.


My tuube of lm pro , man, at least i have aplied 7 times out of it for now , and its only one half gone of all tube... i mean i can do another mb 7 or mb more of that tube.
You sure you don't apply too much? Or ultra is so different from pro... idkn. But 4 times out of 1 tube is kinda low, assuming you need like 2-3 drops and spread it.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Lower PLL will show lower temps although the actual temp may not vary.
> 
> I just put mine at 1.3 and after 5 minutes p95 26.6 has mine at 90, 85, 85, 81 so your results don't look bad to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dropping to PLL 1.1 gives 67,72, 53, 55. Glad to hear you pulled the relid off.


Holy crap you're right, this dropped my temps by 5C. The stupid Auto settings gave waaay too much.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> My tuube of lm pro , man, at least i have aplied 7 times out of it for now , and its only one half gone of all tube... i mean i can do another mb 7 or mb more of that tube.
> You sure you don't apply too much? Or ultra is so different from pro... idkn. But 4 times out of 1 tube is kinda low, assuming you need like 2-3 drops and spread it.


Ultra and Pro are not really different in thermal performance, but I do find CLP to be better on relids... but that's just me. Basically - ANY lm is better than the pigeon poop Intel used.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Holy crap you're right, this dropped my temps by 5C. The stupid Auto settings gave waaay too much.


.. and if you continue to lower PLL, temps will continue to go down.. or more accurately, read lower than actual. the PLL voltage helps to align the DTS signal.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Ultra and Pro are not really different in thermal performance, but I do find CLP to be better on relids... but that's just me. Basically - ANY lm is better than the pigeon poop Intel used.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .. and if you continue to lower PLL, temps will continue to go down.. or more accurately, read lower than actual. the PLL voltage helps to align the DTS signal.


Im sad, don't know what is real anymore....


----------



## Scotty99

Anyone in here own a g4560? Just ordered one off ebay for my HTPC, this old athlon has to go lol.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Just got this bad boy fabricated and installed. Custom CnC machined Copper IHS by Bartek. Cost me $50 AUD overall + free shipping for 2 units, about 10 day lead time and delivery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Observations:
> from my examination, it seems the custom IHS is almost perfectly flat (because it is machined as opposed to stamped on the stock Intel one) and has a much larger base contact surface area with the PCB (thus much less chance of PCB warping).
> The IHS is also a floater design, from my communication with Bartek, there is too much variance in the Z height to risk making full length due to the performance loss from having a thicker interface vs a float design similar to the stock IHS. Be sure to re-seal with RTV or 0.2mm electrical tape shim to prevent PCB warp.
> 
> Performance:
> 
> So far with standard delid + relid protocols on my 7700k (conductonaut, 0.2mm tape shim, Kryonaut) I got 1-2C reduction at idle and 3-4C reduction under load. Very unexpected, I suspect the massive reduction is a combination of:
> 1. my stock IHS is too bowed
> 2. the stock IHS nickel prevents good Conductonaut wetting beyond the very first application (I've redone it 3 times already)
> 3. The usual 1-2C variance in XSPC Raystorm Pro mounting performance.
> 
> I am overall very satisfied with the result, sure it doesn't get massive gains (but I didn't expect such) but I now can keep my stock IHS in a safe place and abuse the Copper IHS I have with confidence. Next up, I might do Conductonaut between the copper and the waterblock.
> 
> Unfortunately, my search in to creating a vapor chamber IHS was fruitless, unless I mount the motherboard horizontal, the thermal engineers at Thermacore are sure the performance will not match a solid copper IHS due to the convection pattern of the liquid.
> 
> If you guys are interested in Bartek's work, fire him an email at, [email protected], I believe he also makes other stuff like Ln2 accessories on demand.


Very interesting... Wonder if there's anything like this for USA. Although, at that point bare die doesn't seem *that* out there.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sic08869*


Charted.


Sample Size55  Average OC5.04Median OC5.00Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.37


----------



## sic08869

Woohoo IM IN!


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Very interesting... Wonder if there's anything like this for USA. Although, at that point bare die doesn't seem *that* out there.
> 
> Charted.
> 
> 
> Sample Size55  Average OC5.04Median OC5.00Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.37


kinda
if bitspower support still sells some

since they've taken them down










but didn't make a difference temp wise


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> kinda
> if bitspower support still sells some
> 
> since they've taken them down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but didn't make a difference temp wise


I got Bartek to do mine because I couldn't find any Bitspower ones and the store rep was ignoring my enquiries.


----------



## sdmf74

Got to get one of those BP kaby lake IHS, any idea on availability in the usa?


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Got to get one of those BP kaby lake IHS, any idea on availability in the usa?


Last I checked, non-existent. Like their international store won't even accept enquiries let alone a fab run.


----------



## Mr-Dark

Hello all

I think i will leave this here.. maybe someone looking for this info about delided 7700k and big AIO..

7700k delided.. CLU under IHS and Noctua NT-H1 between the IHS and the block
Asus z270 IX Code
16GB Vengeance RGB @3ghz
ThermalTake Water 3.0 + Triple RGB fan's so Push/pull at 800Rpm..

cpu at 5.1ghz- cache at 4.5ghz- memory 3ghz-- voltage at 1.36v manual at LLC 5



voltage under load is 1.344v.. been using this from over month with Zero problem..

want to say the 360mm AIO is beast.. compared to H115i and H100i V2.. around 10c better and i can push the voltage up to 1.40v without any overheat.. also 800rpm fans is more than enough









Thanks


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Got to get one of those BP kaby lake IHS, any idea on availability in the usa?


I wrote there support over Skype and it worked ( shopservice.bitspowertw in Skype)
with shipping 35 bucks or so

I bought mine in March I think


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> Hello all
> 
> I think i will leave this here.. maybe someone looking for this info about delided 7700k and big AIO..
> 
> 7700k delided.. CLU under IHS and Noctua NT-H1 between the IHS and the block
> Asus z270 IX Code
> 16GB Vengeance RGB @3ghz
> ThermalTake Water 3.0 + Triple RGB fan's so Push/pull at 800Rpm..
> 
> cpu at 5.1ghz- cache at 4.5ghz- memory 3ghz-- voltage at 1.36v manual at LLC 5
> 
> *
> *
> voltage under load is 1.344v.. been using this from over month with Zero problem..
> 
> want to say the 360mm AIO is beast.. compared to H115i and H100i V2.. around 10c better and i can push the voltage up to 1.40v without any overheat.. also 800rpm fans is more than enough
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks


good set up *****... the 7700K remains a top gamingf CPU. especially when clocked at 5.0 and higher. Tough for any currently marketed cpu to beat.


----------



## Leethal

Hey Guys i overclocked my 7600k with a hyper212 evo cooler.

i got multiplier of 50 so its at 5Ghz and the voltage is 1.340v

idle its at 28c and 1.344v and under full load its at 62c and 1.360v and once in a while rarely i see it spike to 1.374v

is this okay?


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> good set up *****... the 7700K remains a top gamingf CPU. especially when clocked at 5.0 and higher. Tough for any currently marketed cpu to beat.


Thanks Jp

Yeah, its beast cpu.. also this my first delided cpu.. this push my GTX 1080 to the max at 1080p @144hz









the next Upgrade for me is 8700k.. 6 core on Z..mm







x299 isn't worth it at all


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leethal*
> 
> Hey Guys i overclocked my 7600k with a hyper212 evo cooler.
> 
> i got multiplier of 50 so its at 5Ghz and the voltage is 1.340v
> 
> idle its at 28c and 1.344v and under full load its at 62c and 1.360v and once in a while rarely i see it spike to 1.374v
> 
> is this okay?


Well, the temps are certainly okay. The voltages are still safe-ish, although your LLC settings are probably unreasonably high considering your voltage increases with load. You could likely get a stable configuration with lower load voltages by lowering LLC and accepting higher idle voltages. But it's entirely up to you whether you want to fine-tune that.


----------



## Leethal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Well, the temps are certainly okay. The voltages are still safe-ish, although your LLC settings are probably unreasonably high considering your voltage increases with load. You could likely get a stable configuration with lower load voltages by lowering LLC and accepting higher idle voltages. But it's entirely up to you whether you want to fine-tune that.


i'v never done that before. all i know is to change multiplier and set voltage.

any advice? if i keep it like this, is it truly safe? i just built this thing.

Should i try lowering the vcore in the bios? i just set it to 1.340 because i saw it in a overclocking video, so its possible my cpu can run at 1.320 in bios and still be stable right?


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leethal*
> 
> i'v never done that before.
> 
> all i know is to change multiplier and set voltage.
> 
> any advice? if i keep it like this, is it truly safe? i just built this thing.


Well the CPU certainly runs very cool, I'd assume it can manage this pace for the next few years at least. Of course one never knows for sure, plus 14nm chips are so very new that we don't really have any proper longevity data for them yet. As usual, your use scenario heavily affects it; if you at most do gaming, only few hours a day, instead of crunching [email protected] 24/7 your chip will last way longer, usually "forever" (ie. you'll be looking for an upgrade before you notice your CPU is going bad)

If you want to tinker with the Load Line Calibration (go ahead and google about this), find the setting in the bios. You may want to revert your OC completely (reset bios settings to default) before you go make radical swings in the settings, instead taking it step by step. It's generally advisable to have your core voltage drop under load by at least a bit, not go up; there can be potentially dangerous transient voltage spikes hiding there - but considering your measured voltages are still well below 1.4V you're probably fine even with spikes and all.


----------



## MaKeN

@Mr-Dark

Sadly that it wont go with the z270 boards....


----------



## austinmrs

Anyone here with a AsRock Z270 K4?

I just got that board, with a 7600k... Just setup the XMP profile, then setup all cores to 4.6Ghz, set voltage to 1,35V and LLC Level 1 and with a Cooler Master Hyper 212X i was getting to 100ºC really fast with IBT on Very High. Is that normal? Tried to remount the Cooler, same results.


----------



## Leethal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Well the CPU certainly runs very cool, I'd assume it can manage this pace for the next few years at least. Of course one never knows for sure, plus 14nm chips are so very new that we don't really have any proper longevity data for them yet. As usual, your use scenario heavily affects it; if you at most do gaming, only few hours a day, instead of crunching [email protected] 24/7 your chip will last way longer, usually "forever" (ie. you'll be looking for an upgrade before you notice your CPU is going bad)
> 
> If you want to tinker with the Load Line Calibration (go ahead and google about this), find the setting in the bios. You may want to revert your OC completely (reset bios settings to default) before you go make radical swings in the settings, instead taking it step by step. It's generally advisable to have your core voltage drop under load by at least a bit, not go up; there can be potentially dangerous transient voltage spikes hiding there - but considering your measured voltages are still well below 1.4V you're probably fine even with spikes and all.


Okay so i did some reading on it and basically by correctly setting the load line calibration the voltages should drop slightly not increase which is my case at the moment, correct?


----------



## Leethal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> Anyone here with a AsRock Z270 K4?
> 
> I just got that board, with a 7600k... Just setup the XMP profile, then setup all cores to 4.6Ghz, set voltage to 1,35V and LLC Level 1 and with a Cooler Master Hyper 212X i was getting to 100ºC really fast with IBT on Very High. Is that normal? Tried to remount the Cooler, same results.


with the same cooler i hit 5Ghz on 1.340v LLC auto(going to play with this later) and i got

28-32 idle and 58-62 full load Celsius


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> Anyone here with a AsRock Z270 K4?
> 
> I just got that board, with a 7600k... Just setup the XMP profile, then setup all cores to 4.6Ghz, set voltage to 1,35V and LLC Level 1 and with a Cooler Master Hyper 212X i was getting to 100ºC really fast with IBT on Very High. Is that normal? Tried to remount the Cooler, same results.


That is a bit high you most likely need to look at what your actual voltage is under load since your LLC is at its highest setting. Also consider a delid as that will drop your load temps by as much as 20-25 degrees C. Members with Asrock board may have some other voltage tweaks to consider.


----------



## austinmrs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> Anyone here with a AsRock Z270 K4?
> 
> I just got that board, with a 7600k... Just setup the XMP profile, then setup all cores to 4.6Ghz, set voltage to 1,35V, and with a Cooler Master Hyper 212X i was getting to 100ºC really fast with IBT on Very High. Is that normal? Tried to remount the Cooler, same results.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leethal*
> 
> with the same cooler i hit 5Ghz on 1.340v LLC auto(going to play with this later) and i got
> 
> 28-32 idle and 58-62 full load Celsius


How is my CPU overheating so much? Is it the LLC 1 on the AsRock boards or what?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> How is my CPU overheating so much? Is it the LLC 1 on the AsRock boards or what?


From memory LLC 1 on Asrock is same as level 8 on Asus, check what voltage you are actually getting with hardware monitor under load.


----------



## MaKeN

Lol after my cpu degraded its will pass RB 15 mins at stock xpm settings ( 4600 / 3400 on ram /vcore 1.32v , all auto)
It will show a blue screen if i change the vcore any higher than 1.32 v in like 2 mins at the same cpu ratio, feels like 4600 fails at higher voltage then 1.32...
Cpu became unpredictable


----------



## sdmf74

@Lethal what motherboard do you have?


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> Anyone here with a AsRock Z270 K4?
> 
> I just got that board, with a 7600k... Just setup the XMP profile, then setup all cores to 4.6Ghz, set voltage to 1,35V, and with a Cooler Master Hyper 212X i was getting to 100ºC really fast with IBT on Very High. Is that normal? Tried to remount the Cooler, same results.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Leethal*
> 
> with the same cooler i hit 5Ghz on 1.340v LLC auto(going to play with this later) and i got
> 
> 28-32 idle and 58-62 full load Celsius
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How is my CPU overheating so much? Is it the LLC 1 on the AsRock boards or what?
Click to expand...

What's your temp accross cores?

Do you have the voltage mode set to fixed or offset?

What goo did you use to seat the cooler?


----------



## austinmrs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> What's your temp accross cores?
> 
> Do you have the voltage mode set to fixed or offset?
> 
> What goo did you use to seat the cooler?


Fixed LLC1.
The temps, using IBT Very High, were already spiking up to 95ºC on like 30 seconds... Using 1.35V

I used the TIM that came with the Cooler Master cooler.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leethal*
> 
> Hey Guys i overclocked my 7600k with a hyper212 evo cooler.
> 
> i got multiplier of 50 so its at 5Ghz and the voltage is 1.340v
> 
> idle its at 28c and 1.344v and under full load its at 62c and 1.360v and once in a while rarely i see it spike to 1.374v
> 
> is this okay?


That looks Good for what you use the PC for.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> What's your temp accross cores?
> 
> Do you have the voltage mode set to fixed or offset?
> 
> What goo did you use to seat the cooler?
> 
> 
> 
> Fixed LLC1.
> The temps, using IBT Very High, were already spiking up to 95ºC on like 30 seconds... Using 1.35V
> 
> I used the TIM that came with the Cooler Master cooler.
Click to expand...

At very least, go back to optimal settings in the Bios. Use Hwinfo64 to check your Vcore, core temp, and fan speeds. After that, run Realbench stress test and see what you get max temp wise after fifteen minutes. Post back with results.


----------



## Leethal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> @Lethal what motherboard do you have?


ASUS Strix Z270H Gaming


----------



## Leethal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That looks Good for what you use the PC for.


Its just for gaming and web browsing.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leethal*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That looks Good for what you use the PC for.
> 
> 
> 
> Its just for gaming and web browsing.
Click to expand...

Well in that case I would just use the Rig and be happy.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leethal*
> 
> ASUS Strix Z270H Gaming


not familiar with that motherboard but if it has similar LLC settings as the maximus IX line (LLC 1-8) in bios, then set LLC to 5 and use it for a week or so. If no bsod occur your fiNE if it does then fine tune.
As others have said you should set LLC so that your voltage stays the same or rises slightly under load.
You may need a slight bump in voltage since current llc setting is allowing
Voltage to rise so much under load


----------



## deathroll

Hello guys. I got a new 7700K sample. I might have owned weirdest (as far as I see) chip. It runs very hot even in stock clocks. Temps hit ~90C at load. Yet, it has the lowest VID I've seen so far (1.168 V). I suppose the sample was not packed very well with IHS. I am very confused about delidding this chip. What do you think?


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deathroll*
> 
> Hello guys. I got a new 7700K sample. I might have owned weirdest (as far as I see) chip. It runs very hot even in stock clocks. Temps hit ~90C at load. Yet, it has the lowest VID I've seen so far (1.168 V). I suppose the sample was not packed very well with IHS. I am very confused about delidding this chip. What do you think?


Some 7700k very hot.. ( bad TIM by intel )....

also that nice VID at stock.. in general low VID at stock mean good OC but nothing linear.. Mine pull 1.15v at stock


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deathroll*
> 
> Hello guys. I got a new 7700K sample. I might have owned weirdest (as far as I see) chip. It runs very hot even in stock clocks. Temps hit ~90C at load. Yet, it has the lowest VID I've seen so far (1.168 V). I suppose the sample was not packed very well with IHS. I am very confused about delidding this chip. What do you think?


The 2 typical things that cause high temps are:
1. Bad Glue/TIM contact with the IHS and the die
2. Leaky binned chip

In your case it looks more like reason 1.

You can try a delid, get a professional tool like the Rockit Delid or some others.


----------



## Leethal

okay so i set my voltage in bios to 1.300v and the LLC to 4

tested using AIDA64 all night no crash so i assume its stable

i5 7600k 5Ghz 1.300v in Bios LLC 4
in OS voltage is 1.296 under full load
28-34c idle and 58-62c full load


----------



## sdmf74

should be good to go just use it normally for a week or so or run your usual benchmark or stress test programs. Realbench is a good one.
Also now check your idle and load voltages, they should be closer


----------



## Leethal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> should be good to go just use it normally for a week or so or run your usual benchmark or stress test programs. Realbench is a good one.
> Also now check your idle and load voltages, they should be closer


Yeah the idle and load voltages are super close now, no more big drops or spikes. LLC to 4 was awesome


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leethal*
> 
> okay so i set my voltage in bios to 1.300v and the LLC to 4
> 
> tested using AIDA64 all night no crash so i assume its stable
> 
> i5 7600k 5Ghz 1.300v in Bios LLC 4
> in OS voltage is 1.296 under full load
> 28-34c idle and 58-62c full load


Don't use AIDA 64 for stability test regardless of how long you run it for as it is not a very good stress test for stability, use Realbench or OCCT to stress test with or any stress test recommended in the opening post


----------



## sdmf74

Anybody notice that when CPU POWER PHASE CONTROL is set to Auto (default) in bios it shows as set to Extreme in AisuiteIII? If extreme is the default setting I guess changing it makes it a power saving feature
I always hated that asus uses AUTO for certain settings in the bios cause you have no way of knowing which setting auto defaults to









That is unless AisuiteIII is wrong....doubtful


----------



## dsbmlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Anybody notice that when CPU POWER PHASE CONTROL is set to Auto (default) in bios it shows as set to Extreme in AisuiteIII? If extreme is the default setting I guess changing it makes it a power saving feature
> I always hated that asus uses AUTO for certain settings in the bios cause you have no way of knowing which setting auto defaults to
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is unless AisuiteIII is wrong....doubtful


Yeah I noticed that the other day, I agree!


----------



## ViTosS

This isn't a specific question about 7700k OC but I think it applies to mine, as said in the guide, when I use manual voltage with LLC on auto my voltage should be higher in idle and lower in full load, right? But I don't think this is happening with my 4790k, atm I set in BIOS manual vcore of 1.29v and the result showed in CPU-Z is the same in idle and in full load, 1.289v (0.001 less than what I set in BIOS):

Idle:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Full load:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Another question, is it normal when I have SVID DISABLED my PC when I turn on after being turned off in the PSU switch or pulled the power cable the PC turns on, turns off and turns on again? Isn't this dangerous to the Corsair H105 pump, I mean, can it harm the pump because it turns on and off so fast, I know that is SVID causing this because when I set it to ENABLED it doesn't happen.


----------



## woutersrik

Hello guys,

I recently purchased an i7 7700k(+ Dark Rock quiet Pro 3) and installed it on my asus z270-a.
First step I did was stress testing it at stock speed (4.5ghz). Idle temperatures are around 34 degrees and load using the x264 test(5 loops, 16 threads, normal priority).
I thought that was pretty high but I've read that the kaby lake chips are hot in general. So I went to the next step of this guide and try 5.0ghz and 1.35v.
This put my cpu temp immediately up to 90. And after a minute 100 on every core (not continiously), so I stopped the test immediately. My CPU fan was spinning at 100% during each stress test. Am I doing something wrong or is my chip not good?

Any advice on what I should do?

Kind regards,
Wouters Rik


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woutersrik*
> 
> Hello guys,
> 
> I recently purchased an i7 7700k(+ Dark Rock quiet Pro 3) and installed it on my asus z270-a.
> First step I did was stress testing it at stock speed (4.5ghz). Idle temperatures are around 34 degrees and load using the x264 test(5 loops, 16 threads, normal priority).
> I thought that was pretty high but I've read that the kaby lake chips are hot in general. So I went to the next step of this guide and try 5.0ghz and 1.35v.
> This put my cpu temp immediately up to 90. And after a minute 100 on every core (not continiously), so I stopped the test immediately. My CPU fan was spinning at 100% during each stress test. Am I doing something wrong or is my chip not good?
> 
> Any advice on what I should do?
> 
> Kind regards,
> Wouters Rik


yeah, with an air cooler. running at 5.0 with that voltage will likely require you to delid the chip if you want lower temperatures.


----------



## dsbmlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> This isn't a specific question about 7700k OC but I think it applies to mine, as said in the guide, when I use manual voltage with LLC on auto my voltage should be higher in idle and lower in full load, right? But I don't think this is happening with my 4790k, atm I set in BIOS manual vcore of 1.29v and the result showed in CPU-Z is the same in idle and in full load, 1.289v (0.001 less than what I set in BIOS):
> 
> Idle:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full load:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another question, is it normal when I have SVID DISABLED my PC when I turn on after being turned off in the PSU switch or pulled the power cable the PC turns on, turns off and turns on again? Isn't this dangerous to the Corsair H105 pump, I mean, can it harm the pump because it turns on and off so fast, I know that is SVID causing this because when I set it to ENABLED it doesn't happen.


AFAIK, LLC set on auto isn't the best. It's trying it's best to stay around what you manually set (which usually is far from accurate) but honestly, a .001 difference is nothing man Lol Try setting a manual LLC between 4-6 and see what happens.

I couldn't say if it's normal or not, but mine does the same exact thing and I believe I have SVID enabled. Also, I don't believe it's harming your pump. As long as the voltage supplied to the pump is stable (quality PSU plugged in a wall outlet with a proper ground or even better; a quality wall plug extension), it will not harm it. Think of people doing custom watercooling loop having to turn on a off the pump from their power supply to fill the system/loop; It's been done for as far as watercooling has been around. It will not harm your pump.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woutersrik*
> 
> Hello guys,
> 
> I recently purchased an i7 7700k(+ Dark Rock quiet Pro 3) and installed it on my asus z270-a.
> First step I did was stress testing it at stock speed (4.5ghz). Idle temperatures are around 34 degrees and load using the x264 test(5 loops, 16 threads, normal priority).
> I thought that was pretty high but I've read that the kaby lake chips are hot in general. So I went to the next step of this guide and try 5.0ghz and 1.35v.
> This put my cpu temp immediately up to 90. And after a minute 100 on every core (not continiously), so I stopped the test immediately. My CPU fan was spinning at 100% during each stress test. Am I doing something wrong or is my chip not good?
> 
> Any advice on what I should do?
> 
> Kind regards,
> Wouters Rik


*

As Jpmboy mentioned, It is normal. You will have to delid your CPU and replace the crappy TIM Intel used to lower your temps marginally if you plan on overcloking that chip to 5Ghz. Especially on air cooling. I delided mine and saw an insane 17c drop in temperatures under load.


----------



## woutersrik

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, with an air cooler. running at 5.0 with that voltage will likely require you to delid the chip if you want lower temperatures.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, with an air cooler. running at 5.0 with that voltage will likely require you to delid the chip if you want lower temperatures.


I started at a lower setting (1.225v and 4.7ghz) and I've ended up with 1.26 and 4.9 ghz. After about five loops of x264 (with recommended settings from the guide) my temperatures were around 85c (90 spikes on each core). After that I stress tested in aida64(cpu, fpu, cache, sys mem) for about 30 minutes. Temps were max 88c and around 73c average. Is this still way too hot?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woutersrik*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, with an air cooler. running at 5.0 with that voltage will likely require you to delid the chip if you want lower temperatures.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, with an air cooler. running at 5.0 with that voltage will likely require you to delid the chip if you want lower temperatures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I started at a lower setting (1.225v and 4.7ghz) and I've ended up with 1.26 and 4.9 ghz. After about five loops of x264 (with recommended settings from the guide) my temperatures were around 85c (90 spikes on each core). After that I stress tested in aida64(cpu, fpu, cache, sys mem) for about 30 minutes. Temps were max 88c and around 73c average. Is this still way too hot?
Click to expand...

Just for stress testing that temperature is fine. Your not going to run that temperature all the time.


----------



## woutersrik

Thanks for the reply, how much time should I stress the CPU(aida64, x264) now to see if it's fully stable?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woutersrik*
> 
> I started at a lower setting (1.225v and 4.7ghz) and I've ended up with 1.26 and 4.9 ghz. After about five loops of x264 (with recommended settings from the guide) my temperatures were around 85c (90 spikes on each core). After that I stress tested in aida64(cpu, fpu, cache, sys mem) for about 30 minutes. Temps were max 88c and around 73c average. Is this still way too hot?


Not really, the system won;t be loaded to the same level under normal or gaming use... but, to properly test it for "fully stable" you'll likely exceed that temp by a significant amount. I'm not a fan of p95 for this purpose, or OCCT. Try using asus realbench for an hour or two, then something like HCI memtest to nail down the ram (not memtest86).
For a gaming rig.. realbench, hci memtest, and a few loops of intel burn test (to mimic a high current load) is plenty.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woutersrik*
> 
> Thanks for the reply, how much time should I stress the CPU(aida64, x264) now to see if it's fully stable?


A couple hours is fine. I usually do my final stress test while I'm sleeping.


----------



## Hiikeri

My current 7700K rig, since release day, 1/2017:


----------



## fwaggle

Username: fwaggle
CPU Model:7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 47
Core Frequency: 4700MHz
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore in UEFI: 1.250 adaptive
Vcore: 1.242
FCLK: 1000MHz
Cooling Solution: D15, not delidded
Stability Test: OCCT 4.5.0 Large - 1 Hour

Batch Number: Malaysia L702D042
Ram Speed: 2400 13-15-15-28 (XMP timings, manually boosted clock)
Ram Voltage: 1.2
VCCIO:
VCCSA:
Motherboard: Z270 - Asus STRIX Z270F
LLC Setting: 1
Misc Comments:




I think I'm doing this right, need to help drag the averages back down so people don't have unrealistic expectations.









I'm becoming less and less convinced I'm doing something wrong, and more convinced I bought a pretty poor CPU. Would love to hear it's just something I'm doing wrong!

It's stable as near as I can tell at 4.8 and 4.9, but I don't like the temps it gets to so I don't run it long. Maybe after a delid I'll see how far I can push it, but the ambient temps where I am are rather chilly and at 4.8 it peaks at 81C, and 4.9 it hits 90C and OCCT stops, seems like it needs 1.295 and 1.350 respectively for those (LLC seems to make no difference to getting it stable any lower), that just seems way too high for what I get. The temps are too high, so when summer gets here I'd have to back it off anyway.

It loves the low voltage mild OCs though, so I'll quite likely leave it where it sits, delid it, and worry about higher clocks when it's older and I need the performance. Interesting to note: using manual mode, I can get the voltage at 4.6 as low as 1.136, stable and cool as a cucumber, but using offset mode that drops the idle voltage too low (below about 0.5 and it freezes, it's fine at 0.58). Adaptive mode doesn't want to drop vcore below ~1.242 and I dunno why - can go up, but not down (adaptive offset is -0.15v, because the low idle voltage seems to be good for a couple degrees at idle).

RAM is cheap LPX stuff, 2133, snotted the RAM clock out to 2400 for laughs (once I found the lowest Vcore that'd do OCCT) and it's been working fine on the XMP timings, it won't even POST any higher. I have no idea what I'm looking at with any of that stuff, the RAM settings seem to be worth, on average, 1% in Cinebench, but that seems within the margin of error between runs so.... suggestions welcome, I might just drop it back to stock clocks and lower the voltage as far as I can get away with. Haven't dicked with cache settings as my OC isn't very high, not sure if it would help?


----------



## dsbmlord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hiikeri*
> 
> My current 7700K rig, since release day, 1/2017:


DAMN, Nice! What's your cooling setup like?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dsbmlord*
> 
> DAMN, Nice! What's your cooling setup like?


Subzero or close to it. Still haven't seen a chart worthy stability test from this one despite its said to be used 24/7. Happy to be proven wrong if I'm not mistaken. I can cinebench at 5.4 too and a few chips in this thread have been above that. Only happens with phase change, water chillers, and help from old man winter though.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fwaggle*
> 
> Username: fwaggle
> CPU Model:7700K
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 47
> Core Frequency: 4700MHz
> Cache Frequency: 4200
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.250 adaptive
> Vcore: 1.242
> FCLK: 1000MHz
> Cooling Solution: D15, not delidded
> Stability Test: OCCT 4.5.0 Large - 1 Hour
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L702D042
> Ram Speed: 2400 13-15-15-28 (XMP timings, manually boosted clock)
> Ram Voltage: 1.2
> VCCIO:
> VCCSA:
> Motherboard: Z270 - Asus STRIX Z270F
> LLC Setting: 1
> Misc Comments:
> 
> I think I'm doing this right, need to help drag the averages back down so people don't have unrealistic expectations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm becoming less and less convinced I'm doing something wrong, and more convinced I bought a pretty poor CPU. Would love to hear it's just something I'm doing wrong!
> 
> It's stable as near as I can tell at 4.8 and 4.9, but I don't like the temps it gets to so I don't run it long. Maybe after a delid I'll see how far I can push it, but the ambient temps where I am are rather chilly and at 4.8 it peaks at 81C, and 4.9 it hits 90C and OCCT stops, seems like it needs 1.295 and 1.350 respectively for those (LLC seems to make no difference to getting it stable any lower), that just seems way too high for what I get. The temps are too high, so when summer gets here I'd have to back it off anyway.
> 
> It loves the low voltage mild OCs though, so I'll quite likely leave it where it sits, delid it, and worry about higher clocks when it's older and I need the performance. Interesting to note: using manual mode, I can get the voltage at 4.6 as low as 1.136, stable and cool as a cucumber, but using offset mode that drops the idle voltage too low (below about 0.5 and it freezes, it's fine at 0.58). Adaptive mode doesn't want to drop vcore below ~1.242 and I dunno why - can go up, but not down (adaptive offset is -0.15v, because the low idle voltage seems to be good for a couple degrees at idle).
> 
> RAM is cheap LPX stuff, 2133, snotted the RAM clock out to 2400 for laughs (once I found the lowest Vcore that'd do OCCT) and it's been working fine on the XMP timings, it won't even POST any higher. I have no idea what I'm looking at with any of that stuff, the RAM settings seem to be worth, on average, 1% in Cinebench, but that seems within the margin of error between runs so.... suggestions welcome, I might just drop it back to stock clocks and lower the voltage as far as I can get away with. Haven't dicked with cache settings as my OC isn't very high, not sure if it would help?


1.35v for 4.9ghz doesn't seem too bad. Stretch it to like 1.42v for 5ghz for occt stable, and that seems okay. Maybe you'll get 5.1 with an easier test.

(It makes perfect sense to clock slightly worse than average if you're using a tougher test than average and no delidded.)


----------



## fwaggle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> 1.35v for 4.9ghz doesn't seem too bad. Stretch it to like 1.42v for 5ghz for occt stable, and that seems okay. Maybe you'll get 5.1 with an easier test.
> 
> (It makes perfect sense to clock slightly worse than average if you're using a tougher test than average and no delidded.)


Yeah, I guess I just had unrealistic expectations, seeing folks posting on Reddit and looking at the list here. 1.35v is basically higher than I think I'd like to run for no reason, as I said I don't need the power right now (bought it pre-Ryzen for running desktop VMs, for gaming load it's choked out even at stock speeds by a 1060 GPU), but maybe when it gets old I'll revisit the higher specs... for now 5GHz or not is basically just an e-peen thing.

Still going to delid anyway for temperature reasons I think. I'm wondering how much of the spikes on top disappear after a delid?


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fwaggle*
> 
> Yeah, I guess I just had unrealistic expectations, seeing folks posting on Reddit and looking at the list here. 1.35v is basically higher than I think I'd like to run for no reason, as I said I don't need the power right now (bought it pre-Ryzen for running desktop VMs, for gaming load it's choked out even at stock speeds by a 1060 GPU), but maybe when it gets old I'll revisit the higher specs... for now 5GHz or not is basically just an e-peen thing.
> 
> Still going to delid anyway for temperature reasons I think. I'm wondering how much of the spikes on top disappear after a delid?


Nope they won't. In fact, even watercooling doesn't remove them, it merely smooths them out because Water can absorb so much heat.

You may actually find that 5Ghz becomes doable with a delid, something magical happens with stability for these chips the lower below 70C you get. My chip was a derp clocker with 4.7ghz at 1.3V 90C+ on a 360mm rad with no delid. I got 5ghz 1.35v straight after the delid when the temps dropped to 75C. I then got 5ghz 1.35V with my crappy IMC on Cl14 3466mhz DDR4 when I got the core to 65C with 1000mm+ of rads.
I can probably push 5.1ghz with 1.4v+ but I feel my current performance vs power is more than satisfactory already for a really poorly binned chip.

The stability with temp curve is no lie, it does exist.


----------



## Leethal

With manual Voltage set is it still possible to have those Cstates on so that my CPU will downclock at idle?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Leethal*
> 
> With manual Voltage set is it still possible to have those Cstates on so that my CPU will downclock at idle?


yes - enable speedstep (and/or speed shift) and enable c-states. the cpu will down clock but not downvolt. To get downvolting (dynamic frequency and voltage) use Adaptive vcore control.


----------



## Leethal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes - enable speedstep (and/or speed shift) and enable c-states. the cpu will down clock but not downvolt. To get downvolting (dynamic frequency and voltage) use Adaptive vcore control.


Thanks!! rep+


----------



## deathroll

Well, I did my first delidding attempt today. I did not observed any drastic temperature difference. I might have done it wrong. My question is how do you guys clean liquid metal? I used the Conductonaut between the core and the IHS. I wonder there is any methodical difference unlike conventional thermal interface materials? Or, are rubbing alcohol and lint free cloth enough? Thanks!


----------



## MaKeN

Rubbing alcohol works for me for removing LM ... you can even suck it back to the original seringe







and clean the rest ....
what exact temp drops you have after delliding?
Did you spread it out on the core and on the ihs ?
Did you clean the old glue/silicon that was holding the ihs to the chip? That's important part.

As i see in your previous post, you had temps of 90c under load... what are they now ?


----------



## Jpmboy

^^This.

be sure to clean the PCB of any residual sealant before mounting the IHS back on, and paint (don't spread too much) LM on both the die and underside of the IHS after cleaning it thoroughly. Sometimes if the underside of the IHS is not preped properly, the LM will not form am functional bondline between the die and IHS. Basically, count on the LM on both parts to thermally bond (much) better than LM will directly to the underside of the IHS. I mean, you can see how poorly LM spreads out, but it "paints" on quite well.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deathroll*
> 
> Well, I did my first delidding attempt today. I did not observed any drastic temperature difference. I might have done it wrong. My question is how do you guys clean liquid metal? I used the Conductonaut between the core and the IHS. I wonder there is any methodical difference unlike conventional thermal interface materials? Or, are rubbing alcohol and lint free cloth enough? Thanks!


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deathroll*
> 
> Well, I did my first delidding attempt today. I did not observed any drastic temperature difference. I might have done it wrong. My question is how do you guys clean liquid metal? I used the Conductonaut between the core and the IHS. I wonder there is any methodical difference unlike conventional thermal interface materials? Or, are rubbing alcohol and lint free cloth enough? Thanks!


DO NOT just use rubbing alcohol. I made this mistake when trying to remove Liquid Ultra from the die and IHS. Even if it looks clean there will still be old residue there. Which will make your delid even worse because it could cause newly applied liquid metal to pool or not stay put. This happened to me. Use pure acetone in addition to ArctiClean to make sure the die is totally clean of all old liquid metal. For the IHS, toothpaste did wonders for me as another user suggested. First remove the old liquid metal from the IHS using acetone, then a tiny drop of toothpaste. You'll notice all traces and stains will be completely gone. Then after this, use pure acetone or rubbing alcohol to clean / remove the toothpaste.


----------



## MaKeN

Thoothpaste on a cpu







idk if it works or not but sounds funny









Rubbing alcohol works for me... i think it really does completely clean after it. You can even see it on the material that you clean the cpu with.


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Thoothpaste on a cpu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> idk if it works or not but sounds funny
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rubbing alcohol works for me... i think it really does completely clean after it. You can even see it on the material that you clean the cpu with.


I never said apply toothpaste to the CPU. I said apply it to the underside of the IHS to completely remove all traces of liquid metal. And no rubbing alcohol alone does not completely remove liquid metal even though it may appear that way. I experienced all of this and tried all of this last week.

For CPU die: wipe away liquid metal with pure acetone and then use ArctiClean 1 and 2. For kicks, wipe the die down with rubbing alcohol after.

For underside of IHS: wipe away liquid metal with pure acetone. Then use a dab of toothpaste to remove old residue. Then wipe down with acetone again. Then for kicks, rubbing alcohol at the end.


----------



## MaKeN

I see , well i may be wrong , but what you described, is like a really perfect way of cleaning the LM. Its more likely suits an ald /dry lm that needs a refreshment..

But with a still fresh Lm just aplied some days ago its feels like doing 2 much.
In my own experience, i have redelided about 12-15 ties if not more ( just because of trying same chip on different mobos) , i really did not feel any temp increases by just using a rubbing alcohol, and this is after redelidding over and over again.
Im not in to argue or saying that you are wrong or something ,i may also be wrong, i just share my expirience . I feel like, going your way of cleaning involves much more time and stuff , then just cleaning with rubbing alcohol, for a fresh aplied lm.
I agree the ihs is indeed the hardest part to clean ...
But again in his case thats a fresh lm .


----------



## MaKeN

In a case that a freah lm is applied and it was not enought , i would just take the ihs out , with no any cleaning would simply ad a drop and spread it out ( well thats what i do)
If its 2 much applied then just suck it back to the seringe and spread the rest with the brush again.. only because its still fresh.
I may be wrong, but for me , it works ....


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I see , well i may be wrong , but what you described, is like a really perfect way of cleaning the LM. Its more likely suits an ald /dry lm that needs a refreshment..
> 
> But with a still fresh Lm just aplied some days ago its feels like doing 2 much.
> In my own experience, i have redelided about 12-15 ties if not more ( just because of trying same chip on different mobos) , i really did not feel any temp increases by just using a rubbing alcohol, and this is after redelidding over and over again.
> Im not in to argue or saying that you are wrong or something ,i may also be wrong, i just share my expirience . I feel like, going your way of cleaning involves much more time and stuff , then just cleaning with rubbing alcohol, for a fresh aplied lm.
> I agree the ihs is indeed the hardest part to clean ...
> But again in his case thats a fresh lm .


No no, I'm not trying to argue with you either









. I delidded + relidded 5 times in the past week and a half so the LM was very fresh. I didn't like my temps and I got paranoid so I kept re-doing it. After the 3rd delid attempt when I tried putting LM back onto the die it would not spread- at all. There was a tiny bit of old residue on the die that didn't come off with just alcohol. I thought it spread but it didn't. I delidded again and the center of the die was totally bare, the LM didn't stick. Acetone did the trick and then I used ArctiClean for good measure. After that the LM went back on very easily as it should. Too bad I killed memory controllers throughout the process, I could not test the chip to see if it worked. I was skeptical about the toothpaste on the IHS but I was cracking up after I tried it. Even the old stock Intel TIM stains were gone, it was totally spotless.


----------



## Horakur333

So I recently upgraded my 7600K to a 7700K two weeks ago. I'm running a h100i v2 cooler & a MSI Z270 M7 Mobo... so I was already kind of planning a delid on both chips before I even got the 7700K because of all the shtuff I had heard. Using GC Extreme between CPU & heat sync before delidding, it was hitting mid 75c ish at stock boost clock 4.5ghz in Prime95 27.9 b1. The Vcore was dancing around crazy as it does with everything on Auto so I manually set a 1.265v overclock at 4.5 ghz and got it like 3c cooler. Then I abandoned further overclocking for some time.

I had another build ready for my 7600K so I decided I would delid it first as a test run, twas a major success knocked 20c from the temps in Prime95 and Reachbench. Used Conductonaut and relidded with RTV. The 7600K was a definite loser of the silicon lottery, the absolute best I could pull out of it was 4.7ghz vcore 1.365 at about 78c with a 120MM Lepa Aquachanger before. After the delid it maxed out at 62c and that was when I forgot about it stress testing for over a day (1hr test was 59c). Now that there's more headroom I can take it to 4.8ghz without going over 1.40v














but I went back to the 7700K because my trial run panned out.

Delidded the 7700K in a carbon copy process to how I did the other chip and got the same results basically. This 7700K was overclocking so amazingly from then on until I made the leap from 4.8 ghz to 4.9 ghz I had it stable in both prime95 and Reachbench at 1.295v and 68c when it was at 4.8 ghz so I'm all thinking I have this amazing chip that will go to 5.4 ghz.....









Previous ratios were a consistent 100 mhz to + 0.015v for stable clocks. The leap from 4.8 ghz to 4.9 ghz cost me another 0.035v temp 75c and and from 4.9 ghz - 5.0 ghz another 0.035v leaving my 5.0 ghz best at 1.373v 81c

I can promise if you delid properly it will work. This was my first time, but I had dished out the $30 for Rockit Cool delid and relid tool. I'm also pretty good with tinkering around with everything.... not everyone possesses such traits..... This talk of toothpaste hahaha But for real though the thermal compound between the die and the IHS on the 7700K was bo-da-gus I was angry at Intel. The thermal compound on my 7600K was actually in a much better condition when I delidded it and it was a year older than the 7700K I just bought. It was like old wrinkly grey moldy peanut-butter. It makes sense from a business standpoint:

1.) You delid and fail
-- You have to buy a new chip because you've voided your warranty in the most shameful embarrassing way and your whole rig needs a new Intel chip unless your going to buy an entire AMD set up out of spite

2.) You delid successfully but something outside of your control goes wrong in 4 months
-- Warranty voided and once again pay Intel or build AMD rig angrily

3.) You don't delid and this chip dies in 2 years max from high temps
-- Intel wins again!

I came across this post because of things regarding adaptive voltage. When I overclock I always set it to Override to make sure all my variables are consistent. So I get a stable clock on override and set it to adaptive. The problem now is that I really don't want my vcore to ever go over 1.40v even random spikes and with my 5.0 ghz 1.373v overclock that doesn't leave me with a lot of room on adaptive and when stress tested it spiked to 1.412v at times and a stable 1.382v instead of 1.373. The overclock is 100000% stable on Override at 1.373v but then its running full blast all the time which I don't want. For my overclock I had to disable Speed Step because although it passed Prime95, Realbench would downclock to 800 mhz 20 minutes in. Speed Step didn't really make a difference. I messed with every C State including off and auto as well. I think I see where I need my final tweak but I can't figure it out. Adaptive + Offset seems to be in the final right direction but I honestly can figure out how to limit the spikes and not the droops. Anyone ever conquer this issue?


----------



## NeoandGeo

I can attest to how simple the procedure of delidding is, with the right tools, or substitute tools as was my case. I was reaching a point where [email protected] I was hitting the upper 80's during a single x264 RealBench run. I wasn't even contemplating seeing what Prime95 would do to the chip in its stock form, especially since my temp spread between the 4 cores could be as much as 11-12c. This was with a Kraken X61 w/4 ML140 Pro fans in a push/pull configuration and Grizzly Kryonaut. I decided on a whim to research Delidding the 7700k and what alternatives there were to the Unofficially Official tools made for the job. I was going to use a potential failure as an excuse to move to Threadripper as it was so I dove in.

Came across a tutorial that suggested a specific ultra-thin double sided razorblade (Studio 35 Double Edged Razor Blade) and then a Plastic Razorblade tool used to scrape off decals for the PCG/IHS gunk cleaning process. I purchased a pack of those from my local pharmacy, the plastic razorblades and then slowly started the process of carefully making my way into the edges:



I had planned on taking more pics to document my process, but after taking that one real life started knocking (Aquarium with the wife and daughter), so I was a bit hastier in my approach after working out a deal to allow me 30 more minutes of Daddo time. After I finally got all the way around and got the IHS off I realized why my temps were absolute ****. The stock thermal compound had several spots that seemingly had no paste available and it was obviously under applied!

I then scraped off the old adhesive, cleaned all the stock thermal compound off as best I could. Applied a thin line of Kryonaut to the die, put the chip back into my motherboard, lined up the IHS carefully using needle nose pliers so I could have a decent guesstimate of where it should be placed on the PCB. I took a good couple of minutes clamping the IHS/CPU correctly where there was minimal movement during the clamping procedure. I am confident that the motherboard support combined with the Kraken pump will keep everything in place since I don't move my PC at all other than sliding it back and forth when something needs to be done to the tower.

Results were immediate, in the BIOS I was greeted with a temp of 28c at my current settings, this was usually hovering around the 39-42 mark even when the computer had been off for several hours. With a manual voltage of [email protected] w/ 0 AVX Offset I idle at 29-32c and an hour of Realbench x264 testing brings me to a max temp of 76c with the spread between the upper and lower temps of the cores not exceeding 4c. So far after a month, no issues with doing a partial relidding with no adhesive.

I have to give a big shame finger wag to Intel. Is the money you save by not properly assembling a premium CPU really more important than providing the customer with the best possible product? I know many of their 7700k's probably have much better thermal paste applications than mine did, but I am sure there are others that are even worse than what I witnessed. Solder your damn chips from now on please...


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horakur333*
> 
> I can promise if you delid properly it will work. This was my first time, but I had dished out the $30 for Rockit Cool delid and relid tool. I'm also pretty good with tinkering around with everything.... not everyone possesses such traits..... This talk of toothpaste hahaha But for real though the thermal compound between the die and the IHS on the 7700K was bo-da-gus I was angry at Intel.


Laugh away dude. Acetone->toothpaste->acetone works wonders on the IHS if you have to remove *liquid metal*.

Regarding your Vcore issues, have you tried adjusting LLC settings? I'd think with your "superior tinkering skills and traits" you'd have tried that.







I'm just busting your chops. I already acknowledged I'm an idiot for bricking my CPU memory controllers in the process. Misread your post I think. Not sure LLC will help. Have not delidded my new 7700K. It is running fine at 4.7 @ 1.26V. But LLC settings differed between my 2 7700K chips. My first one I had to set LLC to 5 to stabilize voltage. My current one I need to set LLC to 4. If it is at 5 the voltage spikes for me.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horakur333*
> 
> So I recently upgraded my 7600K to a 7700K two weeks ago. I'm running a h100i v2 cooler & a MSI Z270 M7 Mobo... so I was already kind of planning a delid on both chips before I even got the 7700K because of all the shtuff I had heard. Using GC Extreme between CPU & heat sync before delidding, it was hitting mid 75c ish at stock boost clock 4.5ghz in Prime95 27.9 b1. The Vcore was dancing around crazy as it does with everything on Auto so I manually set a 1.265v overclock at 4.5 ghz and got it like 3c cooler. Then I abandoned further overclocking for some time.
> 
> I had another build ready for my 7600K so I decided I would delid it first as a test run, twas a major success knocked 20c from the temps in Prime95 and Reachbench. Used Conductonaut and relidded with RTV. The 7600K was a definite loser of the silicon lottery, the absolute best I could pull out of it was 4.7ghz vcore 1.365 at about 78c with a 120MM Lepa Aquachanger before. After the delid it maxed out at 62c and that was when I forgot about it stress testing for over a day (1hr test was 59c). Now that there's more headroom I can take it to 4.8ghz without going over 1.40v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but I went back to the 7700K because my trial run panned out.
> 
> Delidded the 7700K in a carbon copy process to how I did the other chip and got the same results basically. This 7700K was overclocking so amazingly from then on until I made the leap from 4.8 ghz to 4.9 ghz I had it stable in both prime95 and Reachbench at 1.295v and 68c when it was at 4.8 ghz so I'm all thinking I have this amazing chip that will go to 5.4 ghz.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Previous ratios were a consistent 100 mhz to + 0.015v for stable clocks. The leap from 4.8 ghz to 4.9 ghz cost me another 0.035v temp 75c and and from 4.9 ghz - 5.0 ghz another 0.035v leaving my 5.0 ghz best at 1.373v 81c
> 
> I can promise if you delid properly it will work. This was my first time, but I had dished out the $30 for Rockit Cool delid and relid tool. I'm also pretty good with tinkering around with everything.... not everyone possesses such traits..... This talk of toothpaste hahaha But for real though the thermal compound between the die and the IHS on the 7700K was bo-da-gus I was angry at Intel. The thermal compound on my 7600K was actually in a much better condition when I delidded it and it was a year older than the 7700K I just bought. It was like old wrinkly grey moldy peanut-butter. It makes sense from a business standpoint:
> 
> 1.) You delid and fail
> -- You have to buy a new chip because you've voided your warranty in the most shameful embarrassing way and your whole rig needs a new Intel chip unless your going to buy an entire AMD set up out of spite
> 
> 2.) You delid successfully but something outside of your control goes wrong in 4 months
> -- Warranty voided and once again pay Intel or build AMD rig angrily
> 
> 3.) You don't delid and this chip dies in 2 years max from high temps
> -- Intel wins again!
> 
> I came across this post because of things regarding adaptive voltage. When I overclock I always set it to Override to make sure all my variables are consistent. So I get a stable clock on override and set it to adaptive. The problem now is that I really don't want my vcore to ever go over 1.40v even random spikes and with my 5.0 ghz 1.373v overclock that doesn't leave me with a lot of room on adaptive and when stress tested it spiked to 1.412v at times and a stable 1.382v instead of 1.373. The overclock is 100000% stable on Override at 1.373v but then its running full blast all the time which I don't want. For my overclock I had to disable Speed Step because although it passed Prime95, Realbench would downclock to 800 mhz 20 minutes in. Speed Step didn't really make a difference. I messed with every C State including off and auto as well. I think I see where I need my final tweak but I can't figure it out. Adaptive + Offset seems to be in the final right direction but I honestly can figure out how to limit the spikes and not the droops. Anyone ever conquer this issue?


Set the windows 10 performance policy to High Performance, chip will no longer downclock.


----------



## Horakur333

Heyyy no worries dudeI wasn't trying to insult you or laugh at you but I could see how it might have sounded that way. When I was waiting the day for everything to dry I was really tripping out thinking how it would such if I killed my chip, I could only imagine how much it must have sucked... RIP to your CPU sir/mam. I did purchase some ArtiClean in hopes it would one day remove dried liquid metal. Acetone and toothpaste sounds like it would work, I have some polishing compound for getting deep scratches off of car paint I might actually mix that with acetone and piggyback off what you did when I re-do the delid the see how the thermal compound ended up spreading out.

Yeah I got the LLC perfect to where voltage stays within 0.010v of where I set it in BIOS, every other LLC setting had way too much of a droop for any stable clock. On setting 3 I would get a crash after about 20 minutes (vcore from 1.363 - 1.353) so I had to set it to 2 which made it fluctuate from 1.363v - 1.373v

& Dasboogieman I got the whole downclocking thing under control, I had the settings in Windows to right place from the get-go I think it was downclocking because of the undervoltage control as when I gave it another 0.005v it went away.

I was thinking about it though in like 1 - 2 years I will probably be buying a new CPU or rig anyways just to have whatever crazy CPU comes out in the future.. how long do you think this 7700K will last running at 1.373v 5.0 ghz 4 - 8 hours per day 5 days a week? I have a feeling longer than I'm even going to keep it


----------



## BoredErica

I expect my future CPUs to be delidded by myself, so I will have to be aware of the details of delidding sooner or later.


----------



## ducegt

You guys have fun doing what you do...sometimes killing CPUs. In defense of the helpless chips, consider doing things right the first time and using adhesive on the IHS. Curiosity killed the cat. If obsessing over miniscule difference in temps or an extra 100mhz OC is worth the risk and money, more power to ya.


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> You guys have fun doing what you do...sometimes killing CPUs. In defense of the helpless chips, consider doing things right the first time and using adhesive on the IHS. Curiosity killed the cat. If obsessing over miniscule difference in temps or an extra 100mhz OC is worth the risk and money, more power to ya.










Yep. If I decide to delid again I am not even going to use adhesive and will just make sure the socket clamp + H100i hold everything in place. I've read that people have been just fine this way and assures the IHS sits totally even with no gap. I probably shouldn't have bothered to redo mine as you advised, but my load temps got to the upper 80s delidded so I was convinced something was wrong. Super glue + removal was my boneheaded mistake and what killed the CPU.


----------



## NeoandGeo

The least Intel could do is have an outline of the IHS printed on the PCB for anyone that wants to correct their inane choice of making sure their CPU's run too hot if you dare overclock them past their own turbo limits. My CPU was a shining example of how Intel feels about their "customers". I literally went from the 2600k to the 5820k then sidegrading my computing from a 5820k to a 7700k gaming machine and an E5-2603 v4 home server. I didn't know the pain of having a non-soldered chip while trying to overclock.


----------



## SSIV

Username: SSIV
CPU Model: 7700K, stepping 9
BCLK: 133
Core Multiplier: 39
Core Frequency: 5187
Cache Frequency: 4250
Vcore in UEFI: 1.375
Vcore: 1.382
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delid, Kraken x62
Stability Test: 8 hours realbench

Batch Number: Not sure, don't dare to check








RAM: CMK32GX4M2B3333C16
Ram Speed: 3591, 16-18-18-38-2 (tCAS-tRC-tRP-tRAS-tCR)
VCCIO: 1.320
VCCSA: 1.368
Ram Voltage: 1.350
Motherboard: MSI Z270 XPOWER GAMING TITANIUM (MS-7A58)
LLC Setting: --
Misc Comments: CPU Power Duty Control = "Current Balance", AVX offset = "0", fixed freq, DRAM ref. CLK = "100", Microcode = "5E"

Random benchmarks: https://imgur.com/a/6q9PM

EDIT: Updated Cache Frequency.


----------



## SimpleTech

Username: SimpleTech
CPU Model: i7-7700K
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 49
Core Frequency: 4900
Cache Frequency: 4200
Vcore in UEFI: 1.3v
Vcore: 1.284v
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Custom water cooling (480mm rad, EK Supremacy)
Stability Test: RealBench (8 hours, 16GB)

Batch Number: Not sure
Ram Speed: 3600 15-16-16-36-2T
Ram Voltage: 1.4v
VCCIO: If not tweaked by the user, this may be left blank.
VCCSA: If not tweaked by the user, this may be left blank.
Motherboard: Gigabyte Z170X-Gaming 7
LLC Setting: High
Misc Comments: Latest BIOS with HT flaw fix


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SimpleTech*
> 
> Username: SimpleTech
> CPU Model: i7-7700K
> Base Clock: 100
> Core Multiplier: 49
> Core Frequency: 4900
> Cache Frequency: 4200
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.3v
> Vcore: 1.284v
> FCLK: 1000
> Cooling Solution: Custom water cooling (480mm rad, EK Supremacy)
> Stability Test: RealBench (8 hours, 16GB)
> 
> Batch Number: Not sure
> Ram Speed: 3600 15-16-16-36-2T
> Ram Voltage: 1.4v
> VCCIO: If not tweaked by the user, this may be left blank.
> VCCSA: If not tweaked by the user, this may be left blank.
> Motherboard: Gigabyte Z170X-Gaming 7
> LLC Setting: High
> Misc Comments: Latest BIOS with HT flaw fix


Have you tried Dynamic DVID and Auto LLC at 4.9GHz?


----------



## ViTosS

Guys, just installed my 7700k, what is Intel SpeedShift (Swift or something like that)? Can I disable too like SpeedStep? I don't want to downlock or downvolt. Also I didn't find where is CPU Spread Spectrum, I'm using an Asus Maximus IX Hero.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Username: pyounpy-2
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 54
Core Frequency: 5400
Cache Frequency: 5000
Vcore in UEFI: 1.45
Vcore: 1.472
FCLK: Reminder: 1000
Cooling Solution: Delidded, Custum water cooling
Stability Test: 8 hours realbench ver. 2.54

Batch Number: Malaysia L642G086
Ram Speed: (4133 15-17-17-35-1T)
VCCIO: 1.288
VCCSA: 1.296
Ram Voltage: 1.5
Motherboard: Asus maximus IX Apex (UEFI:0906)
LLC Setting: level 6
Misc Comments: This is the first test of a stress test. Usually it(7700K) is used at 5.54GHz for the voltage of 1.5V.


----------



## ducegt

Very nice. 17C minimum. Cold room or chiller in the loop?


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Thank you REP.. I used a cold room at 20 degrees C and the radiators are exposed to the air flow of an air conditioner dirctly.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Guys, just installed my 7700k, what is Intel SpeedShift (Swift or something like that)? Can I disable too like SpeedStep? I don't want to downlock or downvolt. Also I didn't find where is CPU Spread Spectrum, I'm using an Asus Maximus IX Hero.


Its function is for energy-saving. The performance of CPU is very little changed.
In my feeling, "off" is better for passing the post at high frequency operation of CPU and memory.


----------



## ViTosS

I can't find a LLC setting that will mantain under 1.35v (I'm stable at 1.335v in BIOS and 1.344v full loading using LLC 5) the only problem is my max vcore is sometimes, very rare, detected of 1.360v by HWInfo64, I heard Intel doesn't recommend more than 1.35v for daily use, is that true? I tried higher vcore and lower LLC and also lower vcore and higher LLC, combined everything, tried all LLC levels and I simply can't stay 1.335~1.34v full load and 1.335v idle... Any help?

Edit.: Seems like I'm stable now 1.335v in BIOS and this time LLC on AUTO and my max vcore in full load is 1.344v, not 1.36v anymore, just because I changed LLC to AUTO, is ok to use it on AUTO? 5.0Ghz delided, max temp 60ºC using x264 custom from this thread









Edit2.: I was wrong 1.36v again







:


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I can't find a LLC setting that will mantain under 1.35v (I'm stable at 1.335v in BIOS and 1.344v full loading using LLC 5) the only problem is my max vcore is sometimes, very rare, detected of 1.360v by HWInfo64, I heard Intel doesn't recommend more than 1.35v for daily use, is that true? I tried higher vcore and lower LLC and also lower vcore and higher LLC, combined everything, tried all LLC levels and I simply can't stay 1.335~1.34v full load and 1.335v idle... Any help?
> 
> Edit.: Seems like I'm stable now 1.335v in BIOS and this time LLC on AUTO and my max vcore in full load is 1.344v, not 1.36v anymore, just because I changed LLC to AUTO, is ok to use it on AUTO? 5.0Ghz delided, max temp 60ºC using x264 custom from this thread


There is no issue using "auto" for your LLC provided it keeps the voltages where they need to be. General consensuses seems to be that a Vcore up to 1.4V is OK for 24/7 (provide you have decent temps) use as at that point regardless of what stress test you are using you are unlikely to kill your CPU with too much current/power draw, its current that kills a CPU more so than actual voltage


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Guys, just installed my 7700k, what is Intel SpeedShift (Swift or something like that)? Can I disable too like SpeedStep? I don't want to downlock or downvolt. Also I didn't find where is CPU Spread Spectrum, I'm using an Asus Maximus IX Hero.


if you want the frequency to hold at the turbo multi you set in bios disable both speed step and speed shift. Shift is a new version of 'step that works with windows 10 and TB3. Keep one of these enabled if you want dynamic frequency working.


----------



## ViTosS

Thanks for the answers, I'm trying now to set a offset voltage for the CPU downvolt, but when I set offset voltage mode my PC freezes in Windows loading screen, I tried setting a manual voltage only for the boot but didn't solve, if I move back to manual mode it boots normal, any idea? I didn't set the + or - because I need first to know what is going to be my maximum voltage and then applies the offset, but I can't even boot to Windows! Also I have to force power off the PC after the freeze and start again, because doesn't restart normally.

Edit.: I tried to find Adaptive Mode but l can't, only shows me offset, auto and manual mode, motherboard is an Asus Maximus IX Hero


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Thanks for the answers, I'm trying now to set a offset voltage for the CPU downvolt, but when I set offset voltage mode my PC freezes in Windows loading screen, I tried setting a manual voltage only for the boot but didn't solve, if I move back to manual mode it boots normal, any idea? I didn't set the + or - because I need first to know what is going to be my maximum voltage and then applies the offset, but I can't even boot to Windows! Also I have to force power off the PC after the freeze and start again, because doesn't restart normally.
> 
> Edit.: I tried to find Adaptive Mode but l can't, only shows me offset, auto and manual mode, motherboard is an Asus Maximus IX Hero


to enable adaptive, make sure CPUSVID is on Auto or Enabled


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> to enable adaptive, make sure CPUSVID is on Auto or Enabled


Alright, thank you. Do you have any idea why my PC freezes during Windows loading screen when I set offset mode?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> to enable adaptive, make sure CPUSVID is on Auto or Enabled
> 
> 
> 
> Alright, thank you. Do you have any idea why my PC freezes during Windows loading screen when I set offset mode?
Click to expand...

Increase the Adaptive voltage by 10mv at a time till stable when stress testing.

leave offset on Auto, It should look like this.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Increase the Adaptive voltage by 10mv at a time till stable when stress testing.
> 
> leave offset on Auto, It should look like this.


Well I think I just found the cause that was freezing in windows loading screen, apparentely it was SVID, I had to set it to ENABLED and I was able to boot, if I disable I can't, can you guys confirm that offset/adaptive need SVID ENABLED to work? Or my mobo is faulty?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Well I think I just found the cause that was freezing in windows loading screen, apparentely it was SVID, I had to set it to ENABLED and I was able to boot, if I disable I can't, can you guys confirm that offset/adaptive need SVID ENABLED to work? Or my mobo is faulty?


svid needs to be enabled.. the cpu and ivr need to communicate with eachother for offset or adaptive since both are relative to the VID/frequency stack.

(please update the rig in your sig.







)


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> svid needs to be enabled.. the cpu and ivr need to communicate with eachother for offset or adaptive since both are relative to the VID/frequency stack.
> 
> (please update the rig in your sig.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Done







Thank you for helping


----------



## ViTosS

What am I doing wrong here? I set like in the image but the test starts using 100% all cores showing in CoreTemp but after some seconds the usage in one core is dropped to 50% and stays like that forever:


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> What am I doing wrong here? I set like in the image but the test starts using 100% all cores showing in CoreTemp but after some seconds the usage in one core is dropped to 50% and stays like that forever:


It means that core is unstable and created too many errors in its Prime worker thread.

Try reducing your OC and see if it still keeps happening.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> It means that core is unstable and created too many errors in its Prime worker thread.
> 
> Try reducing your OC and see if it still keeps happening.


Yea, it was unstable, it's strange because I played many games and stressed 8h in Realbench everything stable, but Prime95 give me this error, if I put my ratio from 50 to 49 it fixes that.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> It means that core is unstable and created too many errors in its Prime worker thread.
> 
> Try reducing your OC and see if it still keeps happening.
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, it was unstable, it's strange because I played many games and stressed 8h in Realbench everything stable, but Prime95 give me this error, if I put my ratio from 50 to 49 it fixes that.
Click to expand...

You could try raising the Vcore a little at 5.0GHz.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Yea, it was unstable, it's strange because I played many games and stressed 8h in Realbench everything stable, but Prime95 give me this error, if I put my ratio from 50 to 49 it fixes that.


If you open HWinfo64 while running Prime95. It will tell you exactly what kind of error caused the crash. My money is on L0/L1 coherency instability or some kind of cache error because Prime95 hammers the cache really hard compared to Realbench and games are too fault tolerant to detect. Looking at your temps, you can probably afford a little bit more Vcore.


----------



## RamGuy

Just got myself a delidded i7-7700K, Rampage IX Apex, G.Skill 4266 2x 8GB RAM. Seems like I'm somewhat unlucky with my chip, it simply refuses to hit 5.0GHz. Even with 1.5V it will bluescreen or freeze when running cinebench.. It seems like 4.8GHz is the sweat-spot in terms of volt but I'm able to run it a 4,9GHz, 4,7GHz cache and 4133MHz RAM with 1.375V. That's somewhat high, but with a delidded CPU and NZXT Kraken X62 with 4x Corsair ML140 Pro fans in push/pull my temps don't seem to go above 60 degrees when gaming. When running cinebench I'm looking at 65-75 degrees which is okay. Not great, but okay.

One thing I find strange is that while doing casual stuff in Windows CPU-Z will show my CPU as 4,9GHz (going up and down due to speed step etc..), but when gaming games like Playerunknown's Battlegrounds it's pretty much stuck at 4,7GHz for some reason? If I alt-tab out of the game and into Google Chrome it goes back to 4,9GHz but when I go back into the game I'm down to 4,7GHz. I have the AVX offset at -2 so it almost seems like the offset is kicking in while gaming Battlegrounds? That doesn't seem right.

According to Realtemp I'm always at 4,9GHz, but I suppose its better to trust CPU-Z and not Realtemp?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RamGuy*
> 
> Just got myself a delidded i7-7700K, Rampage IX Apex, G.Skill 4266 2x 8GB RAM. Seems like I'm somewhat unlucky with my chip, it simply refuses to hit 5.0GHz. Even with 1.5V it will bluescreen or freeze when running cinebench.. It seems like 4.8GHz is the sweat-spot in terms of volt but I'm able to run it a 4,9GHz, 4,7GHz cache and 4133MHz RAM with 1.375V. That's somewhat high, but with a delidded CPU and NZXT Kraken X62 with 4x Corsair ML140 Pro fans in push/pull my temps don't seem to go above 60 degrees when gaming. When running cinebench I'm looking at 65-75 degrees which is okay. Not great, but okay.
> 
> One thing I find strange is that while doing casual stuff in Windows CPU-Z will show my CPU as 4,9GHz (going up and down due to speed step etc..), but when gaming games like Playerunknown's Battlegrounds it's pretty much stuck at 4,7GHz for some reason? If I alt-tab out of the game and into Google Chrome it goes back to 4,9GHz but when I go back into the game I'm down to 4,7GHz. I have the AVX offset at -2 so it almost seems like the offset is kicking in while gaming Battlegrounds? That doesn't seem right.
> 
> According to Realtemp I'm always at 4,9GHz, but I suppose its better to trust CPU-Z and not Realtemp?


CPU-Z. I've observed RealTemp reporting the wrong multiplier/frequency many times.


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*





> Originally Posted by *SimpleTech*





> Originally Posted by *SSIV*





> Originally Posted by *fwaggle*


Users above were charted. SSIV did not make it to the main chart.

Sample Size 58
Average OC 5.03

Median OC 5.00

Average Vcore 1.36

Median Vcore 1.37


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RamGuy*
> 
> Just got myself a delidded i7-7700K, Rampage IX Apex, G.Skill 4266 2x 8GB RAM. Seems like I'm somewhat unlucky with my chip, it simply refuses to hit 5.0GHz. Even with 1.5V it will bluescreen or freeze when running cinebench.. It seems like 4.8GHz is the sweat-spot in terms of volt but I'm able to run it a 4,9GHz, 4,7GHz cache and 4133MHz RAM with 1.375V. That's somewhat high, but with a delidded CPU and NZXT Kraken X62 with 4x Corsair ML140 Pro fans in push/pull my temps don't seem to go above 60 degrees when gaming. When running cinebench I'm looking at 65-75 degrees which is okay. Not great, but okay.
> 
> One thing I find strange is that while doing casual stuff in Windows CPU-Z will show my CPU as 4,9GHz (going up and down due to speed step etc..), but when gaming games like Playerunknown's Battlegrounds it's pretty much stuck at 4,7GHz for some reason? If I alt-tab out of the game and into Google Chrome it goes back to 4,9GHz but when I go back into the game I'm down to 4,7GHz. I have the AVX offset at -2 so it almost seems like the offset is kicking in while gaming Battlegrounds? That doesn't seem right.
> 
> According to Realtemp I'm always at 4,9GHz, but I suppose its better to trust CPU-Z and not Realtemp?


In my experience, most high speed Cinebench15 crashes are memory or speedstep/speedshift related.
Turn off SpeedStep/SpeedShift when running over 4.8 GHz, at least while testing/tuning.

To run a stable 5.0 GHz:
I suggest that while you sort out your best CPU settings you turn off XMP and run a lower memory speed.
Proper timings are more beneficial than raw MHz as long as they're reasonable and stable.
Lower your memory Voltage.

*Chips that won't run fast with a BCLK of 100 often run exceptionally fast and smooth with a base clock in the 110-114 range. Set yours in that range* and see if you can run Cinebench @ 5 / 4.7.









You can try even higher BCLCK settings, up to ~130, depending on the quality of your motherboard..


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Yea, it was unstable, it's strange because I played many games and stressed 8h in Realbench everything stable, *but Prime95 give me this error,* if I put my ratio from 50 to 49 it fixes that.


that's because p95 FFT 8 has little to do with stability outside that specific FPU load. It's a waste of time and silicon. p95 FFT 8 tests the thermal behavior, and little else. Throw it back in the sludge pit with the rest of the jurassic crap.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that's because p95 FFT 8 has little to do with stability outside that specific FPU load. It's a waste of time and silicon. p95 FFT 8 tests the thermal behavior, and little else. Throw it back in the sludge pit with the rest of the jurassic crap.


But should I consider raising voltage just to pass this error in Prime95? Because I've raise my offset from +0.080 to +0.160 and still was giving my this error, the vcore was almost 1.38v...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> But should I consider raising voltage just to pass this error in Prime95? Because I've raise my offset from +0.080 to +0.160 and still was giving my this error, the vcore was almost 1.38v...


Personally if you are 8 hours Realbench stable and dont get any BSOD from normal day to day use then why worry about being P95 error free? Leave it as is and be happy


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> But should I consider raising voltage just to pass this error in Prime95? Because I've raise my offset from +0.080 to +0.160 and still was giving my this error, the vcore was almost 1.38v...


Considering what I posted... no. what does stability to FFT 8 prove (cue *Jeopardy music) .


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RamGuy*
> 
> Just got myself a delidded i7-7700K, Rampage IX Apex, G.Skill 4266 2x 8GB RAM. Seems like I'm somewhat unlucky with my chip, it simply refuses to hit 5.0GHz. Even with 1.5V it will bluescreen or freeze when running cinebench.. It seems like 4.8GHz is the sweat-spot in terms of volt but I'm able to run it a 4,9GHz, 4,7GHz cache and 4133MHz RAM with 1.375V. That's somewhat high, but with a delidded CPU and NZXT Kraken X62 with 4x Corsair ML140 Pro fans in push/pull my temps don't seem to go above 60 degrees when gaming. When running cinebench I'm looking at 65-75 degrees which is okay. Not great, but okay.
> 
> One thing I find strange is that while doing casual stuff in Windows CPU-Z will show my CPU as 4,9GHz (going up and down due to speed step etc..), but when gaming games like Playerunknown's Battlegrounds it's pretty much stuck at 4,7GHz for some reason? If I alt-tab out of the game and into Google Chrome it goes back to 4,9GHz but when I go back into the game I'm down to 4,7GHz. I have the AVX offset at -2 so it almost seems like the offset is kicking in while gaming Battlegrounds? That doesn't seem right.
> 
> According to Realtemp I'm always at 4,9GHz, but I suppose its better to trust CPU-Z and not Realtemp?


Some games use AVX from what I was told by someone. I know Chrome browser uses AVX from my testing.


----------



## coc_james

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RamGuy*
> 
> Just got myself a delidded i7-7700K, Rampage IX Apex, G.Skill 4266 2x 8GB RAM. Seems like I'm somewhat unlucky with my chip, it simply refuses to hit 5.0GHz. Even with 1.5V it will bluescreen or freeze when running cinebench.. It seems like 4.8GHz is the sweat-spot in terms of volt but I'm able to run it a 4,9GHz, 4,7GHz cache and 4133MHz RAM with 1.375V. That's somewhat high, but with a delidded CPU and NZXT Kraken X62 with 4x Corsair ML140 Pro fans in push/pull my temps don't seem to go above 60 degrees when gaming. When running cinebench I'm looking at 65-75 degrees which is okay. Not great, but okay.
> 
> One thing I find strange is that while doing casual stuff in Windows CPU-Z will show my CPU as 4,9GHz (going up and down due to speed step etc..), but when gaming games like Playerunknown's Battlegrounds it's pretty much stuck at 4,7GHz for some reason? If I alt-tab out of the game and into Google Chrome it goes back to 4,9GHz but when I go back into the game I'm down to 4,7GHz. I have the AVX offset at -2 so it almost seems like the offset is kicking in while gaming Battlegrounds? That doesn't seem right.
> 
> According to Realtemp I'm always at 4,9GHz, but I suppose its better to trust CPU-Z and not Realtemp?


Pretty sure PUBG taps into the AVX instruction set via DX12. Chrome does as well, which is odd that you're not dropping with Chrome. Maybe you have hardware acceleration set to off for Chrome? I can confirm that when I have an AVX offset active, Chrome, PUBG, and Witcher 3 downclock to match the offset.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> But should I consider raising voltage just to pass this error in Prime95? Because I've raise my offset from +0.080 to +0.160 and still was giving my this error, the vcore was almost 1.38v...


Instability is instability. No matter what people's opinion of Prime 95 is. That being said, If you are currently happy with what your CPU is doing then leave it be. Otherwise yes you need to raise the voltage.

Also question, did you do Prime95 with or without AVX? if you just did it without modifications then the issue is isolated to AVX only. Therefore, you can just increase your AVX offset by 1 and keep everything the same.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Instability is instability. No matter what people's opinion of Prime 95 is. That being said, If you are currently happy with what your CPU is doing then leave it be. Otherwise yes you need to raise the voltage.
> 
> Also question, did you do Prime95 with or without AVX? if you just did it without modifications then the issue is isolated to AVX only. Therefore, you can just increase your AVX offset by 1 and keep everything the same.


I just configured like in the guide for the part of Prime95 specifics


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I just configured like in the guide for the part of Prime95 specifics


mmm ok, just try applying the AVX offset to be 1 higher and see if your instability goes away. Because lets not forget, you are stable in everything else (and I'd wager Realbench doesn't use AVX very much)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Instability is instability. No matter what people's opinion of Prime 95 is. That being said, If you are currently happy with what your CPU is doing then leave it be. Otherwise yes you need to raise the voltage.
> 
> Also question, did you do Prime95 with or without AVX? if you just did it without modifications then the issue is isolated to AVX only. Therefore, you can just increase your AVX offset by 1 and keep everything the same.
> 
> 
> 
> I just configured like in the guide for the part of Prime95 specifics
Click to expand...

If you are using Prim95 v28.10 you can disable AVX testing adding CpuSupportsAVX=0 in the prime95 folder using the local.txt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I just configured like in the guide for the part of Prime95 specifics
> 
> 
> 
> mmm ok, just try applying the AVX offset to be 1 higher and see if your instability goes away. Because lets not forget, you are stable in everything else (and I'd wager Realbench doesn't use AVX very much)
Click to expand...

RealBench version 2.54 uses AVX, Versoin 2.43 does not use AVX. Chrome browser and some games use AVX. I don't use AVX offset because programs are using it.


----------



## BoredErica

Remember, you cannot submit 28.10 with avx disabled as 28.10 1 hr test qualification.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If you are using Prim95 v28.10 you can disable AVX testing adding CpuSupportsAVX=0 in the prime95 folder using the local.txt
> RealBench version 2.54 uses AVX, Versoin 2.43 does not use AVX. Chrome browser and some games use AVX. I don't use AVX offset because programs are using it.


All the more reason to use the AVX offset. You get the best of both worlds, 5ghz on non-AVX tasks and stability in AVX workloads. Otherwise, you will lose the non-AVX workload speeds for the sake of stabilizing AVX.

My take on the matter is, our friend there has 5ghz with no AVX offset and he's getting instability in AVX workloads. If he runs x49 for AVX and x50 for normal, he gets optimal performance.


----------



## BoredErica

I was using D14, switched to 3x560mm Nemesis GTX. Dual Revo D5. Raystorm Pro.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> All the more reason to use the AVX offset. You get the best of both worlds, 5ghz on non-AVX tasks and stability in AVX workloads. Otherwise, you will lose the non-AVX workload speeds for the sake of stabilizing AVX.
> 
> My take on the matter is, our friend there has 5ghz with no AVX offset and he's getting instability in AVX workloads. If he runs x49 for AVX and x50 for normal, he gets optimal performance.


Sure, but for the sake of consistency it's really up to the OP/whoever is managing the list in this thread to decide the metrics. 

Heck I run my 7700K now at barely any OC, we're looking at 4400Mhz x4 during AVX and 4600MHz x4 without, according to the established standards here this would be a 100MHz underclock (despite the fact Intel stock behavior is just that 4400MHz x4, 4.5GHz being just their marketing hype (it's the turbo boost speed for single core use))


----------



## TK421

Other than windows memory diagnostic, what other tool should be used to indefinitely stress memory / ram OC?

Been told that hci memtest is unreliable...


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> Other than windows memory diagnostic, what other tool should be used to indefinitely stress memory / ram OC?
> 
> Been told that hci memtest is unreliable...


Stressapptest for a few hours.


----------



## TK421

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Stressapptest for a few hours.


If I don't have a linux / UNIX environment installed already?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> All the more reason to use the AVX offset. You get the best of both worlds, 5ghz on non-AVX tasks and stability in AVX workloads. Otherwise, you will lose the non-AVX workload speeds for the sake of stabilizing AVX.
> 
> My take on the matter is, our friend there has 5ghz with no AVX offset and he's getting instability in AVX workloads. If he runs x49 for AVX and x50 for normal, he gets optimal performance.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure, but for the sake of consistency it's really up to the OP/whoever is managing the list in this thread to decide the metrics.
> 
> Heck I run my 7700K now at barely any OC, we're looking at 4400Mhz x4 during AVX and 4600MHz x4 without, according to the established standards here this would be a 100MHz underclock (despite the fact Intel stock behavior is just that 4400MHz x4, 4.5GHz being just their marketing hype (it's the turbo boost speed for single core use))
Click to expand...

Have you tried running a program with a single thread, like prime95 1 thread?


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Have you tried running a program with a single thread, like prime95 1 thread?


Like at default configuration or my current one? Default gives 4.5GHz (on a good day, assuming there's not enough OS background processes to fill up enough workload for the CPU to drop down into "2-core used" state), my current config would give me 4.4GHz (AVX) or 4.6GHz (non-AVX)

As usual, the CPU switches frequencies around much faster than the monitoring software can ever cope with; wish I knew what the monitoring software exactly reports to the end user, I've been assuming median or mode frequency used in past X cycles.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> If I don't have a linux / UNIX environment installed already?


As a suggestion, take a flash drive lying around and install Linux on it. I'm no Linux guru but it wasn't complicated.


----------



## Neezy

So I just built my PC. Read up almost this whole thread, watched multiple videos on overclocking, and read up on it online. I pretty much had the basics down. Now when I tried following the OC guide on this thread I was only able to get 4.8ghz at 1.30v on my CPU (i7 7700k w/ Asus Rog Strix Z270E). I've read that not all 7700k can reach 5ghz and I believe my cpu is part of that club. Any time I set the multiplier higher than 49 my system will not boot up and will just get stuck on the Asus logo screen.

Now my question is, is there anything else I can do or should I just try to gamble with another CPU and use this one for a workstation system that won't need the OC? Also if I "delid" my cpu would that help my situation?


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Neezy*
> 
> So I just built my PC. Read up almost this whole thread, watched multiple videos on overclocking, and read up on it online. I pretty much had the basics down. Now when I tried following the OC guide on this thread I was only able to get 4.8ghz at 1.30v on my CPU (i7 7700k w/ Asus Rog Strix Z270E). I've read that not all 7700k can reach 5ghz and I believe my cpu is part of that club. Any time I set the multiplier higher than 49 my system will not boot up and will just get stuck on the Asus logo screen.
> 
> Now my question is, is there anything else I can do or should I just try to gamble with another CPU and use this one for a workstation system that won't need the OC? Also if I "delid" my cpu would that help my situation?


I've never seen a 7700k chip that couldn't run @ 5GHz. It's always come down to questions of how much cooling can you provide the CPU and how much Voltage are you comfortable with feeding it. It's clear that you are not reaching 5 GHz with whatever cooling you have, 1.30V and the other 100 settings in your system. You'll have to change something.

No two overclocks are identical. If you want any serious help, you'll need to list out your system specs and detail what you've experimented with thus far.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Neezy*
> 
> So I just built my PC. Read up almost this whole thread, watched multiple videos on overclocking, and read up on it online. I pretty much had the basics down. Now when I tried following the OC guide on this thread I was only able to get 4.8ghz at 1.30v on my CPU (i7 7700k w/ Asus Rog Strix Z270E). I've read that not all 7700k can reach 5ghz and I believe my cpu is part of that club. Any time I set the multiplier higher than 49 my system will not boot up and will just get stuck on the Asus logo screen.
> 
> Now my question is, is there anything else I can do or should I just try to gamble with another CPU and use this one for a workstation system that won't need the OC? Also if I "delid" my cpu would that help my situation?
> 
> 
> 
> I've never seen a 7700k chip that couldn't run @ 5GHz. It's always come down to questions of how much cooling can you provide the CPU and how much Voltage are you comfortable with feeding it. It's clear that you are not reaching 5 GHz with whatever cooling you have, 1.30V and the other 100 settings in your system. You'll have to change something.
> 
> No two overclocks are identical. If you want any serious help, you'll need to list out your system specs and detail what you've experimented with thus far.
Click to expand...

I have seen a lot of folks not stable at 5.0GHz.


----------



## Neezy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> I've never seen a 7700k chip that couldn't run @ 5GHz. It's always come down to questions of how much cooling can you provide the CPU and how much Voltage are you comfortable with feeding it. It's clear that you are not reaching 5 GHz with whatever cooling you have, 1.30V and the other 100 settings in your system. You'll have to change something.
> 
> No two overclocks are identical. If you want any serious help, you'll need to list out your system specs and detail what you've experimented with thus far.


PC Specs:

Intel I7 7700K
Asus Rog Strix Z270E
NZXT X62 AIO
G.Skill Tridentz DDR4 3000MHz

As far as settings and what I've tried.

I first tried the Asus 5ghz OC profile (failed to boot). Then setting core multiplier to 50 at 1.30v / 1.32v / 1.35v (failed to boot), then 49 1.30v / 1.32v / 1.35v (failed to boot), and finally 48 at 1.30v (able to boot). From there only things I've changed were:
- Ai OC Tuner to Manual
- Manually setting my Ram to its stock speed
- Vcore set to Manual @ 1.30
- CPU SVID set to OFF
- C States set to OFF

Should I be turning up the Vcore until I can get it to boot? I feel like 1.35 is already plenty high for my liking. Sigh all of this is so frustrating sometimes, but a great learning experience most definitely. If theres more info you need I can help once Im off work, but for now I'd like to see if I can at least hit 5ghz or just replace my CPU and try again.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Neezy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> I've never seen a 7700k chip that couldn't run @ 5GHz. It's always come down to questions of how much cooling can you provide the CPU and how much Voltage are you comfortable with feeding it. It's clear that you are not reaching 5 GHz with whatever cooling you have, 1.30V and the other 100 settings in your system. You'll have to change something.
> 
> No two overclocks are identical. If you want any serious help, you'll need to list out your system specs and detail what you've experimented with thus far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PC Specs:
> 
> Intel I7 7700K
> Asus Rog Strix Z270E
> NZXT X62 AIO
> G.Skill Tridentz DDR4 3000MHz
> 
> As far as settings and what I've tried.
> 
> I first tried the Asus 5ghz OC profile (failed to boot). Then setting core multiplier to 50 at 1.30v / 1.32v / 1.35v (failed to boot), then 49 1.30v / 1.32v / 1.35v (failed to boot), and finally 48 at 1.30v (able to boot). From there only things I've changed were:
> - Ai OC Tuner to Manual
> - Manually setting my Ram to its stock speed
> - Vcore set to Manual @ 1.30
> - CPU SVID set to OFF
> - C States set to OFF
> 
> If theres more info you need I can help once Im off work, but for now I'd like to see if I can at least hit 5ghz or just replace my CPU and try again.
Click to expand...

I would keep going up by 10mv to maximum 1.4V to see if you can get 5.0GHz.

Siliconlottery says to run 1.375V Vcore for 5.0GHz LINK: https://siliconlottery.com/collections/lga-1151/products/7700k50g


----------



## Neezy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I would keep going up by 10mv to maximum 1.4V to see if you can get 5.0GHz.
> 
> Siliconlottery says to run 1.375V Vcore for 5.0GHz LINK: https://siliconlottery.com/collections/lga-1151/products/7700k50g


Thank you for the tip. I tried the core multipliers 49 and 50 at max 1.35

I'll try playing around with my VCore and post results!


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Neezy*
> 
> PC Specs:
> 
> Intel I7 7700K
> Asus Rog Strix Z270E
> NZXT X62 AIO
> G.Skill Tridentz DDR4 3000MHz
> 
> As far as settings and what I've tried.
> 
> I first tried the Asus 5ghz OC profile (failed to boot). Then setting core multiplier to 50 at 1.30v / 1.32v / 1.35v (failed to boot), then 49 1.30v / 1.32v / 1.35v (failed to boot), and finally 48 at 1.30v (able to boot). From there only things I've changed were:
> - Ai OC Tuner to Manual
> - Manually setting my Ram to its stock speed
> - Vcore set to Manual @ 1.30
> - CPU SVID set to OFF
> - C States set to OFF
> 
> If theres more info you need I can help once Im off work, but for now I'd like to see if I can at least hit 5ghz or just replace my CPU and try again.


Get some more info:

Make sure XMP is off.
Set speedstep/speedshift to [OFF].
Set C-State limit to [C2]
CPU ratio is [Fixed] - not dynamic.
BCLK fixed @ 100
DRAM freq clock at 100 or 133 whichever will give you the stock RAM speed.

All other BIOS settings @ default (no manual LLC, RAM timings, or exotic MOSFET switching freqs or DRAM phase optimizations...)

What temp is your CPU @ idle?
Use HWinfo64 to determine your max per core temp, VID and max VCore when running Cinebench15 (or any simple CPU test) with your VCore set to [Auto]. You can loop CPU-Z bench if you want...


----------



## Neezy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Get some more info:
> 
> Make sure XMP is off.
> Set speedstep/speedshift to [OFF].
> Set C-State limit to [C2]
> CPU ratio is [Fixed] - not dynamic.
> BCLK fixed @ 100
> DRAM freq clock at 100 or 133 whichever will give you the stock RAM speed.
> 
> All other BIOS settings @ default (no manual LLC, RAM timings, or exotic MOSFET switching freqs or DRAM phase optimizations...)
> 
> What temp is your CPU @ idle?
> Use HWinfo64 to determine your max per core temp, VID and max VCore when running Cinebench15 (or any simple CPU test) with your VCore set to [Auto]. You can loop CPU-Z bench if you want...


Tried messing with your settings. It was a no go. I tried 4.9 and 5.0 starting with 1.35 all the way to 1.4 in 0.10 increments


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Neezy*
> 
> Tried messing with your settings. It was a no go. I tried 4.9 and 5.0 starting with 1.35 all the way to 1.4 in 0.10 increments


OK.
So your chip needs more than 1.4V to boot above 4.8, if even then.

*At 4.8G at the settings I detailed above* and running CB15 all cores or CPU-Z bench stress for 3 minutes (or any simple CPU test) with your VCore set to [Auto],

*what are:
CPU temp @ idle,
max per core temp,
VID and max VCore
?
Comparative max core speeds?*

If you have one core that's more than 10C above the lowest in temp, you're a delid candidate. Or you can just put it on a machine that doesn't warrant overclocking.
_If you have more than a 10C difference at stock speeds, definitely return the chip!_

If you have a lazy core, you should swap the chip.

If all that is good, but it just won't do the higher speeds, you can try a 4.8 base and use dynamic speeds up to 5.0 GHz on one core if your MB supports it.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Neezy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Get some more info:
> 
> Make sure XMP is off.
> Set speedstep/speedshift to [OFF].
> Set C-State limit to [C2]
> CPU ratio is [Fixed] - not dynamic.
> BCLK fixed @ 100
> DRAM freq clock at 100 or 133 whichever will give you the stock RAM speed.
> 
> All other BIOS settings @ default (no manual LLC, RAM timings, or exotic MOSFET switching freqs or DRAM phase optimizations...)
> 
> What temp is your CPU @ idle?
> Use HWinfo64 to determine your max per core temp, VID and max VCore when running Cinebench15 (or any simple CPU test) with your VCore set to [Auto]. You can loop CPU-Z bench if you want...
> 
> 
> 
> Tried messing with your settings. It was a no go. I tried 4.9 and 5.0 starting with 1.35 all the way to 1.4 in 0.10 increments
Click to expand...

Sounds like you just have a chip that is no go for that High of a overclock. It happens if you want a guarantee overclock of 4.9 to 5.0GHz purchase a processor from silicon lottery. https://siliconlottery.com/collections/lga-1151


----------



## Neezy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> OK.
> So your chip needs more than 1.4V to boot above 4.8, if even then.
> 
> *At 4.8G at the settings I detailed above* and running CB15 all cores or CPU-Z bench stress for 3 minutes (or any simple CPU test) with your VCore set to [Auto],
> 
> *what are:
> CPU temp @ idle,
> max per core temp,
> VID and max VCore
> ?
> Comparative max core speeds?*
> 
> If you have one core that's more than 10C above the lowest in temp, you're a delid candidate. Or you can just put it on a machine that doesn't warrant overclocking.
> _If you have more than a 10C difference at stock speeds, definitely return the chip!_
> 
> If you have a lazy core, you should swap the chip.
> 
> If all that is good, but it just won't do the higher speeds, you can try a 4.8 base and use dynamic speeds up to 5.0 GHz on one core if your MB supports it.


Here's my HWInfo


----------



## Beagle Box

Hmmmm...

I notice that you're not running your CPU at a fixed ratio for this test. Your screen shot doesn't tell us anything.

The idea is to set all cores at the same speed and run them all at that speed full blast for... let's now say ...5 minutes by running CPU-Z / Bench / Stress CPU
Then we can see:
1. if all your cores are operating @ 100%.
2. if the temps between all cores are within 10C .



For this test all the areas in orange should say "4,800 MHz" and all the areas in green should say "48 x". Then we compare the info in the purple columns.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Get some more info:
> 
> Make sure XMP is off.
> Set speedstep/speedshift to [OFF].
> Set C-State limit to [C2]
> CPU ratio is [Fixed] - not dynamic.
> BCLK fixed @ 100
> DRAM freq clock at 100 or 133 whichever will give you the stock RAM speed.
> 
> All other BIOS settings @ default (no manual LLC, RAM timings, or exotic MOSFET switching freqs or DRAM phase optimizations...)
> 
> What temp is your CPU @ idle?
> Use HWinfo64 to determine your max per core temp, VID and max VCore when running Cinebench15 (or any simple CPU test) with your VCore set to [Auto]. You can loop CPU-Z bench if you want...


Can I ask you something? Why do you recommend to make sure XMP is off? I'm using XMP now and it is a really good way to set my RAM to stock settings (settings that say it is capable of in the box), should I manually set my RAM to 3000Mhz instead of using XMP that already set the frequency and timmings?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Get some more info:
> 
> Make sure XMP is off.
> Set speedstep/speedshift to [OFF].
> Set C-State limit to [C2]
> CPU ratio is [Fixed] - not dynamic.
> BCLK fixed @ 100
> DRAM freq clock at 100 or 133 whichever will give you the stock RAM speed.
> 
> All other BIOS settings @ default (no manual LLC, RAM timings, or exotic MOSFET switching freqs or DRAM phase optimizations...)
> 
> What temp is your CPU @ idle?
> Use HWinfo64 to determine your max per core temp, VID and max VCore when running Cinebench15 (or any simple CPU test) with your VCore set to [Auto]. You can loop CPU-Z bench if you want...
> 
> 
> 
> Can I ask you something? Why do you recommend to make sure XMP is off? I'm using XMP now and it is a really good way to set my RAM to stock settings (settings that say it is capable of in the box), should I manually set my RAM to 3000Mhz instead of using XMP that already set the frequency and timmings?
Click to expand...

XMP is fine, he was just trying to eliminate stability problems.


----------



## Neezy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Hmmmm...
> 
> I notice that you're not running your CPU at a fixed ratio for this test. Your screen shot doesn't tell us anything.
> 
> The idea is to set all cores at the same speed and run them all at that speed full blast for... let's now say ...5 minutes by running CPU-Z / Bench / Stress CPU
> Then we can see:
> 1. if all your cores are operating @ 100%.
> 2. if the temps between all cores are within 10C .
> 
> 
> 
> For this test all the areas in orange should say "4,800 MHz" and all the areas in green should say "48 x". Then we compare the info in the purple columns.


How would I set it up to have it fixed on all cores? I assumed by having "48" multiplier synced on all cores that would be it?


----------



## Asploit

Okay so I'm not quite sure what sort of issue I'm running into here, but I'm getting fairly high idle temps on my 7700k on 360x27 push-pull intake, pump running at a constant ~2750rpm.

Results are from 5.0 @ 1.33vCore and 5.1 @ 1.44vCore, getting high 30's, sometimes dips up to 42C. Constant vCore maintaining 5.0 or 5.1 depending on what I'm testing.
Load temps get into mid-70's in x264 stress test, LLC5 and AVX0
Ambient about 23-26C depending on the day.

I reseated and repasted my cooler three times now on TG Kryonaut, and the temps seem actually consistent between the two vCore settings, which is a little puzzling.

Is this a seating issue?


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asploit*
> 
> Okay so I'm not quite sure what sort of issue I'm running into here, but I'm getting fairly high idle temps on my 7700k on 360x27 push-pull intake, pump running at a constant ~2750rpm.
> 
> Results are from 5.0 @ 1.33vCore and 5.1 @ 1.44vCore, getting high 30's, sometimes dips up to 42C. Constant vCore maintaining 5.0 or 5.1 depending on what I'm testing.
> Load temps get into mid-70's in x264 stress test, LLC5 and AVX0
> Ambient about 23-26C depending on the day.
> 
> I reseated and repasted my cooler three times now on TG Kryonaut, and the temps seem actually consistent between the two vCore settings, which is a little puzzling.
> 
> Is this a seating issue?


These temps seem pretty good for a not-delidded chip.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Neezy*
> 
> How would I set it up to have it fixed on all cores? I assumed by having "48" multiplier synced on all cores that would be it?


Yes.
Most boards have settings to set CPU ratio to Fixed or Dynamic. On some ASUS boards, the easiest way is to just set C-States to C1.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Neezy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Hmmmm...
> 
> I notice that you're not running your CPU at a fixed ratio for this test. Your screen shot doesn't tell us anything.
> 
> The idea is to set all cores at the same speed and run them all at that speed full blast for... let's now say ...5 minutes by running CPU-Z / Bench / Stress CPU
> Then we can see:
> 1. if all your cores are operating @ 100%.
> 2. if the temps between all cores are within 10C .
> 
> 
> 
> For this test all the areas in orange should say "4,800 MHz" and all the areas in green should say "48 x". Then we compare the info in the purple columns.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How would I set it up to have it fixed on all cores? I assumed by having "48" multiplier synced on all cores that would be it?
Click to expand...

You and I have the power saving features enabled. When you go to full load all cores will be in sync.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Username: pyounpy-2
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 200
Core Multiplier: 25
Core Frequency: 5000
Cache Frequency: 4400
Vcore in UEFI: adaptic mode:1.185+0.005=1.190
Vcore: 1.200
FCLK: Reminder: 1600(800X2??)
Cooling Solution: Delidded, Custum water cooling
Stability Test: 8 hours realbench ver. 2.54

Batch Number: Malaysia L642G086
Ram Speed: (4200 17-17-17-35-1T)
VCCIO: 1.344
VCCSA: 1.368
Ram Voltage: 1.4
Motherboard: Asus maximus IX Apex (UEFI:1010)
LLC Setting: level 5
Misc Comments: I tried to operate CPU at 5GHz under the Vcore of less than 1.2V. Addtionally, I set the Blck at 200MHz. Therfore, the response is very well even I use the C1 state, New version UEFI 1010 is good for me.









*_.=5 GHz Overclock Club=._*


----------



## MaKeN

5.0 at 1.2v impressive


----------



## Asploit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> These temps seem pretty good for a not-delidded chip.


Delidded with TG Cryonaut, though!









Edit: Okay so I updated my bios and now I'm at low 30's again. ***, Asus?!


----------



## radiojam

Hi, I've been browsing this forum for a while but just signed up. Earlier this month I took on the tasks of building my first PC as well as overclocking for the first time. Overclocking to me was always a mystery, but the more I read about it the more I realized how safe and easy it can be as long as you don't go crazy. I hated the idea of leaving performance on the table for no good reason.

The forum (and this thread specifically) has been an invaluable resource in my quest to overclock. When I started I had no idea what to do or where to start, and like many others I made the cardinal error of trying to overclock more than one thing at a time. Didn't take long for me to figure out what a bad idea that was. Anyway I really appreciate all of the great posts, and especially to Darkwizzie for maintaining the spreadsheet - it provided for a really good sanity check during the whole process. I am really satisfied with where I ended up as it seems to be a safe limit with my cooling.

Here is a link to the build: https://pcpartpicker.com/b/mWcYcf

Looks like these are still being charted on the spreadsheet, so here is my info. Hope I included everything.

Username: radiojam
CPU Model: i7-7700K
Base Clock: 100 MHz
Core Multiplier: 49
Core Frequency: 4.9 GHz
Cache Frequency: 4.5 GHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.28v
Vcore: 1.248v (average)
FCLK: 1.0 GHz
Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-U12s single fan, non-delidded
Stability Test: RealBench 2.43 8hrs
Batch Number: X712C959, Vietnam (this seems odd but confirmed on the box)
Ram Speed: 3000 MHz, 15-17-17-35
Ram Voltage: 1.35v
VCCIO:
VCCSA:
Motherboard: Gigabyte Z270x-Ultra Gaming
LLC Setting: High
Misc Comments: No AVX offset. Average temps high 70's, max on any core 87c


----------



## ViTosS

Which C-States do you guys recommend? I currently have my settings on AUTO for C-States and SpeedStep.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Which C-States do you guys recommend? I currently have my settings on AUTO for C-States and SpeedStep.


I have my C-States and speed shift on enabled, then speed step on Auto.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*


Updated.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *radiojam*
> 
> Hi, I've been browsing this forum for a while but just signed up. Earlier this month I took on the tasks of building my first PC as well as overclocking for the first time. Overclocking to me was always a mystery, but the more I read about it the more I realized how safe and easy it can be as long as you don't go crazy. I hated the idea of leaving performance on the table for no good reason.
> 
> The forum (and this thread specifically) has been an invaluable resource in my quest to overclock. When I started I had no idea what to do or where to start, and like many others I made the cardinal error of trying to overclock more than one thing at a time. Didn't take long for me to figure out what a bad idea that was. Anyway I really appreciate all of the great posts, and especially to Darkwizzie for maintaining the spreadsheet - it provided for a really good sanity check during the whole process. I am really satisfied with where I ended up as it seems to be a safe limit with my cooling.


Grats on your first overclock!







It's always an honor to hear stories like this. It reminds me of when I joined over the Catleap monitor thread.

People should expect the spreadsheets to be maintained at least until the next generation of processors come out to replace it. Since Coffee Lake is not out yet I fully intend to update the spreadsheet. When people can actually buy Coffee Lake chips then support for this spreadsheet is no longer guaranteed.

Sample Size:59
Average OC 5.03

Median OC 5.00

Average Vcore 1.35

Median Vcore 1.36


----------



## jlp0209

Great results here, wow. My current 7700K is not good. Original chip ran 5ghz at 1.328, destroyed by my stupid self from using super glue Gel to redo a delid. Current chip needs 1.264 to run at 4.7. I need at least 1.328 to hit 4.8 but I hit 95 degrees at 1.312 so have not gone higher. Using an H100i v2. I am not even going to bother delidding this one as it'll need too much voltage anyway. I have CLU and Permatex black RTV silicone gasket maker this time if I delid again. Tempted to get another chip for $279 at Microcenter and sell my current one, shouldn't be that big of a hit.

I still use Prime95 28.10 and then Realbench 2nd, as the tests of stability. If it isn't stable at the highest load w/ Prime95, it isn't stable.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> Great results here, wow. My current 7700K is not good. Original chip ran 5ghz at 1.328, destroyed by my stupid self from using super glue Gel to redo a delid. Current chip needs 1.264 to run at 4.7. I need at least 1.328 to hit 4.8 but I hit 95 degrees at 1.312 so have not gone higher. Using an H100i v2. I am not even going to bother delidding this one as it'll need too much voltage anyway. I have CLU and Permatex black RTV silicone gasket maker this time if I delid again. Tempted to get another chip for $279 at Microcenter and sell my current one, shouldn't be that big of a hit.
> 
> I still use Prime95 28.10 and then Realbench 2nd, as the tests of stability. If it isn't stable at the highest load w/ Prime95, it isn't stable.


a little dab of acetone would have removed superglue (acrylamide).


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> a little dab of acetone would have removed superglue (acrylamide).


LOL- this I know. It was too late as when I redid the delid (twice) the the damage was already done. I have the Rockit88 tool and listened to that guide and bought the Control Gel. Have since done lots of browsing here and have a tube of black silicone gasket maker on hand for future delids. And a bottle of 100% pure acetone!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> LOL- this I know. It was too late as when I redid the delid (twice) the the damage was already done. I have the Rockit88 tool and listened to that guide and bought the Control Gel. Have since done lots of browsing here and have a tube of black silicone gasket maker on hand for future delids. And a bottle of 100% pure acetone!


what got damaged? cracked the PCB?


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what got damaged? cracked the PCB?


Redid my delid four times in all. I scraped a little too hard removing the super glue gel at some point. Once I learned to use a combo of Goof Off + Q-tip (totally removed all glue from PCB) it was too late, I could see the scratches when the glue came off. I destroyed the memory controllers and got code 55 at start up every time. I could not even enter the BIOS. Lesson learned.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> Redid my delid four times in all. I scraped a little too hard removing the super glue gel at some point. Once I learned to use a combo of Goof Off + Q-tip (totally removed all glue from PCB) it was too late, I could see the scratches when the glue came off. I destroyed the memory controllers and got code 55 at start up every time. I could not even enter the BIOS. Lesson learned.


ugh....


----------



## MaKeN

Goof off is a really strong ****







it melts things down


----------



## rt123

NVM. Need to read better.


----------



## austinmrs

hey guys! Just got my 7700k, with an Asus Z270F Strix.

My cooler is a H110i GT!

Tried to OC the Cpu to 5Ghz with 1,35V, and i got cpu throtlling and really high temps!

Here are my settings and an Aida64/Hwinfo screenshot. Is this normal?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Jpmboy

set llc to 5 and see if the voltage drops at load. it may be running much higher than set... but yes, 7700Ks run hot when pushed. Really need to delid to run 5.0+ comfortably.


----------



## austinmrs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> set llc to 5 and see if the voltage drops at load. it may be running much higher than set... but yes, 7700Ks run hot when pushed. Really need to delid to run 5.0+ comfortably.


I will try that!

I set everything to stock, and this is my temps stress testing with Aida 64:



Ambient temp here of around 24ºC

EDIT:

Set LLC to Level 5. 49 multiplier, manual voltage 1.35V, cache at 45.

Im still overheating...


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> I will try that!
> 
> I set everything to stock, and this is my temps stress testing with Aida 64:
> 
> 
> 
> Ambient temp here of around 24ºC
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> Set LLC to Level 5. 49 multiplier, manual voltage 1.35V, cache at 45.
> 
> Im still overheating...


You need to delid if you want to run those voltages and clockspeeds. You're hitting the limit of thermal transfer that can happen with the TIM interface you have under the IHS.

Either back off the voltage and settle for something like 4.7ghz or delid.


----------



## jlp0209

@austinmrs : Kaby runs hot hot hot as Jpmboy said. Your load temps at 5ghz @ 1.35v seem par for the course as you are not delidded. My chip runs at 4.8ghz @ 1.312v and max temp during Prime95 28.10 is 95-96 degrees. Realbench max temp is 85 degrees. I use an H100i v2. The most voltage I can handle is 1.328 which causes temps to get to 97 during Prime. It makes sense that you're hitting the thermal limit at 1.35. Delidding is the next step if you want to run at 5ghz.

Fyi, adaptive voltage is giving me fits. It seems every Asus board I try (P8Z68, Z77 Pro, Hero VIII Z170, Z170 Mark 1, now Hero IX Z270) I am much better off using manual voltage, really annoying. Are other brands this way? With adaptive I need 1.344v to run 4.8ghz. Manual I'm thankfully stable at 1.312v. I'm happy with this although it isn't a really good chip.

Lastly, if anyone is crashing while using Realbench and EVGA Precision, Precision is the issue. I almost sent my board to Asus because I was crashing at stock and pulling my hair out as to why.


----------



## MaKeN

Same here... crashing using cam software or msi afterburner....


----------



## radiojam

I had the same experience crashing with MSI Afterburner. I kept changing so many CPU settings before it dawned on me that could be the problem. I switched to EVGA Precision and never had another problem. I do have an EVGA card but I doubt that matters.


----------



## wingman99

My MSI Afterburner works fine. What version of rivatuner statistics server were you using?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> I will try that!
> 
> I set everything to stock, and this is my temps stress testing with Aida 64:
> 
> 
> 
> Ambient temp here of around 24ºC
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> Set LLC to Level 5. 49 multiplier, manual voltage 1.35V, cache at 45.
> 
> Im still overheating...


considering the temps the chip is hitting at stock voltage... sorry, but it's a really bad intel TIM sample for sure (we've seen several that run in the 80s at stock settings). As said, that's a delid candidate for sure, or that cooler is just broke or mounted poorly. Luckily, the stock VID looks decent so... all the more reason to delid. lol, if you were local, I'd give ya my rocket tool to pop the top on that.


----------



## austinmrs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> considering the temps the chip is hitting at stock voltage... sorry, but it's a really bad intel TIM sample for sure (we've seen several that run in the 80s at stock settings). As said, that's a delid candidate for sure, or that cooler is just broke or mounted poorly. Luckily, the stock VID looks decent so... all the more reason to delid. lol, if you were local, I'd give ya my rocket tool to pop the top on that.


My H110i GT is brand new, just came from RMA. I mounted it twice already... Everything looks okay with it, pump is running at 2100 RPM, and the AIO liquid is about 30ºC, and the fittings of the AIO doesn't feel hot to the touch.

I will dellid it for sure!


----------



## jlp0209

Bit the bullet and decided to delid my 2nd 7700K (1st one I broke memory controllers). Everything went perfectly until I tried to apply black silicone RTV for relid- the damn tube popped and I got the stuff all over the table and my hands! Yes I punctured the front with the cap so it was open, lol. There was a jam within the plastic attachment / applicator. Luckily it totally missed my CPU and IHS and Rockit tool. At that moment I thought maybe this is another sign that I just shouldn't delid. But I pressed on. I applied a total of 2 pin head sized dots, if that much, of Liquid Ultra to the die and underside of the IHS. Used a toothpick to put some RTV sealant at 4 corners of the IHS and on both sides. Let it settle overnight and powered the PC on this morning before heading out to work.

At 4.8 @ 1.312 my CPU hit 95 degrees in Prime 95 28.10 small ffp after 5 mins. Max 85 in Realbench.

At 4.8 @ 1.312 delidded I'm now at 69 degrees after 5 mins of Prime. Realbench my max was 61 degrees.

Preliminary tests give me a drop of 25 degrees under load, so applying (very small) amount of CLU to the die and bottom of IHS worked. My VID is 1.265 for Prime but I actually need 1.312. Will definitely re-test now that the delid is done.


----------



## austinmrs

Any tips to delid? Im just not sure if i should re seal it, or just put the metal plate on top again...


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> Any tips to delid? Im just not sure if i should re seal it, or just put the metal plate on top again...


Either is fine but I prefer to re seal the IHS. If you do not seal it make sure the IHS does not slide down the PCB when you clamp the CPU down in the socket. If you are going to delid you should definitely use one of the kits. There's no point in delidding if you are not going to use Liquid Ultra / Conductonaut. It is a fun project to do, just go slow!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jlp0209*
> 
> Bit the bullet and decided to delid my 2nd 7700K (1st one I broke memory controllers). Everything went perfectly until I tried to apply black silicone RTV for relid- the damn tube popped and I got the stuff all over the table and my hands! Yes I punctured the front with the cap so it was open, lol. There was a jam within the plastic attachment / applicator. Luckily it totally missed my CPU and IHS and Rockit tool. At that moment I thought maybe this is another sign that I just shouldn't delid. But I pressed on. I applied a total of 2 pin head sized dots, if that much, of Liquid Ultra to the die and underside of the IHS. Used a toothpick to put some RTV sealant at 4 corners of the IHS and on both sides. Let it settle overnight and powered the PC on this morning before heading out to work.
> 
> At 4.8 @ 1.312 my CPU hit 95 degrees in Prime 95 28.10 small ffp after 5 mins. Max 85 in Realbench.
> 
> At 4.8 @ 1.312 delidded I'm now at 69 degrees after 5 mins of Prime. Realbench my max was 61 degrees.
> 
> Preliminary tests give me a drop of 25 degrees under load, so applying (very small) amount of CLU to the die and bottom of IHS worked. My VID is 1.265 for Prime but I actually need 1.312. Will definitely re-test now that the delid is done.


nice. it is really important to paint the LM on the die AND underside of the IHS.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> Any tips to delid? Im just not sure if i should re seal it, or just put the metal plate on top again...


you only need to apply a tiny dab of sealant/glue to the corners. Not an actual reseal. the reason for this is very apparent when you lock the chip is the socket. the lock mechanism applies a slight forward slide to the IHS... so either hold it securly with one finger or a bit of sealant/glue to tack the corners is all that's needed.


----------



## austinmrs

Any recommendations on the glue to use?

UHU High Temperature Silicone Sealant is good?


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nice. it is really important to paint the LM on the die AND underside of the IHS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you only need to apply a tiny dab of sealant/glue to the corners. Not an actual reseal. the reason for this is very apparent when you lock the chip is the socket. the lock mechanism applies a slight forward slide to the IHS... so either hold it securly with one finger or a bit of sealant/glue to tack the corners is all that's needed.


Now you have me paranoid. My IHS was very securely attached to PCB with the sealant but I didn't really put much pressure on the CPU with my finger while clamping down into the socket. I've heard that the IHS can still slide down the PCB when using silicone sealant after awhile due to the clamp. Hopefully this won't happen to me but given my overall experience, would not be surprised at all if it happens.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> Any recommendations on the glue to use?
> 
> UHU High Temperature Silicone Sealant is good?


Should work, someone posted a review on Amazon that it worked just fine. This is what I used:

https://www.amazon.com/Permatex-82180-Maximum-Resistance-Silicone/dp/B0002UEN1U


----------



## NeoandGeo

Wondering about the possibility of degradation of thermal grease after delidding. I chose not to relid just in case something needed to be corrected with my thermal paste (Grizzly Kryonaut) in between the CPU die and the IHS. In the last week or so I have seen my idle temps rise from 29-32c up to 32-35c and max temps after running RealBench [email protected] hour rise from an average of 76c to 80-82c now. This causes sporadic lockups during a Realbench run preventing the option of testing a 1hr run. Ambient temps are within the margin of error both inside and outside the case +/` 1-2c. I checked all my air intakes for dust and radiator for excessive dust buildup, but they all looked good.

I decided to take the lid off to clean/redo the thermal paste on the CPU die. The first time I put a thin line of Kryonaut and when I took the IHS off it seemed like it was enough, there was a tiny bit around the edge of the die and the underside of the IHS looked like it had a good seal on the CPU die, but the IHS seemed like it had more of the grease than the die. CPU tower makes the CPU stand vertical and I figured the pressure of the clamped IHS to the PCB along with a Kraken waterblock would be enough to prevent gravity from taking kits hold.

For now I put the same amount on and everything is back to where I was right after delidding. Hopefully I am just doing something wrong besides not doing a proper relid of course, which will come in time. I did double check and make sure that none of the original adhesive was on the PCB and IHS, which could create a tiny open gap. So my questions are:

Is Kryonaut OK for using in between the IHS and CPU die with my current tower orientation? Is there a better long term solution that will roughly provide the same thermals without relidding? Is there something that could be making the IHS/PCB uneven with each other?


----------



## jlp0209

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NeoandGeo*
> 
> Wondering about the possibility of degradation of thermal grease after delidding. I chose not to relid just in case something needed to be corrected with my thermal paste (Grizzly Kryonaut) in between the CPU die and the IHS. In the last week or so I have seen my idle temps rise from 29-32c up to 32-35c and max temps after running RealBench [email protected] hour rise from an average of 76c to 80-82c now. This causes sporadic lockups during a Realbench run preventing the option of testing a 1hr run. Ambient temps are within the margin of error both inside and outside the case +/` 1-2c. I checked all my air intakes for dust and radiator for excessive dust buildup, but they all looked good.
> 
> I decided to take the lid off to clean/redo the thermal paste on the CPU die. The first time I put a thin line of Kryonaut and when I took the IHS off it seemed like it was enough, there was a tiny bit around the edge of the die and the underside of the IHS looked like it had a good seal on the CPU die, but the IHS seemed like it had more of the grease than the die. CPU tower makes the CPU stand vertical and I figured the pressure of the clamped IHS to the PCB along with a Kraken waterblock would be enough to prevent gravity from taking kits hold.
> 
> For now I put the same amount on and everything is back to where I was right after delidding. Hopefully I am just doing something wrong besides not doing a proper relid of course, which will come in time. I did double check and make sure that none of the original adhesive was on the PCB and IHS, which could create a tiny open gap. So my questions are:
> 
> Is Kryonaut OK for using in between the IHS and CPU die with my current tower orientation? Is there a better long term solution that will roughly provide the same thermals without relidding? Is there something that could be making the IHS/PCB uneven with each other?


I've only successfully delidded 2 of 3 CPU's so I'm still a rookie. How long ago did you delid? Only thing I can think of is maybe not securing the IHS caused very slight IHS movement that over time affected your temps / uneven build up of TIM? I don't think TIM degrades all that quickly on its own? Also why not use Conductonaut? Should give you better temps than Kryonaut.


----------



## jlp0209

After testing my delidded chip I've nailed the sweet spot. Not a good chip but oh well.

I can run 4.9 Ghz at 1.376v, adaptive voltage, LLC 5, AC/DC LL at .01, AVX offset 0 and be stable in every test.

I can run 5.0 Ghz at 1.328v, adaptive voltage, LLC 5, AC/DC LL at .01, AVX offset 2 and be stable in every test that doesn't use AVX. With AVX instruction 4.8 is stable at this voltage.

I crashed when trying 5.0 Ghz at 1.40v (AVX offset 0) in Prime95 28.10 and don't want to go higher than that. Bummer.

I'd rather run 5.0 / 4.8 (I don't think I ever use any software with AVX; just use my PC for office work and gaming) at a sane voltage VS using 4.9 24/7 at 1.376v.

Thanks for all input in this thread. Finally I can stop tinkering and have an F1 2017 marathon this weekend when the game launches Friday


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *austinmrs*
> 
> Any recommendations on the glue to use?
> 
> UHU High Temperature Silicone Sealant is good?


yeah - that's fine. Black looks OEM. I use 587 Blue (by loctite). No difference for this purpose between these except color.









oh.. and that locking "slide", or pressure when the lid is secured to the pcb is purposeful... ever wonder why the socket pins are bent the way they are?


----------



## davidjo

Hi all, fairly new to the forum and overclocking.

Currently running i5 7600k / asus rog z270g / corsair h115i / carbide 270r

Was previously running a Noctua nh-u9bse
Currently overclocked at 4.7 on 1.27 vcore.
Cache clock 4.5

Idle 38-40
ROG Realbench temp max 84 (4-hour test).
Playing CSGO stays under 70 (from memory average around 65).

Installed my h115i and have overclocked exactly as per below guide

http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/ka...cking-guide/3/

which is basically 4.9ghz @ 1.3v in adaptive mode. But HWmonitor displays 1.33

Playing CSGO temps stay under 50.

ran a 4-hour ROG Realbench and hit a max temp of 67.

Went to 5ghz. Crashed after about 2 mins.
Upped the score 1.32. That crashed during a sfc /scannow at about 90%.
I'm now back to 4.9 @ 1.3 but I have switched to xmp.

Do you guys think I should keep increasing the vcore @ 5ghz?

Whats a safe vcore for everyday use?

Do I have much room left in terms of overclocking?

Please note that I won't be delidding either.


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> Hi all, fairly new to the forum and overclocking.
> 
> Currently running i5 7600k / asus rog z270g / corsair h115i / carbide 270r
> 
> Was previously running a Noctua nh-u9bse
> Currently overclocked at 4.7 on 1.27 vcore.
> Cache clock 4.5
> 
> Idle 38-40
> ROG Realbench temp max 84 (4-hour test).
> Playing CSGO stays under 70 (from memory average around 65).
> 
> Installed my h115i and have overclocked exactly as per below guide
> 
> http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/ka...cking-guide/3/
> 
> which is basically 4.9ghz @ 1.3v in adaptive mode. But HWmonitor displays 1.33
> 
> Playing CSGO temps stay under 50.
> 
> ran a 4-hour ROG Realbench and hit a max temp of 67.
> 
> Went to 5ghz. Crashed after about 2 mins.
> Upped the score 1.32. That crashed during a sfc /scannow at about 90%.
> I'm now back to 4.9 @ 1.3 but I have switched to xmp.
> 
> Do you guys think I should keep increasing the vcore @ 5ghz?
> 
> Whats a safe vcore for everyday use?
> 
> Do I have much room left in terms of overclocking?
> 
> Please note that I won't be delidding either.


Turning off adaptive mode and setting it to override should keep your vcore where you set it also make sure your LLC is set to a point where it can handle the Vdroop but not jump too much higher than 0.010v - 0.015v from BIOS Vcore. You have a great chip if you can OC it to 4.9ghz at 1.3, are you stress testing this or just booting windows up?


----------



## davidjo

yep. 4 hour real bench - max temp 67

when you say override, do you mean setting vcore mode to manual?

what do you suggest i set LLC to as a starting point? and where do i go from there if unstable or what not?

will running the 1.3v or whatever it ends up being to get to 5ghz 24/7 be ok?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horakur333*
> 
> Turning off adaptive mode and setting it to override should keep your vcore where you set it also make sure your LLC is set to a point where it can handle the Vdroop but not jump too much higher than 0.010v - 0.015v from BIOS Vcore. You have a great chip if you can OC it to 4.9ghz at 1.3, are you stress testing this or just booting windows up?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> yep. 4 hour real bench - max temp 67
> 
> when you say override, do you mean setting vcore mode to manual?
> 
> what do you suggest i set LLC to as a starting point? and where do i go from there if unstable or what not?
> 
> will running the 1.3v or whatever it ends up being to get to 5ghz 24/7 be ok?


Try setting LLC to 4 or 5 and see where that puts your Vcore under load. You could run up to 1.4V 24/7 quite safely but since you are not planning on deliding you more than likely will hit thermal limits before anything else


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> yep. 4 hour real bench - max temp 67
> 
> when you say override, do you mean setting vcore mode to manual?
> 
> what do you suggest i set LLC to as a starting point? and where do i go from there if unstable or what not?
> 
> will running the 1.3v or whatever it ends up being to get to 5ghz 24/7 be ok?


Yeah definitely don't leave the Vcore on Auto, honestly I wouldn't leave hardly anything on Auto. Turning off Intel Speed Step and all of the C States probably are a good idea too. If you left those on your CPU might have been getting throttled down to 800mhz to prevent crashing during your stress test.

Your LLC will need to be aggressive to handle a 4.9 or 5ghz overclock. You will have to play with the settings and watch the vcore in CPU z to see how much it droops or overvolts, every chip handles things differently. When you get closer to 1.4v you need to be careful to watch the over voltage to keep it under 1.4 you can go over 1.4 but it's not recommended for long term use

Until you get your desired stable overclock I would leave XMP off, less things effecting your system the better for this

I would do this:

1.) Set your chip to stock everything and run a 1 minute stress test, see where the vcore is then go back into BIOS and manually set the multiplier to 38 then back down from the vcore you just saw by a little bit, boot windows and run a stress test for like 15 minutes. Do this process again (lowering vcore) until it crashes and begin the process of finding your stock lowest stable voltage by going up and making sure its 100% stable. Save this profile as it is your baseline frequency

2.) increase multiplier by 1, boot up, stress test, it will probably crash or at the very least one core will drop from 100% to like 5%. Go into BIOS and add 0.005v - 0.010v (depending on how much patience you have) and repeat until you are stable. I like to track the vcore raise to MHz gain as I work my way up to see how much each step costs me. With my chip after 4.4ghz up to 4.5 and 4.6 it cost way more Volts than the other steps did. Same thing applied to my 7700k

This will take quite some time but it is the only way to truly find out the maximum capabilities of your overclock


----------



## davidjo

Ok so I've set vcore to manual @ 1.3.
LLC @ level 5.
Clock at 4.9ghz

Vcore in stress test shows the following

max of 1.296 in hwmonitor
Max of 1.296 in hwinfo64
1.28 to 1.296 in ai suite
So is this considered a droop?

Should I lower LLC to 4? Or increase vcore at this stage?


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> Ok so I've set vcore to manual @ 1.3.
> LLC @ level 5.
> Clock at 4.9ghz
> 
> Vcore in stress test shows the following
> 
> max of 1.205 in hwmonitor
> Max of 1.205 in hwinfo64
> 1.28 in ai suite
> So is this considered a droop?
> 
> Should I lower LLC to 4? Or increase vcore at this stage?


Yupp that's an example of vdroop my friend, setting 2 or 3 will keep it closer to what you dial into BIOS


----------



## davidjo

awesome. thanks.

so what i basically want is an LLC setting that dials vcore in as close as possible to what i set in bios?

then start clocking up and and increasing vcore to suit?


----------



## davidjo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horakur333*
> 
> Yupp that's an example of vdroop my friend, setting 2 or 3 will keep it closer to what you dial into BIOS


awesome. thanks.

so what i basically want is an LLC setting that dials vcore in as close as possible to what i set in bios?

then start clocking up and and increasing vcore to suit?


----------



## davidjo

Sorry, was looking at wrong figures.

LLC at 5 vcore was max of 1.296 but under load it sat around 1.28

LLC at 3 vcore max of 1.296 but under load it sat at 1.264

LLC at 6 vcore sits at 1.296 under load which is spot on with max value.

How do I get max to sit at the value set in bios of 1.3?


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> Sorry, was looking at wrong figures.
> 
> LLC at 5 vcore was max of 1.296 but value sat around 1.28


Yeah you got it, track like how much more volts you have to do to keep it stable when you increase the multiplier and track the temps. That way you can push it to its absolute max

My 7600k definitely was not a winner of the silicon lottery. Before I delidded it 4.6 was its max without going over 1.4v temps still under 80 tho with a 240mm Corsair water cooler. Once I delidded it temps dropped 20c and because it was at 55c or so at 4.6Ghz I was able to get it to 4.8ghz out of it without hitting 1.4v because things react differently at lower temps. But 5.0ghz was not in its future ?


----------



## davidjo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horakur333*
> 
> Yeah you got it, track like how much more volts you have to do to keep it stable when you increase the multiplier and track the temps. That way you can push it to its absolute max
> 
> My 7600k definitely was not a winner of the silicon lottery. Before I delidded it 4.6 was its max without going over 1.4v temps still under 80 tho with a 240mm Corsair water cooler. Once I delidded it temps dropped 20c and because it was at 55c or so at 4.6Ghz I was able to get it to 4.8ghz out of it without hitting 1.4v because things react differently at lower temps. But 5.0ghz was not in its future ?


is there any settings i can change to make the display vcore in apps such as hwmonitor etc be exact as bios? or is this just something i take into consideration with my settings?

example, it sits at 1.296 max on hwmonitor but bios is 1.3? so if i want it to display 1.3, i have to set it to 1.304 in bios?

does llc stay the same level now that ive found the optimal level at my current setting of 1.3? or does it have to change as vcore changes?

so at the current settings, 4.9ghz @ 1.3 vcore bios / 1.296 windows and temps at 67-68. Ive got a bit of room to keep pushing, dont i

5ghz @ 1.35 bios vcore? ?


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> is there any settings i can change to make the display vcore in apps such as hwmonitor etc be exact as bios? or is this just something i take into consideration with my settings?
> 
> example, it sits at 1.296 max on hwmonitor but bios is 1.3? so if i want it to display 1.3, i have to set it to 1.304 in bios?
> 
> does llc stay the same level now that ive found the optimal level at my current setting of 1.3? or does it have to change as vcore changes?
> 
> so at the current settings, 4.9ghz @ 1.3 vcore bios / 1.296 windows and temps at 67-68. Ive got a bit of room to keep pushing, dont i
> 
> 5ghz @ 1.35 bios vcore? ?


It's always a game of tweaking things around to see how close you can get it to sit at the Vcore you dialed into BIOS, I'd say you did a good job of getting it close. I personally like to set my LLC so under heavy loads it has an extra +0.010v at times. You can even mess around with the AVX offset so it only gets the extra +v when processing AVX instructions (like Prime95) but stays fixed the rest of the time.

When you start getting towards that 5.0ghz marker, every extra 100mhz costs a lot more volts than it did before. Running a stable 1.3v at 4.9ghz you definitely have some headroom and a good chip! I'm a little jelly

Since stress tests are not real life normal workloads, after you've found your optimal overclock you can put it back into adaptive mode but be aware that your Vcore will spike above where you have set it when it dances around. I only use my gaming rig for gaming, if I surf the web or do anything else I'm using a less powerful more suited for the job setup. I leave my i7 7700K at a max 1.373vc @ 5.2ghz 100% of the time because adaptive mode always spikes it over 1.4v and C states make it unstable in idle lol.


----------



## ViTosS

Well I'm fully stable (Realbench 8h stress test) with 4.9Ghz and 1.32v with spikes to 1.344v using LLC 5 and offset voltage mode with +0.100, I was trying 5.0Ghz and after 6h of Realbench my PC crashed with BSOD, I was at +0.140 so resulting in 1.376v spike, I have C-States on AUTO and Intel SpeedStep on AUTO too, do you guys think the C-States is making my unstabled and crashing BSOD? Because I really would like to use 5.0Ghz since I delided this chip for it but at the same time I don't want to use 1.376v all the time, that's why I would like C-States.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Well I'm fully stable (Realbench 8h stress test) with 4.9Ghz and 1.32v with spikes to 1.344v using LLC 5 and offset voltage mode with +0.100, I was trying 5.0Ghz and after 6h of Realbench my PC crashed with BSOD, I was at +0.140 so resulting in 1.376v spike, I have C-States on AUTO and Intel SpeedStep on AUTO too, do you guys think the C-States is making my unstabled and crashing BSOD? Because I really would like to use 5.0Ghz since I delided this chip for it but at the same time I don't want to use 1.376v all the time, that's why I would like C-States.


Speed step, C-states power saving features are only active with no load and idle. So using power savings features is fine since at full load only adaptive Vcore is controlling vcore with load change, if you are using adaptive. I enable all power saving features when overclocking for less wear and tear at idle and no load, it works perfect just the same a stock Intel PC's.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Speed step, C-states power saving features are only active with no load and idle. So using power savings features is fine since at full load only adaptive Vcore is controlling vcore with load change, if you are using adaptive. I enable all power saving features when overclocking for less wear and tear at idle and no load, it works perfect just the same a stock Intel PC's.


I see, what I was wondering is if I disable C-States and use manual voltage I would be stable in situations where with C-States ON and offset mode I wouldn't, is this possible?

Also C-States doesn't decrease voltage, it's offset mode that does that, I tested here. I never used Adaptive mode, I was reading about voltage spikes really high in that mode so I prefer to stick with offset for energy saving and temperatures.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Speed step, C-states power saving features are only active with no load and idle. So using power savings features is fine since at full load only adaptive Vcore is controlling vcore with load change, if you are using adaptive. I enable all power saving features when overclocking for less wear and tear at idle and no load, it works perfect just the same a stock Intel PC's.
> 
> 
> 
> I see, what I was wondering is if I disable C-States and use manual voltage I would be stable in situations where with C-States ON and offset mode I wouldn't, is this possible?
> 
> Also C-States doesn't decrease voltage, it's offset mode that does that, I tested here. I never used Adaptive mode, I was reading about voltage spikes really high in that mode so I prefer to stick with offset for energy saving and temperatures.
Click to expand...

C- States does not effect overclocking it only runs at Idle with no load. When using manual Voltage C-states is disabled automatically because the voltage is not allowed to lower.

The only time C-states works is when not using manual Vcore then C-states needs Enabled or Auto depending on the motherboard also the processor needs to be idling with no load.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> Sorry, was looking at wrong figures.
> 
> LLC at 5 vcore was max of 1.296 but under load it sat around 1.28
> 
> LLC at 3 vcore max of 1.296 but under load it sat at 1.264
> 
> LLC at 6 vcore sits at 1.296 under load which is spot on with max value.
> 
> How do I get max to sit at the value set in bios of 1.3?


just know that when you use LLC to hold vcore at the value set in bios (eg, cancelling vdroop) the chip is then subject to transient overshoot on the order of 60-100mV for a few microseconds. This V_ovs (see the product spec pdf) which occurs during load transition can be harmful and lead to degradation.
fro 24/7 settings, it is always good to allow for a "healthy" amount of vdroop even if idle voltage (or low load voltage) is somewhat higher.
table 7.2

7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-.pdf 1678k .pdf file


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just know that when you use LLC to hold vcore at the value set in bios (eg, cancelling vdroop) the chip is then subject to transient overshoot on the order of 60-100mV for a few microseconds. This V_ovs (see the product spec pdf) which occurs during load transition can be harmful and lead to degradation.
> fro 24/7 settings, it is always good to allow for a "healthy" amount of vdroop even if idle voltage (or low load voltage) is somewhat higher.
> table 7.2
> 
> 7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-.pdf 1678k .pdf file


So you mean it is good to have a idle voltage lower than the full load voltage? Mine is 1.328v and spikes to 1.344v sometimes (rare, most of the time in 1.328v), is it ok? Using LLC 5, if I try LLC 6 and 7 it is more higher the difference in idle voltage and full load voltage than at LLC 5


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> So you mean it is good to have a idle voltage lower than the full load voltage? Mine is 1.328v and spikes to 1.344v sometimes (rare, most of the time in 1.328v), is it ok? Using LLC 5, if I try LLC 6 and 7 it is more higher the difference in idle voltage and full load voltage than at LLC 5


It's best to set your LLC so that your *VCore still drops some under load*. If your VCore goes up under load, you run the risk of two Voltage spikes. One when load is applied and another when load is dropped.

If you have to run high amounts of LLC to be stable, it's better to raise your idle VCore and use less LLC.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> It's best to set your LLC so that your *VCore still drops some under load*. If your VCore goes up under load, you run the risk of two Voltage spikes. One when load is applied and another when load is dropped.
> 
> If you have to run high amounts of LLC to be stable, it's better to raise your idle VCore and use less LLC.


Oh I see, so is better to have the load vcore a little bit lower than the idle vcore? And the same thing applies if I use offset voltage mode? Because I can't see my idle vcore when I'm in offset mode because it goes down to 0.800v

Edit.: I put CPU high performance mode in Windows (100% minimum state and 100% maximum) and also disabled C-States and SpeedStep, still using OFFSET, and my idle voltage is 1.312v but there is more two voltages I found checking the HWMonitor, both at load, one at 1.328v and the other spike at 1.344v, using LLC 5 and +0.100 offset sign, you can see in the images all the three diferent voltages:

Idle:



Full load:



What do you recommend me to do? To lower the LLC level?


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Oh I see, so is better to have the load vcore a little bit lower than the idle vcore? And the same thing applies if I use offset voltage mode? Because I can't see my idle vcore when I'm in offset mode because it goes down to 0.800v
> 
> Edit.: I put CPU high performance mode in Windows (100% minimum state and 100% maximum) and also disabled C-States and SpeedStep, still using OFFSET, and my idle voltage is 1.312v but there is more two voltages I found checking the HWMonitor, both at load, one at 1.328v and the other spike at 1.344v, using LLC 5 and +0.100 offset sign, you can see in the images all the three diferent voltages:
> 
> Idle:
> 
> 
> 
> Full load:
> 
> 
> 
> What do you recommend me to do? To lower the LLC level?


First, I really don't trust HWMonitor to be very accurate. HWINFO64 is better.

Can you clarify:
You're running + offset because your VCore is low at idle @ 4.9 GHz?
Is it also that low @ stock speeds?

If it were my machine, I'd find a rock solid [Overide] (manual) VCore/LLC combination with the lowest LLC I could manage. You should see a small drop in VCORE when load is applied, but not a deep dip (VDROOP).

I'd then decide if I can live with that VCore.

Only then would I work on using Offset Mode, SpeedShift, Dynamic BCLK, etc...

For clarity, that upward blip in your CVore isn't the type of "spike" mentioned earlier. A real VCore spike happens so fast it can't be seen by everyday monitorware.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> First, I really don't trust HWMonitor to be very accurate. HWINFO64 is better.
> 
> Can you clarify:
> You're running + offset because your VCore is low at idle @ 4.9 GHz?
> Is it also that low @ stock speeds?
> 
> If it were my machine, I'd find a rock solid [Overide] (manual) VCore/LLC combination with the lowest LLC I could manage. You should see a small drop in VCORE when load is applied, but not a deep dip (VDROOP).
> 
> I'd then decide if I can live with that VCore.
> 
> Only then would I work on using Offset Mode, SpeedShift, Dynamic BCLK, etc...
> 
> For clarity, that upward blip in your CVore isn't the type of "spike" mentioned earlier. A real VCore spike happens so fast it can't be seen by everyday monitorware.


Alright, let me clarify, I did this test using OFFSET MODE with +0.100v and LLC 5, I disabled C-States, SpeedStep and also put minimum CPU state to 100% so with all of this I got my frequency locked to 4900Mhz and also my IDLE vcore at 1.312v as you can see, but when I move it to full load (x264 custom loop from this thread) my vcore goes up to 1.344v (acord to HWMonitor) but most of the time stays at 1.328v, and I'm fine tunning in OFFSET MODE because I never know my full load voltage and idle even in manual mode because of LLC (I can't free myself from LLC, even if I set it to AUTO, still there is more or less voltage in full load), so I see no point fine tunning in manual mode if everything is not constant, I mean, if I increase or decrease LLC level and also voltage, I will never have what I would like, here is what I would like (and as you teached me), 1.31v idle voltage and full load voltage to 1.30v, because I can't really know the voltage I'm stable when I stress test, because is never constant, there is the most of the time voltage (in my case 1.328v) and the rare jumps to 1.344v.

And I'm also running OFFSET MODE to have the energy saving and lower temperatures to preserve my CPU.


----------



## ViTosS

This is the closest voltage drop I could get, 1.344v in IDLE and 1.328v full load, using +0.100 OFFSET MODE voltage and LLC 3, there is no way to reduce anything between the 1.328~1.344, I mean, nothing between these two is reachable, like 1.33v, and also I would like to find myself 1.31v idle and 1.30v stress, but I'm so tired of rebooting my PC and going to BIOS to change offset and LLC and is very hard to find right the one value you will need changing these two, if someone can opinion on this I would be glad, thanks for the help!



Edit.: HWinfo64 registered the minimum vcore of 1.312v while doing Prime95, so there is 3 voltages, 1.344v idle, 1.328v stress and ocasionaly 1.312v stress also.


----------



## BoredErica

I specifically went out of my way to write up something on LLC in the original post... if you haven't read it, you should if you have questions.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*


I saw what you said, but still is hard for me to set what I want, tried decreasing and increasing voltage and also LLC but it will never meet what I want, I understand now that is better to have a higher idle voltage than the full load voltage, that's what I have now (1.344v idle and 1.328v load with 1.312v load sometimes), but I would like to decrease more if possible, currently using LLC 3 (is it good?) And do you recommend Adaptive Mode or Offset Mode? For energy saving and to lower the temperatures?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I saw what you said, but still is hard for me to set what I want, tried decreasing and increasing voltage and also LLC but it will never meet what I want, I understand now that is better to have a higher idle voltage than the full load voltage, that's what I have now (1.344v idle and 1.328v load with 1.312v load sometimes), but I would like to decrease more if possible, currently using LLC 3 (is it good?) And do you recommend Adaptive Mode or Offset Mode? For energy saving and to lower the temperatures?


I use level 3 for 1.4v in the bios.

As for power draw, from what I saw on Haswell adaptive barely moved the needle on power consumption. Right now I don't really see the point of offset mode when there is adaptive mode.

I think to give the best answer I can I should go do some more testing. Testing has to wait a few days though when I have time.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I use level 3 for 1.4v in the bios.
> 
> As for power draw, from what I saw on Haswell adaptive barely moved the needle on power consumption. Right now I don't really see the point of offset mode when there is adaptive mode.
> 
> I think to give the best answer I can I should go do some more testing. Testing has to wait a few days though when I have time.


Alright, I just noticed something weird, atm using +0.100 Adaptive and Additional CPU voltage to AUTO I got a 1.344v idle and 1.328v full load in Prime95 28.10, but when I'm web browsing my HWInfo64 shows vcore highest value of 1.360v, is it ok to have like that? Just spent like 1h trying different values to not that happen, but web browsing throws my voltage higher than idle.


----------



## ViTosS

Oh well, now with Aida64 stressing my full load voltage is 1.360v, higher than the idle voltage of 1.344v, I'm really frustrated now because different stress tests throws my voltage to different values, you recommend lower voltage in full load than in idle but that is not happening in all softwares


----------



## ViTosS

I have two situations, been testing alot lately, web browsing max voltage of 1.344v, idle voltage of 1.328v and full load voltage 1.344v, so the full load voltage from idle is higher but the full load voltage compared to web browsing is the same, should I leave like this or is better thave a higher web browsing voltage (1.360v) and lower full load voltage compared to idle? Every LLC settings, manual mode, offset or adaptive I always run into three different voltages, the idle, web browsing and full load (using stress test softwares)


----------



## davidjo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> Hi all, fairly new to the forum and overclocking.
> 
> Currently running i5 7600k / asus rog z270g / corsair h115i / carbide 270r
> 
> Was previously running a Noctua nh-u9bse
> Currently overclocked at 4.7 on 1.27 vcore.
> Cache clock 4.5
> 
> Idle 38-40
> ROG Realbench temp max 84 (4-hour test).
> Playing CSGO stays under 70 (from memory average around 65).
> 
> Installed my h115i and have overclocked exactly as per below guide
> 
> http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/01/31/ka...cking-guide/3/
> 
> which is basically 4.9ghz @ 1.3v in adaptive mode. But HWmonitor displays 1.33
> 
> Playing CSGO temps stay under 50.
> 
> ran a 4-hour ROG Realbench and hit a max temp of 67.
> 
> Went to 5ghz. Crashed after about 2 mins.
> Upped the score 1.32. That crashed during a sfc /scannow at about 90%.
> I'm now back to 4.9 @ 1.3 but I have switched to xmp.
> 
> Do you guys think I should keep increasing the vcore @ 5ghz?
> 
> Whats a safe vcore for everyday use?
> 
> Do I have much room left in terms of overclocking?
> 
> Please note that I won't be delidding either.


Just a quick update. I am now running 5ghz @ 1.37 in adaptative mode. LLC @ 5. Rog real bench 4 hour test passed at 76 degrees. I didn't monitor the vcore the whole time but did see it go as low as 1.344 and max of 1.376.

I had previously tried 1.32 a few days ago but crashed after a few minutes of realbench so I thought I'd go with a bigger jump this time just to get things going.

I'm not sure if I should keep pushing the clock to see what I can run at this current vcore or work on reducing vcore bit by bit. What does everyone think?


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> Just a quick update. I am now running 5ghz @ 1.37 in adaptative mode. LLC @ 5. Rog real bench 4 hour test passed at 76 degrees. I didn't monitor the vcore the whole time but did see it go as low as 1.344 and max of 1.376.
> 
> I had previously tried 1.32 a few days ago but crashed after a few minutes of realbench so I thought I'd go with a bigger jump this time just to get things going.
> 
> I'm not sure if I should keep pushing the clock to see what I can run at this current vcore or work on reducing vcore bit by bit. What does everyone think?


Nice, if I use LLC 5 or above my load vcore never drops below idle, on jumps a bit higher, I need to use LLC 2 or 3, I don't understand why LLC works different for different peoples, I tried here your setting of 1.37v additional turbo mode, adaptive mode and auto offset with LLC 5 and my voltage was hitting higher in load than compared in idle, while in your case it's lowering your voltage. They say the best is to have lower full load voltage than idle voltage.


----------



## ViTosS

I think I've just discovered what was causing my voltage to jump higher while web browsing, aparentely if I set the AVX ratio to 1 negative offset (4.8Ghz), while browsing the voltage stays at the maximum 1.344v and not 1.36 or 1.376v like before, I think browsing uses AVX in Chrome and that was causing the little ''spike'', now I'm confortable 1.344v idle and 1.328v load
















Quick question, there is no way to set manual or offset/adaptive AVX vcore, right? It's always auto? Because for 4.9Ghz it was hitting 1.360v and now with 4.8Ghz is hitting 1.312v


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I have two situations, been testing alot lately, web browsing max voltage of 1.344v, idle voltage of 1.328v and full load voltage 1.344v, so the full load voltage from idle is higher but the full load voltage compared to web browsing is the same, should I leave like this or is better thave a higher web browsing voltage (1.360v) and lower full load voltage compared to idle? Every LLC settings, manual mode, offset or adaptive I always run into three different voltages, the idle, web browsing and full load (using stress test softwares)


When you use Adaptive the voltage will vary according to CPU load. Adaptive works off VID commands.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When you use Adaptive the voltage will vary according to CPU load. Adaptive works off VID commands.


But that also happens in offset mode, but either of these two options I told you I can use without concern? I've learned that full load voltage has to be lower than idle but what if my web browsing voltage is higher than full load (stressing)?


----------



## BoredErica

How about this picture?



Obviously the values on the axis are arbitrary, this is just for demonstration purposes.


----------



## BoredErica

As you can see from my testing, Speedshift and Cstates had little difference in power draw when measured with Kill-a-watt. It's not a failproof measuring device of course.

I went from 34C on idle to 31C on idle going from manual to adaptive. Ambient is around 24C and taking into account decimal points the difference is probably 3-3.5C. And on low LLC, high idle voltage, and adaptive, I think it's a non-issue. The voltage is pushed so low on idle, it doesn't matter.

Power consumption went from 72w to 54w going from full manual to adaptive.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I have two situations, been testing alot lately, web browsing max voltage of 1.344v, idle voltage of 1.328v and full load voltage 1.344v, so the full load voltage from idle is higher but the full load voltage compared to web browsing is the same, should I leave like this or is better thave a higher web browsing voltage (1.360v) and lower full load voltage compared to idle? Every LLC settings, manual mode, offset or adaptive I always run into three different voltages, the idle, web browsing and full load (using stress test softwares)


i can see from the voltages you are reporting that you are using something like cpuZ or any of a dozen software packages that report voltage from the SIO. Any software wil have a 16mV increment since the SIO report is 8 bit and it has no further resolution. So when you see 1.328, actual will be between 1.328 and 1.344.. when you see 1.344, actuial is between 1.344 and 1.360V. Actual means the SIO input value... I would not sweat over a 16mV variance reported from the OS. If you want to know what the voltage really is, you have to read it with a DMM off the MB. A 16mV variance is within the normal "variance".

and whether using manual. offset or adaptive, you can "see" the idle voltage just by changing windows power plan to High Performance mode.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*


looks good. Offset will have the same slope as Auto since offset adds mV across the entire VID stack. Adaptive will kick in after the first turbo multiplier is requested. (and this is why adaptive cannot work when using high BCLK (125+)


----------



## davidjo

Decided to go down the vcore route.

5ghz @ 1.36 vcore in adaptive mode. LLC 5
Vcore under load is 1.344 on hwinfo64.

Rog real bench 4 hour test
Temps average is 67
Max is 75

My question is, since under load it's running at 1.344 vcore, am I right in assuming it runs stable from as low as 1.344?

If so, if I lower the bios to 1.35, is there a setting I can change to ensure it drops to 1.344 under load?


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> i can see from the voltages you are reporting that you are using something like cpuZ or any of a dozen software packages that report voltage from the SIO. Any software wil have a 16mV increment since the SIO report is 8 bit and it has no further resolution. So when you see 1.328, actual will be between 1.328 and 1.344.. when you see 1.344, actuial is between 1.344 and 1.360V. Actual means the SIO input value... I would not sweat over a 16mV variance reported from the OS. If you want to know what the voltage really is, you have to read it with a DMM off the MB. A 16mV variance is within the normal "variance".
> 
> and whether using manual. offset or adaptive, you can "see" the idle voltage just by changing windows power plan to High Performance mode.
> looks good. Offset will have the same slope as Auto since offset adds mV across the entire VID stack. Adaptive will kick in after the first turbo multiplier is requested. (and this is why adaptive cannot work when using high BCLK (125+)


But can't it harm the CPU if the voltage under load (considering web browsing load) is higher than the idle voltage? What have been told here is to have a lower load voltage than idle voltage is better for the CPU, and that is not happening when I'm web browsing.


----------



## NIK1

I have a 5.0 OC using adaptive voltage on my I7 7700k/Z270 Apex mb and all is stable while stressing.I have C-States on enabled and Intel SpeedStep enabled also.What I want to do is have the voltage drop with the core on idle and so far with windows power options on balanced the core speed drops down to 0.8 on idle but the vcore voltage does not drop.Is there any other power saving setting I need to set to get the voltage to drop with the core when in windows with power saving set to balanced.Package C-State Limit is on auto.I tried C7 and it drops the voltage alright even with high performance mode the core stays at 5.0 and voltage drops here too.How do I get the volts to drop just in power saving mode only..Any info appreciated...


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NIK1*
> 
> I have a 5.0 OC using adaptive voltage on my I7 7700k/Z270 Apex mb and all is stable while stressing.I have C-States on enabled and Intel SpeedStep enabled also.What I want to do is have the voltage drop with the core on idle and so far with windows power options on balanced the core speed drops down to 0.8 on idle but the vcore voltage does not drop.Is there any other power saving setting I need to set to get the voltage to drop with the core when in windows with power saving set to balanced.Package C-State Limit is on auto.I tried C7 and it drops the voltage alright even with high performance mode the core stays at 5.0 and voltage drops here too.How do I get the volts to drop just in power saving mode only..Any info appreciated...


Maybe this will help you in some way... For me the voltage does not drop when max/min cache setting is set to max. If I set min to 8 and max to 48 for example, voltage drops. The core may downclock with or without that change, but the vcore will be stuck at max otherwise.

Weird.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> But can't it harm the CPU if the voltage under load (considering web browsing load) is higher than the idle voltage? What have been told here is to have a lower load voltage than idle voltage is better for the CPU, and that is not happening when I'm web browsing.


Current is what you need to focus on (within reason... running your cpu at 2V with a light load is not healthy







). A light load - like web browsing - draws very little current and has no detrimental effect on the CPU. Idle voltage is meaningless - voltage at TDP and higher is where you need ot be concerned. For example - I can and have idled my 7700K (or a dozen other processors) at stupidly high voltage and it's all happy, can sit like that a very long time, browse, or even run the Image Editing modeule in Realbench.... run a benchmark. or run the x264 module in Realbenchand it crashes/BSODs. Voltyage is just potential to deliver current to do work.


----------



## BoredErica

I'm running adaptive voltage right now. Clocks are low on idle. With Chrome things jump around, from like 0.8 to 1.4v. It's fine.

I've updated the original post with some new data on voltage modes and power saving settings, along with PLL Bandwidth setting and its nasty effects.

The thing I don't really get right now is the difference between adaptive voltage and adaptive voltage with C states. I'm not understanding what benefits c states bring me.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I'm running adaptive voltage right now. Clocks are low on idle. With Chrome things jump around, from like 0.8 to 1.4v. It's fine.
> 
> I've updated the original post with some new data on voltage modes and power saving settings, along with PLL Bandwidth setting and its nasty effects.
> 
> The thing I don't really get right now is the difference between adaptive voltage and adaptive voltage with C states. I'm not understanding what benefits c states bring me.


i really think that c-states are best disabled when running an adaptive voltage overclock. The only way to save any power from the adaptive idle state (~ 0.7V) is to start parking cores. Eben in manual mode, the wake cores receive the full manual override voltage (that why it is called manual override) while the low-power state cores will receive only a few mV, so the "core sparing" is distrubuted, but not uniform at any given time. IMO... at that point, just "suspend to ram" ... sleep the rig.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Current is what you need to focus on (within reason... running your cpu at 2V with a light load is not healthy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). A light load - like web browsing - draws very little current and has no detrimental effect on the CPU. Idle voltage is meaningless - voltage at TDP and higher is where you need ot be concerned. For example - I can and have idled my 7700K (or a dozen other processors) at stupidly high voltage and it's all happy, can sit like that a very long time, browse, or even run the Image Editing modeule in Realbench.... run a benchmark. or run the x264 module in Realbenchand it crashes/BSODs. Voltyage is just potential to deliver current to do work.


But I don't think you understood me, you said earlier and confirmed by others that is better to have a lower full load voltage then the idle voltage (example: 1.344v idle and 1.328v load), so if there is any value over 1.344v during load, it's not healthy for the CPU, and this is what is hapenning with me, web browsing throws my voltage to 1.360v, 1360v is higher than 1.344v, so I'm afraid of harming the CPU because of that, understand?


----------



## ViTosS

And all the LLC settings, voltages and voltage modes I tried, always end up having a little higher vcore during web browsing


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> i really think that c-states are best disabled when running an adaptive voltage overclock. The only way to save any power from the adaptive idle state (~ 0.7V) is to start parking cores. Eben in manual mode, the wake cores receive the full manual override voltage (that why it is called manual override) while the low-power state cores will receive only a few mV, so the "core sparing" is distrubuted, but not uniform at any given time. IMO... at that point, just "suspend to ram" ... sleep the rig.


Adaptive + C states + Balanced power plan seem to = Adaptive + Balanced (freq downclock, cpu downvolt)

Manual + Balanced = Manual + C states + Balanced? (freq downlock, voltage constant) (Minor power saving)

I believe that's what I got...

Then what is actually the benefit of c states?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When you use Adaptive the voltage will vary according to CPU load. Adaptive works off VID commands.
> 
> 
> 
> But that also happens in offset mode, but either of these two options I told you I can use without concern? I've learned that full load voltage has to be lower than idle but what if my web browsing voltage is higher than full load (stressing)?
Click to expand...

Web browsing is a grater load on the CPU then a lot of stress tests. Chrome uses AVX.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Web browsing is a grater load on the CPU then a lot of stress tests. Chrome uses AVX.


I really don't think Chrome's going to be a tougher load than stress tests... especially not any that would be accepted for the chart.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Current is what you need to focus on (within reason... running your cpu at 2V with a light load is not healthy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). A light load - like web browsing - draws very little current and has no detrimental effect on the CPU. Idle voltage is meaningless - voltage at TDP and higher is where you need ot be concerned. For example - I can and have idled my 7700K (or a dozen other processors) at stupidly high voltage and it's all happy, can sit like that a very long time, browse, or even run the Image Editing modeule in Realbench.... run a benchmark. or run the x264 module in Realbenchand it crashes/BSODs. Voltyage is just potential to deliver current to do work.


I guess the relevant question is what actually happens in video from Actually Hardware Overclocking with the LLC graph. So the load ends and the voltage overshoots. Does the severity of that overshoot matter whether it's a Prime load that's done or a web browsing load that's done?

Unrelated note:

So PLL voltage can screw with temp readings. But PLL Bandwidth is something else. When CPU freq goes to 5.3 and above PLL Bandwidth and VTT go up a lot IIRC. Does anything else go up a lot? I tried to decrease VTT in Tweaker's Paradise and it didn't change the value.

I could go back and recheck though. I've spent 4 hours today going back and forth through the UEFI though.


----------



## ViTosS

Maybe this jump from 1.344v to 1.360v while web browsing is just the HWInfo64 error or something, because gaming and stress testing is never above 1.344v, only 1.328v or 1.344v maximum, I don't know, what I know is that is impossible to have a higher idle voltage compared to load, at least what the HWInfo64 reports me if is real.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Web browsing is a grater load on the CPU then a lot of stress tests. Chrome uses AVX.
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't think Chrome's going to be a tougher load than stress tests... especially not any that would be accepted for the chart.
Click to expand...

Chrome is not a long term load, it just makes the voltage go up higher when using short burst using AVX and running Adaptive Vcore.


----------



## davidjo

my current vcore settings are 1.36 adaptive mode. LLC5. 5ghz OC. No cache clock yet or XMP.
under load it drops to 1.344
but idles at 1.36

is this normal?

i assumed that in adaptive mode it would drop lower if it wasnt using any CPU? it would be nice for it to drop low when not using for life span etc


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Chrome is not a long term load, it just makes the voltage go up higher when using short burst using AVX and running Adaptive Vcore.


Not only adaptive, but offset too, I didn't test manual to be sure though...


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> my current vcore settings are 1.36 adaptive mode. LLC5. 5ghz OC. No cache clock yet or XMP.
> under load it drops to 1.344
> but idles at 1.36
> 
> is this normal?
> 
> i assumed that in adaptive mode it would drop lower if it wasnt using any CPU?


You have the exact same LLC settings and voltage I'm using at adaptive mode, LLC 5, 1.360v additional turbo mode voltage and I have drop to 1.344v stress testing.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> my current vcore settings are 1.36 adaptive mode. LLC5. 5ghz OC. No cache clock yet or XMP.
> under load it drops to 1.344
> but idles at 1.36
> 
> is this normal?
> 
> i assumed that in adaptive mode it would drop lower if it wasnt using any CPU? it would be nice for it to drop low when not using for life span etc


Check min/max cache ratio setting in Asus UEFI if you are using an Asus board. That can prevent voltage from decreasing.


----------



## davidjo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Check min/max cache ratio setting in Asus UEFI if you are using an Asus board. That can prevent voltage from decreasing.


these are set at auto atm. ill run max cache clock of 45 once i work out lowest vcore setting possible


----------



## davidjo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> But I don't think you understood me, you said earlier and confirmed by others that is better to have a lower full load voltage then the idle voltage (example: 1.344v idle and 1.328v load), so if there is any value over 1.344v during load, it's not healthy for the CPU, and this is what is hapenning with me, web browsing throws my voltage to 1.360v, 1360v is higher than 1.344v, so I'm afraid of harming the CPU because of that, understand?


missed this. currently in same boat. normal cpu usage or even idle is giving me 1.36 but load is 1.344


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> these are set at auto atm. ill run max cache clock of 45 once i work out lowest vcore setting possible


Hmm, maybe you can try 8 as min and 45 as max real quickly to see if that clears it up. It was the thing that confused me as to why my voltages weren't going down.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> missed this. currently in same boat. normal cpu usage or even idle is giving me 1.36 but load is 1.344


Voltage dropping under load is typical behavior. Low LLC or no LLC, voltage drops under load. Very high LLC, voltage increases under load.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> missed this. currently in same boat. normal cpu usage or even idle is giving me 1.36 but load is 1.344


This is the way it has to be, use lower voltage during load and higher during idle, they said it's healthier to CPU use like this than having a higher load voltage, something related to having 2 different vcores


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> But I don't think you understood me, you said earlier and confirmed by others that is better to have a lower full load voltage then the idle voltage (example: 1.344v idle and 1.328v load), so if there is any value over 1.344v during load, it's not healthy for the CPU, and this is what is hapenning with me, web browsing throws my voltage to 1.360v, 1360v is higher than 1.344v, so I'm afraid of harming the CPU because of that, understand?


I understood what you said.. browsing is a very low load situation and voltage at that power usage (wattage, amperage.. what ever term you best recognize) is low, and again, 1.344 and 1.360 may only be a true difference of 1 or 2 mV since the reading goes in 16mV increments - right?
And.. you are not damaging your cpu at 1.36V (especially if you think 1.344V is not







)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Adaptive + C states + Balanced power plan seem to = Adaptive + Balanced (freq downclock, cpu downvolt)
> Manual + Balanced = Manual + C states + Balanced? (freq downlock, voltage constant) (Minor power saving)
> 
> I believe that's what I got...
> *Then what is actually the benefit of c states?*


only really when using manual voltage. I really think that Adaptive with "min proc state = 0% is the best way to go for idle/standby situations... or suspend-to-ram.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I really don't think Chrome's going to be a tougher load than stress tests... especially not any that would be accepted for the chart.
> I guess the relevant question is what actually happens in video from Actually Hardware Overclocking with the LLC graph. So the load ends and the voltage overshoots. *Does the severity of that overshoot matter whether it's a Prime load that's done or a web browsing load that's done*?
> 
> Unrelated note:
> So PLL voltage can screw with temp readings. But PLL Bandwidth is something else. When CPU freq goes to 5.3 and above PLL Bandwidth and VTT go up a lot IIRC. Does anything else go up a lot? I tried to decrease VTT in Tweaker's Paradise and it didn't change the value.
> 
> I could go back and recheck though. I've spent 4 hours today going back and forth through the UEFI though.


yes - the extent of over (and under) shoot depends on the current draw and the voltage when the load changes - th eintel spec sheet limit of 70mV for a few microsec is base upon stock voltage and the stock max turbo frequency... the 200mV spec is called "virus mode TDP" and reflects the extent (at stock) when using something like p95 w/AVX.. in fact that is specifically what it refers to.









ASUS PLL bandwidth auto rules will jack the PLL BW voltage when the multiplier exceeds 52 (so @ 53). Two things need to be manually adjusted when above 52" PLL BW - set manually to 0 thru 2, and CPu standby voltage - set this to 1.10V or only as high as needed to hold the overclock. It will jump to 1.5V at 5.3 and higher - not damaging in a benchmarking setting, but for 24/7? Let's not find out.









edit: thought I'd add that, at least with a 7740X on x299 (which is basically a 7700K) PLL BW can really help stabilizing high and tight ram (like 4000c16 and tighter).


----------



## BoredErica

> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I understood what you said.. browsing is a very low load situation and voltage at that power usage (wattage, amperage.. what ever term you best recognize).. and again, 1.344 and 1.360 may only be a true difference of 1 or 2 mV since the reading goes in 16mV increments - right?
> And.. you are not damaging your cpu at 1.36V (especially if you think 1.344V is not
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> only really when using manual voltage. I really think that Adaptive with "min proc state = 0% is the best way to go for idle/standby situations... or suspend-to-ram.
> yes - the extent of over (and under) shoot depends on the current draw and the voltage when the load changes - th eintel spec sheet limit of 70mV for a few microsec is base upon stock voltage and the stock max turbo frequency... the 200mV spec is called "virus mode TDP" and reflects the extent (at stock) when using something like p95 w/AVX.. in fact that is specifically what it refers to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS PLL bandwidth auto rules will jack the PLL BW voltage when the multiplier exceeds 52 (so @ 53). Two things need to be manually adjusted when above 52" PLL BW - set manually to 0 thru 2, and CPu standby voltage - set this to 1.10V or only as high as needed to hold the overclock. It will jump to 1.5V at 5.3 and higher - not damaging in a benchmarking setting, but for 24/7? Let's not find out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit: thought I'd add that, at least with a 7740X on x299 (which is basically a 7700K) PLL BW can really help stabilizing high and tight ram (like 4000c16 and tighter).


I think more specifically the ramp up for those voltages with auto rules kick in at at 5.3 on the dot. As in, with bclk adjustments to get 5.299 it's still fine. But any combination of multiplier and bclk that results in 5.3ghz and up means the voltages go up.

How high did you set the PLL Bandwidth for your ram overclocking? I've tried fiddling with vccsa or vccio but that's already a lot to deal with since higher isn't always better.


----------



## davidjo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Hmm, maybe you can try 8 as min and 45 as max real quickly to see if that clears it up. It was the thing that confused me as to why my voltages weren't going down.
> 
> Voltage dropping under load is typical behavior. Low LLC or no LLC, voltage drops under load. Very high LLC, voltage increases under load.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> This is the way it has to be, use lower voltage during load and higher during idle, they said it's healthier to CPU use like this than having a higher load voltage, something related to having 2 different vcores


yep so i get that.

so am safe to assume my 5ghz overclock runs stable at 1.344 then?

if so, how can i drop bios vcore to 1.35 and still ensure that underload it runs 1.344


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I think more specifically the ramp up for those voltages with auto rules kick in at at 5.3 on the dot. As in, with bclk adjustments to get 5.299 it's still fine. But any combination of multiplier and bclk that results in 5.3ghz and up means the voltages go up.
> 
> How high did you set the PLL Bandwidth for your ram overclocking? I've tried fiddling with vccsa or vccio but that's already a lot to deal with since higher isn't always better.


just empirically - testing failed without increasing PLL bandwidth to level 2 ... obviously with the freq < 5.3. (I haven't needed bclk for 24/7 clocks, just been sticking with 100)









back to the c-states thing. I have a 4960X sitting at 1.344V manual + c-states for the past 2 years... still strong. So can;t say I have data on longevity with either method. my 2700K is still at 1.4V adaptive and doing video aquisition and compression all day - for even more years. These chips are pretty tough, unless really abused.


----------



## ViTosS

I'm checking here and with adaptive mode, windows power plan minimum state of 5% CPU and SpeedStep on AUTO my CPU is downclocking and downvolting, so C-States is pretty usuless now with this configuration, if I disable SpeedStep what do I lose? The downclocking or downvolting?


----------



## ViTosS

Is there a way to stress without AVX? I'm Prime 95 28.10 stable 4.900Mhz AVX and 1.360v lowest, but I'm using offset from 50x multiplier, I need to know now if I'm stable at 5.0Ghz, I know I can disable AVX instructions on Prime95, but what about RealBench and x264 custom loop?


----------



## BoredErica

Chess?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I'm checking here and with adaptive mode, windows power plan minimum state of 5% CPU and SpeedStep on AUTO my CPU is downclocking and downvolting, so C-States is pretty usuless now with this configuration, if I disable SpeedStep what do I lose? The downclocking or downvolting?


Is that the one where the uefi description reads 'supports two frequency ranges'?


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Chess?
> 
> Is that the one where the uefi description reads 'supports two frequency ranges'?


Yep, that one.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Yep, that one.


Disable that and your overclock goes out the window... So no choice but to leave it on.


----------



## sdmf74

What is CPU PACKAGE POWER in HWinfo64? and why does it not exceed 4 or 5 watts?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> What is CPU PACKAGE POWER in HWinfo64? and why does it not exceed 4 or 5 watts?


Is SVID turned off in uefi?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Is there a way to stress without AVX? I'm Prime 95 28.10 stable 4.900Mhz AVX and 1.360v lowest, but I'm using offset from 50x multiplier, I need to know now if I'm stable at 5.0Ghz, I know I can disable AVX instructions on Prime95, but what about RealBench and x264 custom loop?


can't disable AVX at the hardware level - you can only use the offset (or not). Can;t disable AVX in RB or x264/x265


----------



## davidjo

Got my i5 7600k running nicely on 5ghz @ 1.5 adaptive mode. According to hwinfo64 it runs at 1.328 under load and has a max of 1.344.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> Got my i5 7600k *running nicely on 5ghz @ 1.5 adaptive mode.* According to hwinfo64 it runs at 1.328 under load and has a max of 1.344.


huh?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Is there a way to stress without AVX? I'm Prime 95 28.10 stable 4.900Mhz AVX and 1.360v lowest, but I'm using offset from 50x multiplier, I need to know now if I'm stable at 5.0Ghz, I know I can disable AVX instructions on Prime95, but what about RealBench and x264 custom loop?


while RealBench uses AVX it is nowhere near as hard on you're CPU as Prime with AVX

I would just not use an AVX offset when testing with RealBench


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> while RealBench uses AVX it is nowhere near as hard on you're CPU as Prime with AVX
> 
> I would just not use an AVX offset when testing with RealBench


I'm asking that because if I set no offset to AVX it will run in 5.0Ghz and is unstable with 1.376v and I don't want to go further in vcore more than this, the best spot I found is 50x for non-AVX and 49x for AVX.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I'm asking that because if I set no offset to AVX it will run in 5.0Ghz and is unstable with 1.376v and I don't want to go further in vcore more than this, the best spot I found is 50x for non-AVX and 49x for AVX.


that's a fine overclock! If you are worried about testing the non-AVX clock, you can use p95 with AVX/FMA3 disabled (instructions are in the undoc.txt file in the p95 folder).


----------



## davidjo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> huh?


Lol sorry I meant 5ghz at 1.35 adaptive vcore with an LLC of 5

I have since started using xmp mode and max cache of 45.


----------



## ViTosS

The only LLC that works great for me downvolting from 1.376v to 1.360v is LLC 5, if I use LLC 4 or 3, even if I raise the vcore or lower it, I end up always having a big drop of voltage, and sometimes the idle voltage over than what I want, like LLC 3 I can have only 1.392v dropping to 1.344v or 1.376v dropping to 1.328v, and with LLC 4 my idle voltage sometimes web browsing jumps from 1.376v to 1.392v, with LLC 5 is the only one that doesn't jump in idle and step just 16mV lower in full load. I hope LLC 5 is ok to use for 24/7.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> The only LLC that works great for me downvolting from 1.376v to 1.360v is LLC 5, if I use LLC 4 or 3, even if I raise the vcore or lower it, I end up always having a big drop of voltage, and sometimes the idle voltage over than what I want, like LLC 3 I can have only 1.392v dropping to 1.344v or 1.376v dropping to 1.328v, and with LLC 4 my idle voltage sometimes web browsing jumps from 1.376v to 1.392v, with LLC 5 is the only one that doesn't jump in idle and step just 16mV lower in full load. I hope LLC 5 is ok to use for 24/7.


yes - llc 5 is perfect for the long term.


----------



## davidjo

Does setting lower cache improve performance at all? Atm I have max at 45. Will setting lower to like 8, have any benefit


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> Does setting lower cache improve performance at all? Atm I have max at 45. Will setting lower to like 8, have any benefit


nope. just leave it on auto (or equial to the max setting). it needs to adapt to the ram frequency forcing it lower than 1/2 dram freq can cause problems. so for exampl, with 2400 ram, min should be 12. with 4000 ram, min should be 2000


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nope. just leave it on auto (or equial to the max setting). it needs to adapt to the ram frequency forcing it lower than 1/2 dram freq can cause problems. so for exampl, with 2400 ram, min should be 12. with 4000 ram, min should be 2000


I have mine at AUTO for min and max is 45, is that ok?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I have mine at AUTO for min and max is 45, is that ok?


yes


----------



## ViTosS

Guys, I've been trying some things here, I noticed when I set manual mode 1.408v and LLC 5, my idle voltage is 1.408v and full load is 1.392v, that is ok, but if I move to adaptive and set the offset to AUTO and put additional turbo mode voltage to 1.408v (the same in manual mode), when I'm in Windows I idle again at 1.408v but this time when I stress test, the voltage jumps to 1.42v+ instead of going back to 1.392v, anyone know why is that? I tested different LLC levels and always end up with higher voltage during stress, I want to have a lower full load voltage like in manual mode, that seems impossible!


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Is SVID turned off in uefi?


*Yes, my understanding is that cpu SVID support should be disabled when using a manual overclock on z270 is that correct?*

(After reading your post I temporarily set it to auto and the cpu package power reads a max of 88 watts, read below

Here is what the overclocking guide has to say about cpu svid support:

"CPU SVID Support: Can be left on Auto for all normal overclocking. SVID allows the processor to communicate with the CPU Core Voltage power delivery circuit in order to change voltage
on-the-fly for power saving purposes and allows power levels to be read by monitoring software. For Adaptive and Offset Mode for CPU Core/Cache Voltage, this setting must
be set to Auto or Enabled. For all normal overclocking a setting of Auto can be used without requiring adjustment."

This guide only recommends & explains how to overclock on adaptive so im assuming that is why it says to leave on auto or enabled for all normal overclocking?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> *Yes, my understanding is that cpu SVID support should be disabled when using a manual overclock on z270 is that correct?*
> 
> (After reading your post I temporarily set it to auto and the cpu package power reads a max of 88 watts, read below
> 
> Here is what the overclocking guide has to say about cpu svid support:
> 
> "CPU SVID Support: Can be left on Auto for all normal overclocking. SVID allows the processor to communicate with the CPU Core Voltage power delivery circuit in order to change voltage
> on-the-fly for power saving purposes and allows power levels to be read by monitoring software. For Adaptive and Offset Mode for CPU Core/Cache Voltage, this setting must
> be set to Auto or Enabled. For all normal overclocking a setting of Auto can be used without requiring adjustment."
> 
> This guide only recommends & explains how to overclock on adaptive so im assuming that is why it says to leave on auto or enabled for all normal overclocking?


adaptive - CPUSVID AUTO or Enabled
Manual - CPUSViD AUTO or disabled.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> adaptive - CPUSVID AUTO or Enabled
> Manual - CPUSViD AUTO or disabled.


Auto is enabled so how can that be? You are saying that with manual its ok to use enabled or disabled?
Unless im missing something


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Auto is enabled so how can that be? You are saying that with manual its ok to use enabled or disabled?
> Unless im missing something


It's fine. The recommendation is based off of Asus UEFI description. The only thing is SVID must be on for adaptive mode, and on for power reading in HWinfo.


----------



## sdmf74

Thats the thing, the bios says to disable it when overclocking and the guide says to enable it for adaptive but says nothing about manual.

Im not concerned about software not communicating properly cause the only thing that doesnt report correctly is the cpu package power in hwinfo64.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Thats the thing, the bios says to disable it when overclocking and the guide says to enable it for adaptive but says nothing about manual.
> 
> Im not concerned about software not communicating properly cause the only thing that doesnt report correctly is the cpu package power in hwinfo64.


What the UEFI says and what Raja says are slightly different.

You enable it when overclocking with adaptive voltage because without it you won't even get the option to use adaptive voltage in the first place. You disable SVID when not using adaptive because there's no need for it. If you're not using adaptive then I'm implying you are probably using manual. So with manual you can turn it off.

But in terms of actually negative impacts on overclocking with it on when not needed, I have not encountered anything.


----------



## sdmf74

OK thanks for your insight









One last thing, I finally got around to doing an adaptive oc for the first time. That way I can have a profile saved for each of my types of overclocks and I have a question about the voltage....
With my manual oc I was running 50x LLC 5 @ 1.365v and and it never exceeded 1.360v during usage

I just ran my first quick benchmark test on adaptive oc @ 50x LLC 5 @ 1.350v and my voltage temporarily jumped to 1.376v during realbench, Is that normal?
I set IA AC & IA DC load line to .01 in bios
Are there any other voltage related settings in bios needing adjustment for an adaptive oc?

Here is a ss of my current/min/max voltage during that test...



never mind the minimum voltage as I havent enabled c~states yet

edit: My guess is the best bet would be to lower the LLC to 4 to bring down the max voltage under load???


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Auto is enabled so how can that be? You are saying that with manual its ok to use enabled or disabled?
> Unless im missing something


the auto rules are linked to the method chosen in the bios vcore setting field. On ASUS boards, Auto "knows" whether you selected manual or dynamic/offset.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> OK thanks for your insight
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One last thing, I finally got around to doing an adaptive oc for the first time. That way I can have a profile saved for each of my types of overclocks and I have a question about the voltage....
> With my manual oc I was running 50x LLC 5 @ 1.365v and and it never exceeded 1.360v during usage
> 
> I just ran my first quick benchmark test on adaptive oc @ 50x LLC 5 @ 1.350v and my voltage temporarily jumped to 1.376v during realbench, Is that normal?
> I set IA AC & IA DC load line to .01 in bios
> Are there any other voltage related settings in bios needing adjustment for an adaptive oc?
> 
> Here is a ss of my current/min/max voltage during that test...
> 
> 
> 
> never mind the minimum voltage as I havent enabled c~states yet
> 
> edit: My guess is the best bet would be to lower the LLC to 4 to bring down the max voltage under load???


Realbench runs AVX instructions. Increase your AVX offset.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Realbench runs AVX instructions. Increase your AVX offset.


Im not using an AVX offset, Ive already found my stable manual oc so I wont be stress testing heavily just trying to dial in a stable adaptive oc.

By reducing the LLC to 4 my max voltage doesnt exceed 1.360v but I had to bump the core v a notch to 1.355v (which is actually still lower than my manual voltage setting) so far so good.

Im just wondering whats the difference between setting a negative offset with an adaptive overclock and lowering LLC? It seems they pretty much have the same effect, They both affect the entire voltage stack.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Im not using an AVX offset, Ive already found my stable manual oc so I wont be stress testing heavily just trying to dial in a stable adaptive oc.
> 
> By reducing the LLC to 4 my max voltage doesnt exceed 1.360v but I had to bump the core v a notch to 1.355v (which is actually still lower than my manual voltage setting) so far so good.
> 
> Im just wondering whats the difference between setting a negative offset with an adaptive overclock and lowering LLC? It seems they pretty much have the same effect, They both affect the entire voltage stack.


Yeah. I should have been more detailed in my response.
Just answering your question as to whether it was normal to see that Voltage increase in Realbench. That answer is "YES, probably because of the AVX. Set an AVX offset to be sure."

Offset vs. LLC:







Either will drop your max VCore. However, while a negative offset should lower your Voltage when not under load, if lowering your LLC drops your Voltage when not under load, it's set too high.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Realbench runs AVX instructions. Increase your AVX offset.
> 
> 
> 
> Im not using an AVX offset, Ive already found my stable manual oc so I wont be stress testing heavily just trying to dial in a stable adaptive oc.
> 
> By reducing the LLC to 4 my max voltage doesnt exceed 1.360v but I had to bump the core v a notch to 1.355v (which is actually still lower than my manual voltage setting) so far so good.
> 
> Im just wondering whats the difference between setting a negative offset with an adaptive overclock and lowering LLC? It seems they pretty much have the same effect, They both affect the entire voltage stack.
Click to expand...

Negative offset will effect the Voltage scaling of non turbo multipliers if your using speed step. That can cause idle and boot failures.


----------



## ViperSB1

Anyone use one of these for their delid yet? I just built a Kaby 7700k system and will be doing my first delid because I am not happy with my temps. If this is not relevant to this thread then let me know but I thought it was as this product may help with delid's and overclocking. I have been running a X58 EVGA Classy board with a i7 990x hexa-core overclocked to 4.2ghz and was getting 10c to 12c idle temps. With my Kaby at a modest 4.8 overclock I am getting idle temps of 29c. My goal is to hit 5.2 with idle temps under 20c. Am i dreaming? lol

http://www.performance-pcs.com/bitspower-cpu-integrated-heat-spreader-silver-shining.html


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViperSB1*
> 
> Anyone use one of these for their delid yet? I just built a Kaby 7700k system and will be doing my first delid because I am not happy with my temps. If this is not relevant to this thread then let me know but I thought it was as this product may help with delid's and overclocking. I have been running a X58 EVGA Classy board with a i7 990x hexa-core overclocked to 4.2ghz and was getting 10c to 12c idle temps. With my Kaby at a modest 4.8 overclock I am getting idle temps of 29c. My goal is to hit 5.2 with idle temps under 20c. Am i dreaming? lol
> 
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/bitspower-cpu-integrated-heat-spreader-silver-shining.html


a few guys have.. and posted pics. lol - tto bad you then cover up the custom lid with a block.


----------



## ViTosS

I can't find a voltage setting and LLC to use that will drop my voltage under load while using adaptive *IF* I set 50x without AVX offset, or 49x or 48x without offset too, I can only have the full load voltage to drop compared to idle when I'm using 50x and 49x AVX (1 negative offset), also I can't understand why when I use the same voltage for the OC, like 1.37v for 50x/49x have different value than 49x/49x using *THE SAME VOLTAGE VALUE*. The solution I found was using 50x and 49x, but in-game the frequency varies according to AVX instructions being used or not, it fluctuates 5000Mhz to 4900Mhz all the time, do I have performance loss or fluctuations in GPU usage because of this 100Mhz variation? Should be ideal to use 50x/50x or 49x/49x knowing I can't have lower full load voltage using this way?

Thanks for all the help so far.

Also, do I need to take so serious the recommendation of having lower load voltage than idle? Because I would be much happier and a lot easier to find the setting to OC like the voltage a little bit higher than idle when in load, A LOT easier


----------



## TK421

Does RSR actually do anything if disable/enable, if the system is only used for light day to day overclock 4.5-4.7ghz?


----------



## sdmf74

I am unfamiliar with the new c states with kaby lake ie package c state limit. Its unclear what exactly the "other" & cpu default" settings do however The cpu default seems to be downclocking & the "other" setting does not


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sdmf74*
> 
> I am unfamiliar with the new c states with kaby lake ie package c state limit. Its unclear what exactly the "other" & cpu default" settings do however The cpu default seems to be downclocking & the "other" setting does not


C-states is for power savings it shuts down the unused cores when idle with no load.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Username: pyounpy-2
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 200
Core Multiplier: 27
Core Frequency: 5400
Cache Frequency: 4800
Vcore in UEFI: adaptic mode:1.350+0.03=1.380
Vcore: 1.440
FCLK: Reminder: 1600
Cooling Solution: Delidded, Custum water cooling (diect exposing air conditioner to the radiators out side of the PC)
Stability Test: 2 hours Realbench ver. 2.54
Video cards: Titan XP SLI
Batch Number: Malaysia L642G086
Ram Speed: (4266-15-17-17-35-1T)
VCCIO: 1.350(UEFI)
VCCIO: 1.392(actua max)
VCCSA:1.350(UEFI)
VCCSA: 1.408(actual max)
Ram Voltage: 1.552
Motherboard: Asus maximus IX Apex (UEFI:1010)
LLC Setting: level 6
Misc Comments: I tried to operation at 5.4GHz using Bclk of 200MHz. Because of using high Blck frequency, I could use the higher memory speed of 4266MHz. I used C0/C1 state only.
When very high Bclk frequency, I feel that the response of PC is very fast. for example, full speed start up and high cpu frequency at C-state. Additionally, I can use lower voltage for Vcore than
it of Blck frequency of 100MHz.

By the way, when high power vidio cards for example titan XP SLI, I thnk Realbench becomes very heavy. This is because both CPU and VGA are used 100%. For the higher CPU frequency more
than 5.3 GHz, the higher LLC level better (but less than level 6 for water cooling) to make a lower Vcore.

Please Update my result.










*5 GHz Overclock Club*


----------



## NIK1

Anyone know whats the highest safe voltage to use for a 24/7 OC on a I7/7700k under water.


----------



## sdmf74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> C-states is for power savings it shuts down the unused cores when idle with no load.


I know what c -states are lol, I was saying that I wasnt familiar with the difference with the newest deeper staes from z97. Primarily package c states had new options. I got it figured out though.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NIK1*
> 
> Anyone know whats the highest safe voltage to use for a 24/7 OC on a I7/7700k under water.


1.4 ish if your temps are good


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NIK1*
> 
> Anyone know whats the highest safe voltage to use for a 24/7 OC on a I7/7700k under water.


Opinions will differ. As much as you can control the temperature. Most custom loops still can't do 1.5v. IMO, best to aim for 5.1ghz and if you can't do that with 1.425, 5.2 won't be doable with 1.5. maybe 5.15. The chip is so small that it can't transfer heat fast enough and this creates a bottleneck regardless how big the loop is.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NIK1*
> 
> Anyone know whats the highest safe voltage to use for a 24/7 OC on a I7/7700k under water.


you get a definitive: depends and nobody really *knows* a save voltage

one user in this thread is burning up 7700k's
but he seems to hammer them on a daily basis

for gaming; anything less than 1.4v should be fine

Asus is recommending not more than 1.35v when testing stability with Prime with AVX enabled

maybe that's a magical line then

that being said

through testing I know my magical golden freqency and voltage

if I want to go faster I have to raise voltage insanely high (for a comparatavly small freqency bump)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Opinions will differ. As much as you can control the temperature. Most custom loops still can't do 1.5v. IMO, best to aim for 5.1ghz and if you can't do that with 1.425, 5.2 won't be doable with 1.5. maybe 5.15. The chip is so small that it can't transfer heat fast enough and this creates a bottleneck regardless how big the loop is.


with 1.5v it's not really about heat any more

1.5v
that's ballsy

hell anything above 1.4v is living on the edge already


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NIK1*
> 
> Anyone know whats the highest safe voltage to use for a 24/7 OC on a I7/7700k under water.


I thnik the highest safe voltage depend on the CPU temp. I used [email protected] @1.6V in a few days so far. its peak temp. was 85-90 degrees C. At that time, cpu temp. value indication was strange finally (half broken?).
But, it was recovered by bios clear. That cpu performance didn't chang. Empirically, 1.52V and less than 80 C is safe, even if the voltage is continuously applying to CPU.
So far I never feel clear cpu performance down. However, how long will you use your cpu? if you want to use it 5 years more, I think Iess than voltage of 1.5V and less than temp. of 80 C are better.

Anyone break a cpu only by the high voltage at low temp<80C?


----------



## NIK1

Thanks for the info everyone..By the way anyone ever use y-cruncher cpu intensive stress tests to see if core clock is stable..


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> you get a definitive: depends and nobody really *knows* a save voltage
> one user in this thread is burning up 7700k's
> but he seems to hammer them on a daily basis
> for gaming; anything less than 1.4v should be fine
> Asus is recommending not more than 1.35v when testing stability with Prime with AVX enabled
> maybe that's a magical line then
> that being said
> through testing I know my magical golden freqency and voltage
> *if I want to go faster I have to raise voltage insanely high* (for a comparatavly small freqency bump)
> with 1.5v it's not really about heat any more
> 1.5v
> that's ballsy
> hell anything above 1.4v is living on the edge already


This is actually how you identify the chip's sweetspot or, the point at which the Hz/mV curve/line get very non-linear and you start to see each 100MHz cost more than 10-12mV for each core (so 40-50mV for 100MHz on a 7700K, HT or not). The other critical factor is the thermal behavior.. if you run heavy AVX loads all day, then 1.5X the TDP and under 80C is smart. For most uses, Under 2x TDP with temps under 80C is fine too. Temps above 80C with high current (watts or waaay over the TDP) just age the cpu.. May not kill it, but the Hz/mV ratio starts to grow slowly. If you upgrade every year or two, it's not an issue.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NIK1*
> 
> Thanks for the info everyone..By the way anyone ever use y-cruncher cpu intensive stress tests to see if core clock is stable..


yes. it's a hot one!


----------



## davidjo

Currently running stable at 5ghz with a 1.35 vcore in adaptive mode, which drops 1.328 under load and 1.344 normally. Also, have xmp enabled and a max cache clock of 45.

Temps stay under 60 while playing csgo, a max of 75 on rog realbench 4 hour test and 69 during realbench benchmark. Current cooling is a corsair h115i and I have not deliddded.

Will I see much improvement going to 5.1 or 5.2. Id say I have a little room...


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> This is actually how you identify the chip's sweetspot or, the point at which the Hz/mV curve/line get very non-linear and you start to see each 100MHz cost more than 10-12mV for each core


which was the point I was trying to make








maybe I could've been a bit more explanatory, but RL









getting to the sweetspot of the chip, you don't need ohh so much voltage, but getting past it is barely worth the voltage you need to pour down its throat really

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> Currently running stable at 5ghz with a 1.35 vcore in adaptive mode, which drops 1.328 under load and 1.344 normally. Also, have xmp enabled and a max cache clock of 45.
> 
> Temps stay under 60 while playing csgo, a max of 75 on rog realbench 4 hour test and 69 during realbench benchmark. Current cooling is a corsair h115i and I have not deliddded.
> 
> Will I see much improvement going to 5.1 or 5.2. Id say I have a little room...


just try it out really
if you notice you need a huge bump in voltage to get it stable above 5Ghz then your past the sweetspot

ohh and word to the wise
RealBench is already not the hardest test on the block (you can leave it unattended overnight with no worries really)
I had settings I thought were stable but continuously crashed (well only halted because of a missmatch in the hash, wasn't a hard crash) *after* 4 hours of RealBench
so doing at least one 8 hour run overnight when you think you settled on your settings would be good

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> I thnik the highest safe voltage depend on the CPU temp. I used [email protected] *@1.6V in a few days* so far.


your one brave SOB

well at least for a 24 hour overclock
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> At that time, cpu temp. value indication was strange finally (half broken?).


if its on an Asus board, then going past 5.3 Ghz increases some secondary voltage settings to the insane if left on Auto and even idle temps shoot up by around 40 degrees
its a bug for quite a while now
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> Sort of a bug with Asus boards. When moving past 5.25GHz auto values for PLL Termination, PCH Core, and CPU Standby voltages are set to 1.6V which is way too high. Set all of these manually to 1V.


once I corrected these values everything was fine again
but I decided going from 5.2Ghz with 1.375v to 5.3 Ghz with 1.45v isn't worth it, and pushing past that would be too high
I'm sure there is a reason vcore turns purple colored from 1.5v onwoards in the UEFI

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> Empirically, *1.52V and less than 80 C is safe*, even if the voltage is continuously applying to CPU.
> So far I never feel clear cpu performance down. However, how long will you use your cpu? if you want to use it 5 years more, I think Iess than voltage of 1.5V and less than temp. of 80 C are better.


I would never recommend going that high to anyone who isn't an overclocking expert and really knows what he is doing
someone who isn't coming into this thread and asks about a safe voltage
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> Anyone break a cpu only by the high voltage at low temp<80C?


I think nowhere near that high voltage

in this thread quite some pages ago
however not for gaming, me thinks

like there







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Lol after my cpu degraded its will pass RB 15 mins at stock xpm settings ( 4600 / 3400 on ram /vcore 1.32v , all auto)
> It will show a blue screen if i change the vcore any higher than 1.32 v in like 2 mins at the same cpu ratio, feels like 4600 fails at higher voltage then 1.32...
> Cpu became unpredictable


I think MaKeN is on his third 7700k now


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> Currently running stable at 5ghz with a 1.35 vcore in adaptive mode, which drops 1.328 under load and 1.344 normally. Also, have xmp enabled and a max cache clock of 45.
> 
> Temps stay under 60 while playing csgo, a max of 75 on rog realbench 4 hour test and 69 during realbench benchmark. Current cooling is a corsair h115i and I have not deliddded.
> 
> Will I see much improvement going to 5.1 or 5.2. Id say I have a little room...


Which LLC level are you using? And you monitored if the vcore doesn't go over 1.344v? My bet is that it goes to 1.360v while Youtube/web browsing


----------



## MrHarris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Gonna be honest with ya, i dont care what that guy says.
> 
> I want you to explain why *you* think LLC is necessary when using a modern overclock with adaptive volts and P state or multiplier overclocking.
> 
> I actually made a thread on this a while back, and got no satisfactory responses.
> 
> Literally all it does is change where i need to put my offset to so my volts are where i want it under load. Its like two ways of getting to the same net result, and has a negative factor which is that it increases my idle cpu volts as well.


I could not agree more. Ive been wondering about this for 15 years now.


----------



## peter2k

I would say it's a minor detail

the important value is the one under load

I'd say were just trying not to overshoot in voltage under other circumstances
which in the end is probably not really necessary

if it's idle and on manual override
it's still idle and even a high voltage wouldn't matter

if it's using the more modern ways to apply voltage and clocks down when idle
it will also reduce voltage when idle

ehh
if anything using manual and a fitting LLC resulted in me using a tad less vcore under load than with adaptive
but then vcore isn't as precisely reported

I'd say it's a minor thing not worth a discussion in a thread like this for a dozen pages every 3 months or so

but I can understand why in a way
vcore is an important value
and it gets obviously influenced by LLC


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I would never recommend going that high to anyone who isn't an overclocking expert and really knows what he is doing
> someone who isn't coming into this thread and asks about a safe voltage


Thanks, for your recommends,

Have you read the Intel data sheet of the kaby lake? In Intel's data sheet, maxmum voltage is shown. The value is 1.52V.
Additionally, every 7700K have SVID data until 1.52V. So, I think the safe voltage is 1.52V, when the core tem. is kept at under 80C.
For commercially available water cooling system, getting the such low tem. is difficult. But question was "what is safe voltage?".
So I asked 1.52V for even 24/7 using.
But due to cooling difficulty, In my actual case, maximum votage for hard 24/7 use has been [email protected] and
for 24/7 light use has been 1.52V @5.52Ghz Both are water cooling.
The former one is very stable whenever. And the latter one must be hunging up when the core tem. reaches at 80-90 C,
however such(hung up) case meets rarely. There is no problem for the conventional short duration bench marks, e.g. 3d-mark.

I will show here a part of data sheets of intel.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I would never recommend going that high to anyone who isn't an overclocking expert and really knows what he is doing
> someone who isn't coming into this thread and asks about a safe voltage
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, for your recommends,
> 
> Have you read the Intel data sheet of the kaby lake? In Intel's data sheet, maxmum voltage is shown. The value is 1.52V.
> Additionally, every 7700K have SVID data until 1.52V. So, I think the safe voltage is 1.52V, when the core tem. is kept at under 80C.
> For commercially available water cooling system, getting the such low tem. is difficult. But question was "what is safe voltage?".
> So I asked 1.52V for even 24/7 using.
> But due to cooling difficulty, In my actual case, maximum votage for hard 24/7 use has been [email protected] and
> for 24/7 light use has been 1.52V @5.52Ghz Both are water cooling.
> The former one is very stable whenever. And the latter one must be hunging up when the core tem. reaches at 80-90 C,
> however such(hung up) case meets rarely. There is no problem for the conventional short duration bench marks, e.g. 3d-mark.
> 
> I will show here a part of data sheets of intel.
Click to expand...

Also you have to look at the maximum 100 Amps + 1.52v = 152 watts.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> Thanks, for your recommends,
> 
> Have you read the Intel data sheet of the kaby lake? In Intel's data sheet, maxmum voltage is shown. The value is 1.52V.
> Additionally, every 7700K have SVID data until 1.52V. So, I think the safe voltage is 1.52V, when the core tem. is kept at under 80C.
> For commercially available water cooling system, getting the such low tem. is difficult. But question was "what is safe voltage?".
> So I asked 1.52V for even 24/7 using.
> But due to cooling difficulty, In my actual case, maximum votage for hard 24/7 use has been [email protected] and
> for 24/7 light use has been 1.52V @5.52Ghz Both are water cooling.
> The former one is very stable whenever. And the latter one must be hunging up when the core tem. reaches at 80-90 C,
> however such(hung up) case meets rarely. There is no problem for the conventional short duration bench marks, e.g. 3d-mark.
> 
> I will show here a part of data sheets of intel.


Various people have looked at that and decided the 1.52v figure is out of context and not useful for our purposes.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrHarris*
> 
> I could not agree more. Ive been wondering about this for 15 years now.


This has already been addressed...? I even drew a picture in the OP.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> When very high Bclk frequency, I feel that the response of PC is very fast. for example, full speed start up and high cpu frequency at C-state. Additionally, I can use lower voltage for Vcore than
> it of Blck frequency of 100MHz.
> Can people even perceive any sluggishness with Speed Shift?
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> Anyone break a cpu only by the high voltage at low temp<80C?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know how people would get <80C at 1.6v under load, and sane people would lower the voltage once they detect degradation.
> 
> Speaking of which, I've had all 3 of the CPUs I've made threads for degrade to some extent. Call it degradation or 'break in', but the result is an overclock that was stable no longer is stable. It's always been on air, and now I'm on water... but shaving 10C is not going to make any significant difference.
> 
> Yet other people are saying they've never had such a problem. It's really confusing.
Click to expand...


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Also you have to look at the maximum 100 Amps + 1.52v = 152 watts.


Thank you, I have seen 130W over by HWinFo64 only (AVX offset=0).
I shuld had considered and explained on the dividing voltage, temperature, and so on.

I sometimes wonder which is giving longer life time of CPU, 24/7 using at near the OC limit(case1) or at much lower form the limit(case2).
:except for extremely cooling e.g. LN2 (at that time different problem appeared :heat-shock and wetness).
in the case1, In all time voltage, temperature and OS must be controlled strictly for the higher clock operation. Therefore, damage of CPU might be small (I think).
In the case2, If the some conditions are not fit CPU (namely bad), the cpu can acts as normally due to lower operation frequency.

Additionally, when the deterioration of cpu, mother, and so on appears, in the case1, it will be found soon.
Recently,I think there is a credibility in the case1 due to automatical function of cpu and mother.

One way to use keeping far from cpu breaking that I thnk, set the temperature limit at 80-90C.
The system decreases the cpu frequency and voltage atomattically when core temp close to the set temp..
And in that case, the every softweare and OS never stop, I had tested it.


----------



## BoredErica

Somebody pay me a decent salary and supply me with endless supply of CPUs, I'll give you all the data you want.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

[/quote]
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> 1.Various people have looked at that and decided the 1.52v figure is out of context and not useful for our purposes.
> 2.Can people even perceive any sluggishness with Speed Shift?
> 3.I don't know how people would get <80C at 1.6v under load, and sane people would lower the voltage once they detect degradation.


1. I'm sorry.
2. Yes, because OS boot up at 100MHzX42=4.2GHz usually, In the case using 200MHz, that is 200MHzX27=5.4GHz. Additionally, UEFI is operationg at 1600MHz, So the posting speed
becomes faster. Also, at the start up of applications, if the cpu was C state, the frequency is 1600MHz. I think many one can feels it fast.
3. In my water cooling system has large researvor moer than 10 littles for CPU and 30 littles for GPU. It temperature close to 0 degrees C or less in the winter season even if the PC is on and at light use.
until the water temperature increasing to 10-15 dgrees C(about 10-20min), CPU temp could be kept less than 80C for 1.6V. This duration is enought long for the bench mark test.
But it dose not fit for your purpose. Sorry. now I clearly understand for your purpose.


----------



## davidjo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Which LLC level are you using? And you monitored if the vcore doesn't go over 1.344v? My bet is that it goes to 1.360v while Youtube/web browsing


LLC 5. Nah it does not. 1.344 max.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> LLC 5. Nah it does not. 1.344 max.


And not using AVX offset? Wow, I never was able to mantain only lower values than idle voltage value, tried every LLC setting and voltage you can think in Adaptive Mode and always end up having a little jump in vcore when browsing in Youtube where in stress tests doesn't happen, the only way to fix this was to set AVX 1 offset, so right now I'm using 5.0Ghz, Adapative Mode at 1.370v additional turbo mode voltage, LLC 5 and AVX 1 offset, this way I have idle voltage of 1.376v and loading (gaming, stress testins, web browsing and everything) of 1.360v. I really wish I could use 50x for CPU and 50x for AVX multiplier without having that voltage jump...


----------



## ViTosS

This is what happens, exactly like you set yours, can you confirm in this BIOS screenshot is the same you set, please?



So this is what happens, idle voltage of 1.360v, stress testing of 1.376v, web browsing at 1.392v and gaming 1.344v with drops to 1.328v, I have so many vcore values that I couldn't print, but is basically this:



No one was able to help me out with this


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> This is what happens, exactly like you set yours, can you confirm in this BIOS screenshot is the same you set, please?
> 
> 
> 
> So this is what happens, idle voltage of 1.360v, stress testing of 1.376v, web browsing at 1.392v and gaming 1.344v with drops to 1.328v, I have so many vcore values that I couldn't print, but is basically this:
> 
> 
> 
> No one was able to help me out with this


When you use Adaptive the Vcore scales to CPU load using Intel VID (voltage identification digital). Also I find the web browsers uses the most voltage for stability.

If you run the PC stock like all the newer Intel OEM PCs in the world they all use VID to control Vcore just like what your seeing.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Also you have to look at the maximum 100 Amps + 1.52v = 152 watts.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, I have seen 130W over by HWinFo64 only (AVX offset=0).
> I shuld had considered and explained on the dividing voltage, temperature, and so on.
> 
> I sometimes wonder which is giving longer life time of CPU, 24/7 using at near the OC limit(case1) or at much lower form the limit(case2).
> :except for extremely cooling e.g. LN2 (at that time different problem appeared :heat-shock and wetness).
> in the case1, In all time voltage, temperature and OS must be controlled strictly for the higher clock operation. Therefore, damage of CPU might be small (I think).
> In the case2, If the some conditions are not fit CPU (namely bad), the cpu can acts as normally due to lower operation frequency.
> 
> Additionally, when the deterioration of cpu, mother, and so on appears, in the case1, it will be found soon.
> Recently,I think there is a credibility in the case1 due to automatical function of cpu and mother.
> 
> One way to use keeping far from cpu breaking that I thnk, set the temperature limit at 80-90C.
> The system decreases the cpu frequency and voltage atomattically when core temp close to the set temp..
> And in that case, the every softweare and OS never stop, I had tested it.
Click to expand...

The Intel kaby lake will throttle automatically at 100c to protect the processor.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When you use Adaptive the Vcore scales to CPU load using Intel VID (voltage identification digital). Also I find the web browsers uses the most voltage for stability.
> 
> If you run the PC stock like all the newer Intel OEM PCs in the world they all use VID to control Vcore just like what your seeing.


I see, but why using the same settings he is using my vcore fluctuates different than him? I mean, maybe his motherboard is different and the values alter there, but I don't know, I can't have load voltage lower than idle voltage all the time, tried many LLC levels and vcore settings, also OFFSET, Adaptive mode and Manual, if I set the same CPU frequency as AVX frequency, I can't have what I would want and what is recommended, which is lower full load voltage than idle voltage, example, like 1.360v idle and 1.344v~1.328v load.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I see, but why using the same settings he is using my vcore fluctuates different than him? I mean, maybe his motherboard is different and the values alter there, but I don't know, I can't have load voltage lower than idle voltage all the time, tried many LLC levels and vcore settings, also OFFSET, Adaptive mode and Manual, if I set the same CPU frequency as AVX frequency, I can't have what I would want and what is recommended, which is lower full load voltage than idle voltage, example, like 1.360v idle and 1.344v~1.328v load.


Something differs. Silicon of the chip itself, power supply, or most likely temperature. For example, a stable 5ghz chip at 1.3v @ 50C might need 1.4v @ 70C because of a phenomenon known as transistor leakage. I think your obsessing over trivial matters to be frank.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Something differs. Silicon of the chip itself, power supply, or most likely temperature. For example, a stable 5ghz chip at 1.3v @ 50C might need 1.4v @ 70C because of a phenomenon known as transistor leakage. I think your obsessing over trivial matters to be frank.


I see, I was fine having my OC idle 1.328v and jumping to 1.344v load, but I saw 3 experienced people recommending here to have like 1.344v idle and 1.328v load but I tried like 3 days many and many settings and I even downloaded Asus Ai Suite 3 to stop rebooting PC so many times to go to BIOS to try another setting everytime and it was a pain in the @ss to reach what they said, only exit I found was to lower my AVX frequency, setting it to 1 offset, because I noticed the voltage also reacts different when I raise or lower the AVX offset, even using the same LLC and fixed voltage set, the vcore changes when I change AVX offset.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When you use Adaptive the Vcore scales to CPU load using Intel VID (voltage identification digital). Also I find the web browsers uses the most voltage for stability.
> 
> If you run the PC stock like all the newer Intel OEM PCs in the world they all use VID to control Vcore just like what your seeing.
> 
> 
> 
> I see, but why using the same settings he is using my vcore fluctuates different than him? I mean, maybe his motherboard is different and the values alter there, but I don't know, I can't have load voltage lower than idle voltage all the time, tried many LLC levels and vcore settings, also OFFSET, Adaptive mode and Manual, if I set the same CPU frequency as AVX frequency, I can't have what I would want and what is recommended, which is lower full load voltage than idle voltage, example, like 1.360v idle and 1.344v~1.328v load.
Click to expand...

When you don't have all the power saving features on the load Vcore will be lower than Idle.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When you don't have all the power saving features on the load Vcore will be lower than Idle.


No, I tested this too, I set minimum CPU state to 100% and they said I could use in adaptive mode like this to test the idle and load better, but even with this or even with C-States/SpeedStep disabled I have vcore jump in web browsing and also always higher vcore in load except if I set lower LLC, but depends of the voltage I set together with the LLC too, but if I end up having lower voltage in load I end up having voltage jumps in web browsing, anyway, all methods I tried I end up having higher voltage during load (web browsing) and also two values for minimum voltage while stress testing and gaming.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Various people have looked at that and decided the 1.52v figure is out of context and not useful for our purposes.
> 
> This has already been addressed...? I even drew a picture in the OP.


The 1.52v figure was either for one or two possible things:

1) possible VIDs that were CAPABLE of being programmed into SKU's if Intel decided such a VID would be needed--if you notice on that VID chart, it starts off really low then ends at 1.52v. But no chip ever had such a high VID.
2) the maximum possible voltage allowed for transient spiking (which is something that vdroop is supposed to not allow to happen in the first place).
That is absolutely not for normal operation.

I suggest someone call Intel via their developer line and actually ask them about this. They do have a 1800 number. I'm surprised no one has attempted this. Warning: the engineers who work at Intel are EXTREMELY intelligent and will make you feel like Dave talking to Hal.

The fact that that 1.52v figure was KEPT when the process shrank to ivy bridge should have given red flags to people. Yet I don't even know if anyone noticed. I think this "VID" point was even kept on Broadwell...?


----------



## Falkentyne

The "IA" (Intel Architecture) AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline settings I believe are NOT designed to be used with the "Loadline Calibration" main setting. I think they are mutually exclusive, and one should be used in place of the other. I don't know why Asus says set this to 0.01. That's the lowest value. If you're using Adaptive voltage and overclocking far, and have IA AC and DC loadline set to auto, and are stable, you set this to 0.01 you're going to crash harder than the Titanic. Someoen who was using adaptive already tried that. Auto was stable, 0.01=lower temps but crash. Setting this to something like "150" to "175" (if the max value is 6399) might be more like it.

I also don't know if these settings affect only Adaptive voltage (with or without offsets) or if they affect STATIC voltage. Someone else will need to test this for themselves. If you use a static voltage and are using "loadline calibration" (aka in Asus DigiVRM), set LLC back to disabled or Auto, then go to the IA AC/DC loadline values and try something like "150" for 1.5 mOhms and see if you get similar results as the regular "LLC" settings.

WHATEVER YOU DO, DO NOT USE ANYTHING CLOSE TO THE HIGHEST VALUES. PERIOD.

Someone should test this. If it does affect Static voltages the same way as the regular "LLC" levels, then they're both mutually exclusive.
What's really...bizarre about this is that there are AC and DC loadline settings also in System Agent, Ring, and GT (integrated graphics)...so yeah...whatever.

IA (Intel Architecture) Domain:

AC Loadline
AC Loadline is defined in 1/100 mOhms and uses the BIOS mailbox command 0x2. A value of 100 equals 1.0 mOhm, and 1255 is 12.55 mOhms. Range is 0-6249 (0-62.49 mOhms). Enter 0 for AUTO.

DC Loadline
DC Loadline is defined in 1/100 mOhms and uses the BIOS mailbox command 0x2. A value of 100 equals 1.0 mOhm, and 1255 is 12.55 mOhms. Range is 0-6249 (0-62.49 mOhms). Enter 0 for AUTO.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> The 1.52v figure was either for one or two possible things:
> 
> 1) possible VIDs that were CAPABLE of being programmed into SKU's if Intel decided such a VID would be needed--if you notice on that VID chart, it starts off really low then ends at 1.52v. But no chip ever had such a high VID.
> 2) the maximum possible voltage allowed for transient spiking (which is something that vdroop is supposed to not allow to happen in the first place).
> That is absolutely not for normal operation.
> 
> I suggest someone call Intel via their developer line and actually ask them about this. They do have a 1800 number. I'm surprised no one has attempted this. Warning: the engineers who work at Intel are EXTREMELY intelligent and will make you feel like Dave talking to Hal.
> 
> The fact that that 1.52v figure was KEPT when the process shrank to ivy bridge should have given red flags to people. Yet I don't even know if anyone noticed. I think this "VID" point was even kept on Broadwell...?


this table

in here:

7th-gen-core-family-desktop-s-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-.pdf 1678k .pdf file


So - 1.52V is the max AOR.. as long as other specifications are met.. so.. operating under the TDP, other voltages in range.. etc. Any operating spec cannot be taken in isolation. What ever the voltage one uses, once you start exceeding 2x TDP at any frequency or voltage, "ageing" is in play.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> The "IA" (Intel Architecture) AC Loadline and IA DC Loadline settings I believe are NOT designed to be used with the "Loadline Calibration" main setting. I think they are mutually exclusive, and one should be used in place of the other. I don't know why Asus says set this to 0.01. That's the lowest value. If you're using Adaptive voltage and overclocking far, and have IA AC and DC loadline set to auto, and are stable, you set this to 0.01 you're going to crash harder than the Titanic. Someoen who was using adaptive already tried that. Auto was stable, 0.01=lower temps but crash. Setting this to something like "150" to "175" (if the max value is 6399) might be more like it.
> 
> I also don't know if these settings affect only Adaptive voltage (with or without offsets) or if they affect STATIC voltage. Someone else will need to test this for themselves. If you use a static voltage and are using "loadline calibration" (aka in Asus DigiVRM), set LLC back to disabled or Auto, then go to the IA AC/DC loadline values and try something like "150" for 1.5 mOhms and see if you get similar results as the regular "LLC" settings.
> 
> WHATEVER YOU DO, DO NOT USE ANYTHING CLOSE TO THE HIGHEST VALUES. PERIOD.
> 
> Someone should test this. If it does affect Static voltages the same way as the regular "LLC" levels, then they're both mutually exclusive.
> What's really...bizarre about this is that there are AC and DC loadline settings also in System Agent, Ring, and GT (integrated graphics)...so yeah...whatever.
> 
> IA (Intel Architecture) Domain:
> 
> AC Loadline
> AC Loadline is defined in 1/100 mOhms and uses the BIOS mailbox command 0x2. A value of 100 equals 1.0 mOhm, and 1255 is 12.55 mOhms. Range is 0-6249 (0-62.49 mOhms). Enter 0 for AUTO.
> 
> DC Loadline
> DC Loadline is defined in 1/100 mOhms and uses the BIOS mailbox command 0x2. A value of 100 equals 1.0 mOhm, and 1255 is 12.55 mOhms. Range is 0-6249 (0-62.49 mOhms). Enter 0 for AUTO.


IA Ac and IA DC load line simply modulate the response to VID requests and essentially change the slope of the response line. it is not the same as load line compensation (LLC). Maybe a useful term would be Load Line Calibration.


----------



## Falkentyne

I've seen that chart in various iterations (even going back to P4 Northwood).
Operating range does NOT apply to ALL processors. Each processor is calibrated differently. That chart is simply theoretical based on the process being used.

Have you ever seen a chip run at 0.55v at load?
That's exactly why this chart can't be used at all.
It has nothing to do with current operating current.

If a current chip can operate at 1.52v at full load without damage or degradation (it can't. Maybe under subzero), then you should be able to operate a chip at 0.55v also at load. Find a chip that isn't a ULV chip that will do that. You run any current CPU at 0.55v it will instantly crash as soon as any load is put on it.

Likewise, if a 7700k chip has a default VID of 1.0v at 4.2 ghz, is going to respond far differently than another 7700k chip that has a default VID of 1.25v at 4.2 ghz.

Read what the docs say "VID" is. VID is set at the Intel factory and is based on a combination of preset calibrations on the silicon quality, temperature and current draw, such that no two chips will have the exact same VID. It's possible for a chip to theoretically have a VID of 0.55v, and it's possible for a chip to have a VID of 1.52v. But are you going to ever see one of those? Nope.
I'm not talking about voltage OVERRIDES. i'm talking about VID. You have to understand this. Intel does not make their chips to be designed to be pushed manually to 1.52. VID is done *automatically* by the processor. If you force a 7700k to run at 800 mhz, the VID might be 0.65v. But run a 7700k at 5.5 ghz, with automatic voltage. is the VID going to be 1.52v? Nope. Not even close.

Your post is assuming Intel is knowing that people are changing the vcore on their CPU's and are designing that chart based on what is safe for overclockers to do. That chart has NOTHING to do with that. It has everything to do with STOCK settings and what the chips will want to use based on current and temperature increases. It's a preset from the factory. Remember VID increases as current and heat increase.

About the AC/DC stuff....can you um.....explain that a bit clearer please?
How is what you said any different from the good old "Load Line Calibration"? Changing AC /DC loadline helps remove vdroop.

Again, we really need someone to do scientific tests on it. That's why I mentioned it. Words mean nothing unless someone actually does a direct test comparing the two. I can't do it myself. I don't have access to "LLC", just IA AC/DC loadline.

I'm pretty sure there was extensive discussion way back, where people were discussing VID on GPU's and CPU's some years ago, and determined stuff like chips with a certain VID range running cooler but responding less gracefully to voltage, while other chips running hotter, but loving voltage--if you could cool them enough. This may have been stuff with ASIC and leakage, but people were discussing CPU's with different default VIDS also.


----------



## MaKeN

@Peter2k







no im not on third , still on the second degraded one ... i gave up with 7700k will wait that 8700k...
But yea this one runs stock demanding 1.4v for stability, and anyway fails occt or p95 in minutes...
but its playable a crush here and there every 2-3 hours only if i play andromeda in rest its ok even rendering.

But for the future i will think twice about setting v core to 1.4v again , the chip would be stable at 5.0 1.35v , but No! I wanted 5.1 at 1.41v







and now i ended up with a stock speed. Btw , honestly i dont really feel any big difference performance wise stock speed vs 5.1mhz in games.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> @Peter2k
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no im not on third , still on the second degraded one ... i gave up with 7700k will wait that 8700k...
> But yea this one runs stock demanding 1.4v for stability, and anyway fails occt or p95 in minutes...
> but its playable a crush here and there every 2-3 hours only if i play andromeda in rest its ok even rendering.
> 
> But for the future i will think twice about setting v core to 1.4v again , the chip would be stable at 5.0 1.35v , but No! I wanted 5.1 at 1.41v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and now i ended up with a stock speed. Btw , honestly i dont really feel any big difference performance wise stock speed vs 5.1mhz in games.


sorry mate

the question was originally if anyone actually degraded a 7700k in this thread

so while you're not using a third, you still managed to "break" 2









I don't really know what you're using those i7's for
but I don't think the 8700k is going to be "sturdier"









ohh
btw
I notice a difference, in one instance

it's a badly unoptimzed game, which tends to make too many draw calls, which are ohh so dependent on IPC&freqency but don't just multithread well
mechwarrior online
I just knew what I'm getting this RIG for

all other games would be more dependent on the GPU

mmm
it's also one of the last hobbies that are left
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> Thanks, for your recommends,
> 
> Have you read the Intel data sheet of the kaby lake? In Intel's data sheet


yes we had a discussion about it like 80 pages ago
about march I'd say

you want to put that much voltage into it
that's fine

but I would never *recommend* it to someone new to overclocking, or out of the game for a while

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Somebody pay me a decent salary and supply me with endless supply of CPUs, I'll give you all the data you want.


you just wanna have those being sold with Darkwizzie etched in silver (yeah silver custom IHS)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> I've seen that chart in various iterations (even going back to P4 Northwood).
> Operating range does NOT apply to ALL processors. Each processor is calibrated differently. That chart is simply theoretical based on the process being used.
> 
> Have you ever seen a chip run at 0.55v at load?
> *That's exactly why this chart can't be used at all.*
> It has nothing to do with current operating current.
> 
> If a current chip can operate at 1.52v at full load without damage or degradation (it can't. Maybe under subzero), then you should be able to operate a chip at 0.55v also at load. Find a chip that isn't a ULV chip that will do that. You run any current CPU at 0.55v it will instantly crash as soon as any load is put on it.
> 
> Likewise, if a 7700k chip has a default VID of 1.0v at 4.2 ghz, is going to respond far differently than another 7700k chip that has a default VID of 1.25v at 4.2 ghz.
> 
> Read what the docs say "VID" is. VID is set at the Intel factory and is based on a combination of preset calibrations on the silicon quality, temperature and current draw, such that no two chips will have the exact same VID. It's possible for a chip to theoretically have a VID of 0.55v, and it's possible for a chip to have a VID of 1.52v. But are you going to ever see one of those? Nope.
> I'm not talking about voltage OVERRIDES. i'm talking about VID. You have to understand this. Intel does not make their chips to be designed to be pushed manually to 1.52. VID is done *automatically* by the processor. If you force a 7700k to run at 800 mhz, the VID might be 0.65v. But run a 7700k at 5.5 ghz, with automatic voltage. is the VID going to be 1.52v? Nope. Not even close.
> 
> Your post is assuming Intel is knowing that people are changing the vcore on their CPU's and are designing that chart based on what is safe for overclockers to do. That chart has NOTHING to do with that. It has everything to do with STOCK settings and what the chips will want to use based on current and temperature increases. It's a preset from the factory. Remember VID increases as current and heat increase.
> 
> About the AC/DC stuff....can you um.....explain that a bit clearer please?
> How is what you said any different from the good old "Load Line Calibration"? Changing AC /DC loadline helps remove vdroop.
> 
> Again, we really need someone to do scientific tests on it. That's why I mentioned it. Words mean nothing unless someone actually does a direct test comparing the two. I can't do it myself. I don't have access to "LLC", just IA AC/DC loadline.
> 
> I'm pretty sure there was extensive discussion way back, where people were discussing VID on GPU's and CPU's some years ago, and determined stuff like chips with a certain VID range running cooler but responding less gracefully to voltage, while other chips running hotter, but loving voltage--if you could cool them enough. This may have been stuff with ASIC and leakage, but people were discussing CPU's with different default VIDS also.


operating current is in a chart further in the document.. but since you choose not to read but rather to speculate... "bliss".








I'm using AC and DC load line adjustments on x299 apex right now. Needed to use it on early z270 Apex bios - Elmor then released a bios with this "fixed". It does what I said., You got some catching up to do bro.


----------



## Falkentyne

I've read far more Intel PDF documents than you have. I've been around awhile.
I've also *degraded* my own share of chips by listening to the "1.52v" Bible.

Are you willing to buy Makan a new 7700k because he ran his at 1.41v when YOU said 1.52v is safe?
No, of course not. Instead you're just going to flame me over the internet.
I'm done. I have more important things to do than deal with people who are being jerks.

There are people in this thread who are smart enough to know that I'm making logical sense.

For the others who actually want to do some testing and have access to IA AC/DC Loadline, try testing that out (make sure you don't use LLC and IA at the same time, put one on auto when using the other), and report back your findings. Do not under any circumstances ever use 62 ohms. Your Chip will get north of 1.5v...


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> I've read far more Intel PDF documents than you have. I've been around awhile.
> I've also *degraded* my own share of chips by listening to the "1.52v" Bible.
> 
> Are you willing to buy Makan a new 7700k because he ran his at 1.41v when YOU said 1.52v is safe?
> No, of course not. Instead you're just going to flame me over the internet.
> I'm done. I have more important things to do than deal with people who are being jerks.


But Jpmdad has read more than your dad.

Logic without understanding ambugity isnt a way to reason.

You could advise someone to try 1.21v and their chip could die, and that means you should be buying them a replacement? Man oh man.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> *I've read far more Intel PDF documents than you have. I've been around awhile.*
> I've also *degraded* my own share of chips by listening to the "1.52v" Bible.
> 
> Are you willing to buy Makan a new 7700k because he ran his at 1.41v when YOU said 1.52v is safe?
> No, of course not. Instead you're just going to flame me over the internet.
> I'm done. I have more important things to do than deal with people who are being jerks.
> 
> There are people in this thread who are smart enough to know that I'm making logical sense.
> 
> For the others who actually want to do some testing and have access to IA AC/DC Loadline, try testing that out (make sure you don't use LLC and IA at the same time, put one on auto when using the other), and report back your findings. Do not under any circumstances ever use 62 ohms. Your Chip will get north of 1.5v...


lol - assuming things based on my user name - you've not been around long enough. (or maybe waaay too long). sounding a bit aphasic.

anyway - are you asking a question or making a statement about voltage, current load line calibration.. or any of this? Or simply blurting out sht?

AND (now read and comprehend carefully) I said NONE of the AORs can be taken in isolation. For exampple, 1.52V requires under power top be TDP... among other parameters within range. so, on most any serious work load, this will restrict the operating frequency.
Now read that sentence again please. there will be a quiz tomorrow.


----------



## Falkentyne

It's fine. I already put him on ignore for flaming and harassment. I don't like people who insult and attack me in that fashion.
My job is to stop people from degrading their chips by so-called "experts" who give wrong information. If i can protect people like Makan from degrading their expensive chips, then I did my job, regardless of how many enemies I make on this forum or on the internet. Until an Intel Engineer says I'm wrong, I stand my ground.

have a nice day. I'm busy now.


----------



## ducegt

I ran mine with higher clocks and more voltage than Maken, and I believe for longer and with less cooling. After months of well above 1.4, I still do 5.1 1.328-1.344. No signifcant degration. Seems to only affect Romanians







Im actually waiting to fly back home to the US from RO right now.


----------



## Falkentyne

I believe the chip's default VID represents in what way it can handle higher voltages. But the last mass study with something like this was from Asus, years ago.
Maybe i'm bitter and "Biased" because I degraded a $1,000 CPU with voltages other people claimed were 'safe', on sub 80C temps, and only in the future, did some others start agreeing with me. Long after I made my share of enemies. But that's okay. Life's too short to worry about drama.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I ran mine with higher clocks and more voltage than Maken, and I believe for longer and with less cooling. After months of well above 1.4, I still do 5.1 1.328-1.344. No signifcant degration. Seems to only affect Romanians
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im actually waiting to fly back home to the US from RO right now.


You got lucky lol. Don't take your single sample size and extrapolate it for everyone.

Only Intel knows what their Voltage/Power to Degradation curve is. So in lieu of that lack of hard evidence, it is prudent to be safe under 1.4V. Just because a few people have gotten away with it doesn't mean we all will.

If I may chip in to the discussion. Despite the voltage, the Intel spec that everyone seems to ignore is the max Amperage the CPU is allowed to draw is specified at 100A for some time now (since Ivy Bridge).
I believe this also plays a role in degradation because there are a lot of folk that run at fairly conservative voltages and can also degrade their chips due to continuous AVX type loading.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I ran mine with higher clocks and more voltage than Maken, and I believe for longer and with less cooling. After months of well above 1.4, I still do 5.1 1.328-1.344. No signifcant degration. Seems to only affect Romanians
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im actually waiting to fly back home to the US from RO right now.


I've been in the forums for 3 years every day and have not seen a CPU degrade with High Vcore.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> You got lucky lol. Don't take your single sample size and extrapolate it for everyone.
> 
> Only Intel knows what their Voltage/Power to Degradation curve is. So in lieu of that lack of hard evidence, it is prudent to be safe under 1.4V. Just because a few people have gotten away with it doesn't mean we all will.
> 
> If I may chip in to the discussion. Despite the voltage, the Intel spec that everyone seems to ignore is the max Amperage the CPU is allowed to draw is specified at 100A for some time now (since Ivy Bridge).
> I believe this also plays a role in degradation because there are a lot of folk that run at fairly conservative voltages and can also degrade their chips due to continuous AVX type loading.


The sample size on the other side of the coin isnt large either. And even if a chip has degraded, speculation of what caused it is just that, speculation.

Someome else may argue its...
Prudent... To stay under 1.35 because its safer yet. We are dealing with CPUs, not data integrity. More voltage, more gains, and more risk. Everyone understands this so its trivial to suggest one number for different applications.

My gut feeling is people dont understand how efficency of thermal paste fades with time and how transistor leakage tempts people to running higher voltage. Seems to me that many claims of degration are from people lost in a forest, obsessing over obscure and trivial settings; so they forget about the basics. My other hobby is plants and though Im very knowledgeable and experienced, its fundamentals that are my occasional downfall. Im keen to observe this with others and its not so challenging because of how prevalent it is.

Anyway, Im just bored at an airport and I suppose my point is there is the human element to these degration anecdotes.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> The sample size on the other side of the coin isnt large either. And even if a chip has degraded, speculation of what caused it is just that, speculation.
> 
> Someome else may argue its...
> Prudent... To stay under 1.35 because its safer yet. We are dealing with CPUs, not data integrity. More voltage, more gains, and more risk. Everyone understands this so its trivial to suggest one number for different applications.
> 
> My gut feeling is people dont understand how efficency of thermal paste fades with time and how transistor leakage tempts people to running higher voltage. Seems to me that many claims of degration are from people lost in a forest, obsessing over obscure and trivial settings; so they forget about the basics. My other hobby is plants and though Im very knowledgeable and experienced, its fundamentals that are my occasional downfall. Im keen to observe this with others and its not so challenging because of how prevalent it is.
> 
> Anyway, Im just bored at an airport and I suppose my point is there is the human element to these degration anecdotes.


Personally I haven't had any issue's with my 7700K [email protected], still I have never gone above that voltage not even for benchmarks, system has been running now for 8 months without any system stability issues whatsoever, maybe Im just lucky


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I've been in the forums for 3 years every day and have not seen a CPU degrade with High Vcore.


Then what do you call my chips?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> No signifcant degration. Seems to only affect Romanians
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im actually waiting to fly back home to the US from RO right now.


ohh.. that was under the belt !
Maybe the officer at the customs has a blue screen on the scanner and goes hands on with you or the airport has a "404 not found" with your luggage


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> ohh.. that was under the belt !
> Maybe the officer at the customs has a blue screen on the scanner and goes hands on with you or the airport has a "404 not found" with your luggage


Haha! Lucky me, already in Germany now.


----------



## MaKeN

Maybe i just had a bad luck with my chip... from almost all factors that lead to degradation ( temps/current/not running p95-occt overnight /highest LLC setting etc.) the only "rule" broken was just running the chip at higher then 1.35v suggested by intel.. but again as we all know its not the voltage that kills it righ?

Before that i had a skeptical view to cpu degradation... even watching Linus on youtube , were he makes tests and stuff and kinda proofs that degratation does not exists or something.

But this process does exist, for sure. Not only taking my chip into consideration...
2-3 days ago in one of gtx 1080ti's thread i saw 2 guys claiming their gpu started to degrade..
i think @Darkwizzie also mentioned in this thread that over some time his cpu wont pass stress tests as it did at the beginning?or i may be wrong

But i think it also really depends on the sample youve got.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Maybe i just had a bad luck with my chip... from almost all factors that lead to degradation ( temps/current/not running p95-occt overnight /highest LLC setting etc.) the only "rule" broken was just running the chip at higher then 1.35v suggested by intel.. but again as we all know its not the voltage that kills it righ?


I agree with you(MakeN).
First, what is degradation? which you(not MakeN) call.
Decreasing in the OC limits?, or voltage lowest limit for operating at 5GHz?
If so, the high voltage must be applying to CPU when you investigate the degradation.
Namely, users avoiding higher voltage cannot find the degration of CPU, if the degradation occurs.
Such degration is felt only for the user using CPU at higher clock and higher voltage.
It looks like paradox.

If some performance down is degradation which you mean,
I'm not specialist for computation, but the case is more rarely.
If the cpu shows some paformance down depending on the each CPU at same frequency.
Before using the CPU, it shuld have different performance.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Maybe i just had a bad luck with my chip... from almost all factors that lead to degradation ( temps/current/not running p95-occt overnight /highest LLC setting etc.) the only "rule" broken was just running the chip at higher then 1.35v suggested by intel.. but again as we all know its not the voltage that kills it righ?
> 
> Before that i had a skeptical view to cpu degradation... even watching Linus on youtube , were he makes tests and stuff and kinda proofs that degratation does not exists or something.
> 
> But this process does exist, for sure. Not only taking my chip into consideration...
> 2-3 days ago in one of gtx 1080ti's thread i saw 2 guys claiming their gpu started to degrade..
> i think @Darkwizzie also mentioned in this thread that over some time his cpu wont pass stress tests as it did at the beginning?or i may be wrong
> 
> But i think it also really depends on the sample youve got.


I degraded a p4 3.4C (or EE, I forgot) by gaming with it at 1.7-1.75v, so badly that it would't even run at stock anymore (this took less than a few weeks to happen)
I degraded a second P4 3.4 also down to the point where it would ONLY run at stock, but this took longer to happen, as I stayed below 1.7v. But it still happened.
Degrading a $1,000 chip and having people flame you on forums and insult you...sorta ....gets to you and changes your perception of the human race overall.
I was ridiculed extensively and every expert kept saying degradation doesn't happen. It was hilarious.
Only later did some others claim the same thing. And the "experts" said 1.7v was safe.
There was a reason these CPU's were known as tissue paper processors.

Stock voltage was 1.5v. Going from 1.5 to 1.7v is a lot less than going from 1.2v to 1.4v.
Note: Pentium 3 coppermines ran at 1.75v, IIRC.

I massively degraded my first 2600k by trying to run stress tests on these forums to join the "degrade your CPU and get a badge" club. I ran it at 1.52v and below at 5.2 ghz. Took mere weeks; eventually I couldn't exceed 4.5 ghz. All speed bins were affected by this; 4 ghz required more voltage, 4.5 ghz, etc. I eventually threw the chip away.
The second 2600k has also degraded but not as drastically as the first, but **THIS** chip originally did 5 ghz prime stable at 1.37v. Repeated stress testing eventually started making 101's and 124's 'appear so slowly but surely it needed more than 1.4v.

Sorry guys--the 1.52v "absolute safe limit" is complete--utter--baloney. And unless someone puts a gun in my face and tells me to say otherwise (or an Intel engineer posts here), I'm not changing my mind on this. And I'm not going to allow random keyboard warriors on the internet to change my mind and my beliefs. I control my life, not random people on forums.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I've been in the forums for 3 years every day and have not seen a CPU degrade with High Vcore.
> 
> 
> 
> Then what do you call my chips?
Click to expand...

Are you having a problem with your chips?


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Are you having a problem with your chips?


For 4670k, 6700k, and 7700k, I've had the chip be unable to do the overclock I normally run half a year to a year into using it. (1.42v, 1.42v, 1.4v volts respectively).

The world's not crashing down (and I would've pulled the plug before it came to that), but it sucks to have to downclock my overclock (200mhz, 100mhz, 100mhz respectively).


----------



## MaKeN

Btw , anyone heard something about degradation from guys running 7700k on ln2/sub zero ?
the voltage is indeed increased there as hell...


----------



## Jpmboy

IDK guys, too bad wizzie's excellent thread got derailed with a drive by.
Anyway, It is a balance of current, voltage and temperature. Heck, you can let a cpu idle at 1.7V for days and nothing happens - ask it to do a little work and it falls over. LN2 benched CPU get juiced with 1.6-2.0V and run at 2x TDP and higher for a short period. Clean 'em up, and they run at ambient like nothing happened. I have a 2700K that's been running (last I checked on it







) at 1.42-1.45V for.. well since launch. It acquires, encodes and compresses security camera video 24/7 ay 4.8GHz. Does it overclock higher as it did when new? Of course not. On the other hand, I've had 2C4T processors die after days benching at 1.6V. (7350, 6820 in the pile)
I have 5 other CPUs here right now ([email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] and a [email protected]) - each is running well above stock but balanced with the common rule of staying under 2x the TDP for each at peak usage.
Bottom line - if your use scenario is high current 1.5-2x TDP all day - well, you need to add that into your overclocking objective and adjust voltage so that your usage stays under 1.5-2X TDP always. If it's web browsing as the high load activity or u-tube... you can run significantly higher clocks - but be sure to allow for significant vdroop since load will be cycling frequently and transients are damaging over time since 99%^ of the time it will be at a very low % of TDP.

CPUs "age" or degrade based on the current draw, time at temperature, and frequency of operation... and the extent of transients (this is how robustness testing is done.. tho actual accelerated testing is done using conditions well outside the AORs). CPU failure (short term.. like instantly or over days) most commonly occurs during an over current or over voltage event or configuration.

Now - no one is advising anyone to run their 7700K at 1.52V as a daily setting (unlike someone is claiming - like their hair is on fire). The information that is available, and that is not simply rumor or "semi-empirical" from old gen chips is pretty clear and sensible: balance Load and extent of TDP_use with voltage for overclocking. Asking what's a "safe voltage" without further info, well gets the response it deserves. There is no safe voltage with no other information on how the rig will be used.

Besides... why ask that question anywhere else but a "safevoltage.net"


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Btw , anyone heard something about degradation from guys running 7700k on ln2/sub zero ?
> the voltage is indeed increased there as hell...


Those guys combat degradation through sheer temperature. IIRC Buildzoid mentioned that the extremely low temperatures reduce the operating power so much it almost offsets the electromigration effects of Voltage. That being said, Ln2 guys still get degradation (except their idea of degradation is 3-4 additional Ln2 attempts) because high Voltage can still damage certain types of electrical traces on the PCB (by literally punching electrons through them).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> IDK guys, too bad wizzie's excellent thread got derailed with a drive by.
> Anyway, It is a balance of current, voltage and temperature. Heck, you can let a cpu idle at 1.7V for days and nothing happens - ask it to do a little work and it falls over. LN2 benched CPU get juiced with 1.6-2.0V and run at 2x TDP and higher for a short period. Clean 'em up, and they run at ambient like nothing happened. I have a 2700K that's been running (last I checked on it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) at 1.42-1.45V for.. well since launch. It acquires, encodes and compresses security camera video 24/7 ay 4.8GHz. Does it overclock higher as it did when new? Of course not. On the other hand, I've had 2C4T processors die after days benching at 1.6V. (7350, 6820 in the pile)
> I have 5 other CPUs here right now ([email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] and a [email protected]) - each is running well above stock but balanced with the common rule of staying under 2x the TDP for each at peak usage.
> Bottom line - if your use scenario is high current 1.5-2x TDP all day - well, you need to add that into your overclocking objective and adjust voltage so that your usage stays under 1.5-2X TDP always. If it's web browsing as the high load activity or u-tube... you can run significantly higher clocks - but be sure to allow for significant vdroop since load will be cycling frequently and transients are damaging over time since 99%^ of the time it will be at a very low % of TDP.
> 
> CPUs "age" or degrade based on the current draw, time at temperature, and frequency of operation... and the extent of transients (this is how robustness testing is done.. tho actual accelerated testing is done using conditions well outside the AORs). CPU failure (short term.. like instantly or over days) most commonly occurs during an over current or over voltage event or configuration.
> 
> Now - no one is advising anyone to run their 7700K at 1.52V as a daily setting (unlike someone is claiming - like their hair is on fire). The information that is available, and that is not simply rumor or "semi-empirical" from old gen chips is pretty clear and sensible: balance Load and extent of TDP_use with voltage for overclocking. Asking what's a "safe voltage" without further info, well gets the response it deserves. There is no safe voltage with no other information on how the rig will be used.
> 
> Besides... why ask that question anywhere else but a "safevoltage.net"


Half the people that visit here don't leave a message and are looking for safe OCs + Voltage ranges that only a community forum can provide.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Those guys combat degradation through sheer temperature. IIRC Buildzoid mentioned that the extremely low temperatures reduce the operating power so much it almost offsets the electromigration effects of Voltage. That being said, Ln2 guys still get degradation (except their idea of degradation is 3-4 additional Ln2 attempts) because high Voltage can still damage certain types of electrical traces on the PCB (by literally punching electrons through them).
> Half the people that visit here don't leave a message and are looking for safe OCs + Voltage ranges that only a community forum can provide.


"those guys"?



and... what is a safe OC? yeah - buy the intel tuning plan


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Half the people that visit here don't leave a message and are looking for safe OCs + Voltage ranges that only a community forum can provide.










and they are entitled to the most accurate information and performance at the same time? LIke jpmboy said, nobody is suggesting any outlandish voltages and time and time again, the proper methodology to intelligently overclocking has been well articulated by various users. People are responsible for who they seek to believe.

If you buy a car and install an aftermarket nitrous oxide kit that is highly recommended by a given community; how much do you think the manufacture of said car gives a ****? If Bob on some forum suggested a particular NOS recommendation and it blows up the motor in my pinto, does Bob own me a new car?

If Joe-Blow's life circumstances...living pay check to paycheck with a family of 7... pressure him to have a reliable and affordable car, and regardless he decides to run some NOS through to satisfy whatever need that's maligned with his larger picture (and Bob suggested something), that's on Joe-Blow. He reaps the benefit of accomplishing a variety of needs; so long as it don't blow up the engine.

This debate isn't even about CPUs or overclocking. It's about personal personality and duties; and those of the community as you stated (like you're a dictator mind you.)


----------



## woodyfly

Just got my 7600k today with a gigabyte gaming k3

5ghz air @ 1.27. 80c
4.9 @ 1.18

This seems like a golden chip, my first one ever.


----------



## Seijitsu

I wish we could see some actual data on degradation. It seems to be hit and miss on who actually experiences some sort of it.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> I wish we could see some actual data on degradation. It seems to be hit and miss on who actually experiences some sort of it.


In the Intel forum I see just as meany stock CPUs have problems as I see with overclocking. I replaced a stock clocked sky lake this year that had trouble.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> In the Intel forum I see just as meany stock CPUs have problems as I see with overclocking. I replaced a stock clocked sky lake this year that had trouble.


Trouble, as in instability at stock?


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woodyfly*
> 
> Just got my 7600k today with a gigabyte gaming k3
> 
> 5ghz air @ 1.27. 80c
> 4.9 @ 1.18
> 
> This seems like a golden chip, my first one ever.


I5s usually have an easier time as far as voltage vs temps/clockspeed.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *woodyfly*
> 
> Just got my 7600k today with a gigabyte gaming k3
> 
> 5ghz air @ 1.27. 80c
> 4.9 @ 1.18
> 
> This seems like a golden chip, my first one ever.
> 
> 
> 
> I5s usually have an easier time as far as voltage vs temps/clockspeed.
Click to expand...

Not for mine. I need 1.2v for 4.6GHz prime95 stable 94c.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> In the Intel forum I see just as meany stock CPUs have problems as I see with overclocking. I replaced a stock clocked sky lake this year that had trouble.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trouble, as in instability at stock?
Click to expand...

Yes.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> I wish we could see some actual data on degradation. It seems to be hit and miss on who actually experiences some sort of it.


that's also because it matters what you do with it

most games don't even tax the CPU, the GPU is the limiting factor

even games that can max out a CPU 100% is still a different work load than running Prime or OCCT

or [email protected] 24/7 for a year
video editing and converting for hours and hours on end

we got the AVX offset not so overclockers can overclock higher per se

we got it because AVX code runs hotter and taxes the CPU more

also the finer/smaller the manufacturing process becomes the more sensitive or should become

at least one would have to start over with each node jump

however I would also just love a really good guesstimate by some Intel engineers on what a good max voltage would be

that being said

the ASUS OC guide in Jpmboy's sig suggests 1.35v for testing with latest Prime (using AVX)


----------



## Dasboogieman

For those that believe high voltage without load doesn't kill your chip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1AH1uxtR1U

16:30min mark.
TLDW: Dead vega because feedback volt mod went bad and allowed the GPU to be exposed to brief spikes of 1.5-2V for several months.

Also a warning for people who use too much LLC.

I'm glad I have my VRM switching frequency on 500khz now. I reduce my LLC to allow more Vdroop too for good measure.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> Username: pyounpy-2
> CPU Model: 7700k
> Base Clock: 200
> Core Multiplier: 27
> Core Frequency: 5400
> Cache Frequency: 4800
> Vcore in UEFI: adaptic mode:1.350+0.03=1.380
> Vcore: 1.440
> FCLK: Reminder: 1600
> Cooling Solution: Delidded, Custum water cooling (diect exposing air conditioner to the radiators out side of the PC)
> Stability Test: 2 hours Realbench ver. 2.54
> Video cards: Titan XP SLI
> Batch Number: Malaysia L642G086
> Ram Speed: (4266-15-17-17-35-1T)
> VCCIO: 1.350(UEFI)
> VCCIO: 1.392(actua max)
> VCCSA:1.350(UEFI)
> VCCSA: 1.408(actual max)
> Ram Voltage: 1.552
> Motherboard: Asus maximus IX Apex (UEFI:1010)
> LLC Setting: level 6
> Misc Comments: I tried to operation at 5.4GHz using Bclk of 200MHz. Because of using high Blck frequency, I could use the higher memory speed of 4266MHz. I used C0/C1 state only.
> When very high Bclk frequency, I feel that the response of PC is very fast. for example, full speed start up and high cpu frequency at C-state. Additionally, I can use lower voltage for Vcore than
> it of Blck frequency of 100MHz.
> 
> By the way, when high power vidio cards for example titan XP SLI, I thnk Realbench becomes very heavy. This is because both CPU and VGA are used 100%. For the higher CPU frequency more
> than 5.3 GHz, the higher LLC level better (but less than level 6 for water cooling) to make a lower Vcore.
> 
> Please Update my result.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *5 GHz Overclock Club*


2 hours of Realbench does not fulfill the requirements to be in the main chart.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> 2 hours of Realbench does not fulfill the requirements to be in the main chart.


mmm

at least he can disable the GPU part, if he says RealBench becomes too heavy for SLI Titans or something something, right?


----------



## Jpmboy

use the x264 stability test.


----------



## nonpolar

http://i.imgur.com/Fy2wDIP.png

7700K, H100i V2, ASUS Hero Z270, 8GB of RAM

Bclk @ 100, Core Mult @ 52, Core Freq @ 5.2, V core in Bios 1.40V

Test done with Realbench @ 8 hours


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> 2 hours of Realbench does not fulfill the requirements to be in the main chart.


Username: pyounpy-2
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 200
Core Multiplier: 27
Core Frequency: 5400
Cache Frequency: 4800
Vcore in UEFI: adaptic mode:1.350+0.03=1.380
Vcore: 1.440
FCLK: Reminder: 1600
Cooling Solution: Delidded, Custum water cooling (diect exposing air conditioner to the radiators out side of the PC)
Stability Test: 8 hours Realbench ver. 2.54
Video cards: Titan XP SLI
Batch Number: Malaysia L642G086
Ram Speed: (4200-17-17-17-35-1T)
VCCIO: 1.175(UEFI)
VCCIO: 1.208(actua max)
VCCSA:1.225(UEFI)
VCCSA: 1.256(actual max)
Ram Voltage: 1.400
Motherboard: Asus maximus IX Apex (UEFI:1010)
LLC Setting: level 6



Sorry Darkwizzie. Because of huge heating from Titan XP SLI used in this system,(In another one, 1080ti SLI was used.
In that case, heating is not so large.) I have used 2hours before. I had retested soon after seeing your comment. and
I show you the result of 8 hours Realbench here. Memory speed was changed due to decreasing the VCCIO & VCCSA.
In the before date, I thought them are too high. I hope you will accept this new result. best regards.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Additional infomation,

The AVX offset was 0.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nonpolar*
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/Fy2wDIP.png
> 
> 7700K, H100i V2, ASUS Hero Z270, 8GB of RAM
> 
> Bclk @ 100, Core Mult @ 52, Core Freq @ 5.2, V core in Bios 1.40V
> 
> Test done with Realbench @ 8 hours


Dear nonpolar, you used Realbench 2.43.
I feel Realbench 2.54 is much more heavy than Realbench2.43 for 7700K.

I think it from using or not using AVX.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Was there ever a database of KabyLake stock voltages vs the final clocks they topped out at?

I just swapped 7700ks with my friend because he owed me a favor. His one was manufactured recently in March 2017 and has a stock voltage of 1.125V while my one was manufactured Feb 2016 and had a stock voltage of 1.24V.

Final OC results look promising, this sample is getting 5ghz @1.25V. I'll push it further and see where I get, my previous one could only do 5ghz @ 1.35V and also had an especially weak IMC which crapped itself on RAM faster than 3466mhz.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Was there ever a database of KabyLake stock voltages vs the final clocks they topped out at?
> 
> I just swapped 7700ks with my friend because he owed me a favor. His one was manufactured recently in March 2017 and has a stock voltage of 1.125V while my one was manufactured Feb 2016 and had a stock voltage of 1.24V.
> 
> Final OC results look promising, this sample is getting 5ghz @1.25V. I'll push it further and see where I get, my previous one could only do 5ghz @ 1.35V and also had an especially weak IMC which crapped itself on RAM faster than 3466mhz.


Must have been some favor for him to swap for such a turd sample







Looks like you have a winner there. Delid and see how far you can go.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> Must have been some favor for him to swap for such a turd sample
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like you have a winner there. Delid and see how far you can go.


Yeah, his PC died and he's broke so I bought him a new one. He felt bad so he told me I could keep his chip if it was a good one.
This sample is looking very good. I delidded and am pushing 1.24V now for 5ghz. I'm confident this thing can do 1.22V, maybe even 1.2.

Unfortunately, RAM isn't going any further from 3466 CL 14-15-15. Could be motherboard is holding me back.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> mmm
> 
> at least he can disable the GPU part, if he says RealBench becomes too heavy for SLI Titans or something something, right?


Dear, peter2k Yes, exactly. I used titan XP SLI which unlocked power limit. So, in the realbench 2.54, even if VGA is no-OC setting, about 600W power is used only by the VGAs.
In that case, it is difficult to keep the Vcore voltage of lessthan 1.44V(actual). Of cource, I have never meet such case in usual use.
Then, in my new submission, I decreased Max frequency of one GPU to 1.6GHz(another was default:1.91GHz).
Thank you.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> Dear, peter2k Yes, exactly. I used titan XP SLI which unlocked power limit. So, in the realbench 2.54, even if VGA is no-OC setting, about 600W power is used only by the VGAs.
> In that case, it is difficult to keep the Vcore voltage of lessthan 1.44V(actual). Of cource, I have never meet such case in usual use.
> Then, in my new submission, I decreased Max frequency of one GPU to 1.6GHz(another was default:1.91GHz).
> Thank you.


I think it would've been fine if you just unchecked the box for GPU testing when running the stability test

or

used the x264 custom loop


----------



## AyeYo

Are most people using fixed voltage or offset? I've had to run negative offset just to undo the insane voltages my MB wants to run this chip at. Auto vcore had the chip tapping 1.40v and occasionally higher in RB. I've set a -0.110v offset, which now keeps it around 1.256v in RB, which I still think is absurdly high for stock clocks. I figured since the voltage is already high, I'd try upping clocks just for the hell of it (no real desire to overclock this thing, I need reliability, not 300 more mhz). With the original -0.100v offset (which yields like 1.306v in RB), I couldn't even make it to the desktop at 4.8ghz or even 4.7ghz.

Maybe the worst chip of all time or is offset just not good to use because of transient loads?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> Are most people using fixed voltage or offset? I've had to run negative offset just to undo the insane voltages my MB wants to run this chip at. Auto vcore had the chip tapping 1.40v and occasionally higher in RB. I've set a -0.110v offset, which now keeps it around 1.256v in RB, which I still think is absurdly high for stock clocks. I figured since the voltage is already high, I'd try upping clocks just for the hell of it (no real desire to overclock this thing, I need reliability, not 300 more mhz). With the original -0.100v offset (which yields like 1.306v in RB), I couldn't even make it to the desktop at 4.8ghz or even 4.7ghz.
> 
> Maybe the worst chip of all time or is offset just not good to use because of transient loads?


Dynamic offset ajusts the Vcore according to load just like stock. When overclocking folks just need to set offset correctly. Sounds like your MSI motherboard has a high Auto VID = Vcore calabration, unless it is a high VID on the CPU. I use Dynamic Vcore Auto and overclock a little.


----------



## AyeYo

I see there's a BIOS revision out so maybe I'll give that a try and see what it does to the outrageous voltages this board applies to every part of the system.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> I see there's a BIOS revision out so maybe I'll give that a try and see what it does to the outrageous voltages this board applies to every part of the system.


My Bios update lowered the stock voltage on my Gigabyte Z170. Post back what you get with the Bios update?


----------



## Keller1234

What is a safe voltage for 7700K overclock?

I'm getting stability @ 5.1 Ghz with a UEFI adaptive voltage of 1.354v, and a HWInfo Vcore of 1.344v, LLC is set to Level 5 on ASUS motherboard.

The voltage did increase exponentially between 5.0 and 5.1 Ghz, but I'am wonder if it is safe to run CPU 24/7 at that voltage? If not I will drop back down to 5.0 Ghz

I have delidded and used Thermal grizzily conductunaut, and use AIO watercooling, so thermals are not an issue - maxing at ~68C

Cheers


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Keller1234*
> 
> What is a safe voltage for 7700K overclock?
> 
> I'm getting stability @ 5.1 Ghz with a UEFI adaptive voltage of 1.354v, and a HWInfo Vcore of 1.344v, LLC is set to Level 5 on ASUS motherboard.
> 
> The voltage did increase exponentially between 5.0 and 5.1 Ghz, but I'am wonder if it is safe to run CPU 24/7 at that voltage? If not I will drop back down to 5.0 Ghz
> 
> I have delidded and used Thermal grizzily conductunaut, and use AIO watercooling, so thermals are not an issue - maxing at ~68C
> 
> Cheers


General consensus seems to be for 24/7 use 1.4V or less provided temps are OK


----------



## MaKeN

5.1 at 1.354v 68c sounds really good
What voltage 5.0 requires?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Keller1234*
> 
> What is a safe voltage for 7700K overclock?
> 
> I'm getting stability @ 5.1 Ghz with a UEFI adaptive voltage of 1.354v, and a HWInfo Vcore of 1.344v, LLC is set to Level 5 on ASUS motherboard.
> 
> The voltage did increase exponentially between 5.0 and 5.1 Ghz, but I'am wonder if it is safe to run CPU 24/7 at that voltage? If not I will drop back down to 5.0 Ghz
> 
> I have delidded and used Thermal grizzily conductunaut, and use AIO watercooling, so thermals are not an issue - maxing at ~68C
> 
> Cheers


1.35V with a bit of droop under load and that temp range is probably good for decades.


----------



## NeoandGeo

Couple of niggling issues along with an update to my delidded 7700k w/ Kryonaut TIM application. I decided to go ahead and take the full plunge and do a proper application of Conductonaut on the CPU die and the underside of the IHS. Long story short, the process went smoothly and I am now able to reach a new max of 5.1Ghz | 50xUC | -1 AVX | 1.375v and stay under 70c under Realbench AVX encode after about 30 minutes. Lowering the overall temps has also been kind to my RAM. Previously I hit a limit on my 4x8GB G.Skill RJ V 3200c14 of 3600c16 with tightened RTL/Tertiary timings. Now, without losing stability, I am able to bump up the voltages to 1.4v on the RAM and ~1.25v VCCIO/SA and run 3733c16 with a hair more optimization on the secondary timings.































Now on to my issues. I am not sure when this happened exactly and I am guessing, but I noticed my 1080 Ti is only running as PCIe 3.0 x8 instead of x16. I am using a Maximus IX Hero and have covered all the bases that I know of in troubleshooting, using the top slot, showing as x8 in the BIOS, so not a driver/Windows related issue. I have re-seated the card several times and made sure it's making perfect contact, checked the contacts on the GPU, made sure the PCIe slot is free of debris. As I took the CPU out of the socket to reseat it I noticed one pin that kind of stood out compared to the rest of them (6th pin over from the bottom left area, sorry for the semi-blurry pic:



Can it be determined if that is in an area of the socket related to the dedicated 16 PCIe lanes on the CPU? I have not yet tested the card in another PC, but I will be able to in the next couple of days in case this isn't the issue. Also is it just a matter of using tiny tweezers, a steady hand and moving it back into the correct orientation?

Thanks again for all the great advice and excellent discussions going on in here, this has been by far the most fun I've had tinkering with a PC both physically and electronically.


----------



## MaKeN

Its very easy to bend it back, i use a magnifying glass and a simple needle. Just do not push hard , thats it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NeoandGeo*
> 
> Couple of niggling issues along with an update to my delidded 7700k w/ Kryonaut TIM application. I decided to go ahead and take the full plunge and do a proper application of Conductonaut on the CPU die and the underside of the IHS. Long story short, the process went smoothly and I am now able to reach a new max of 5.1Ghz | 50xUC | -1 AVX | 1.375v and stay under 70c under Realbench AVX encode after about 30 minutes. Lowering the overall temps has also been kind to my RAM. Previously I hit a limit on my 4x8GB G.Skill RJ V 3200c14 of 3600c16 with tightened RTL/Tertiary timings. Now, without losing stability, I am able to bump up the voltages to 1.4v on the RAM and ~1.25v VCCIO/SA and run 3733c16 with a hair more optimization on the secondary timings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now on to my issues. I am not sure when this happened exactly and I am guessing, but I noticed my 1080 Ti is only running as PCIe 3.0 x8 instead of x16. I am using a Maximus IX Hero and have covered all the bases that I know of in troubleshooting, using the top slot, showing as x8 in the BIOS, so not a driver/Windows related issue. I have re-seated the card several times and made sure it's making perfect contact, checked the contacts on the GPU, made sure the PCIe slot is free of debris. As I took the CPU out of the socket to reseat it I noticed one pin that kind of stood out compared to the rest of them (6th pin over from the bottom left area, sorry for the semi-blurry pic:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can it be determined if that is in an area of the socket related to the dedicated 16 PCIe lanes on the CPU? I have not yet tested the card in another PC, but I will be able to in the next couple of days in case this isn't the issue. Also is it just a matter of using tiny tweezers, a steady hand and moving it back into the correct orientation?
> 
> Thanks again for all the great advice and excellent discussions going on in here, this has been by far the most fun I've had tinkering with a PC both physically and electronically.


yeah - bend it back... when you place the cpu on that it will short to the pin above it. You can check the land signal assignments in the Intel datasheet if you care to. otherwise, just fix and check the PCIE bandwidth.


----------



## NeoandGeo

Welp, that was the issue and that was much easier than I expected. Touched it a couple times with some precision tweezers and it virtually just popped back into place on its own.

After booting it back up I got a message about a new CPU being installed. I saw that only one other time during the half dozen or so in and out routines the CPU went through while I have been fiddling with everything. I guess that was the motherboard telling me that the PCIe lane count changed so it was more or less a new, or at least different, CPU at that point.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NeoandGeo*
> 
> Welp, that was the issue and that was much easier than I expected. Touched it a couple times with some precision tweezers and it virtually just popped back into place on its own.
> 
> After booting it back up I got a message about a new CPU being installed. I saw that only one other time during the half dozen or so in and out routines the CPU went through while I have been fiddling with everything. I guess that was the motherboard telling me that the PCIe lane count changed so *it was more or less a new, or at least different, CPU at that point*.


cool.. and yes, from the MB/Bios perspective - it's a new CPU.


----------



## AyeYo

What do you guys trust for reading vcore while in the OS? I noticed HWinfo gets a lot of use these days, but the spread between what HWinfo is telling me and what CPU-Z is telling me is massive (like 0.15-0.20v difference). Also, how accurate is the VID info in HWinfo?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> What do you guys trust for reading vcore while in the OS? I noticed HWinfo gets a lot of use these days, but the spread between what HWinfo is telling me and what CPU-Z is telling me is massive (like 0.15-0.20v difference). Also, how accurate is the VID info in HWinfo?


Personally i use Aida64 for all my system monitoring.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> What do you guys trust for reading vcore while in the OS? I noticed HWinfo gets a lot of use these days, but the spread between what HWinfo is telling me and what CPU-Z is telling me is massive (like 0.15-0.20v difference). Also, how accurate is the VID info in HWinfo?


VID is the voltage requested by the CPU and Vcore is what is actually supplied.

I would trust Vcore more because that is the software readout of the VRM output of the motherboard.

The only reading that is more accurate is a DMM on the mobo cap banks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> snip


Username: Dasboogieman
CPU Model: i7-7700k
Base Clock: Bclk: 100
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency: 5200
Cache Frequency: 46
Vcore in UEFI: 1.344 adaptive + 0.001 offset
Vcore: 1.328
FCLK: 1000mhz
Cooling Solution: Delidded, Conductonaut, custom water.
Stability Test: Realbench 8hrs

Batch Number: Vietnam X712D828
Ram Speed: 3466 14-15-15-41 2T tRFC 270
Ram Voltage: 1.375V
VCCIO: 1.1
VCCSA: 1.1
Motherboard: Z270, Asus Strix Gaming Z270H
LLC Setting: LLC4
Misc Comments: AVX Offset -2, stock voltage was 1.125V


----------



## Waleh

Hey guys, so I am using a 7700k with the ITX rig in my sig. My temperatures on stock clocks are very high! On idle, I hover around 35 and during gaming (Battlefield 1, a CPU intensive game) I am in the 80's with peaks of 89 degrees! Is it safe for the CPU to handle this kind of temp? Do I need to send it over to silicon lottery so they can delid it for me to just run at stock? Thanks


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waleh*
> 
> Hey guys, so I am using a 7700k with the ITX rig in my sig. My temperatures on stock clocks are very high! On idle, I hover around 35 and during gaming (Battlefield 1, a CPU intensive game) I am in the 80's with peaks of 89 degrees! Is it safe for the CPU to handle this kind of temp? Do I need to send it over to silicon lottery so they can delid it for me to just run at stock? Thanks


At stock settings this should be completely fine. If you want to try something immediately to maybe get a bit off your temps, you might check the bios voltage settings whether they're set on 'auto' - many motherboards seem to give a bit too much juice to the CPU by default nowadays and you might be able to lower the voltage (and thus power consumption and thus temps) by fiddling with the settings manually.

But as said, the temperatures are well within Intel's standard operating parameters and should not cause any trouble.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waleh*
> 
> Hey guys, so I am using a 7700k with the ITX rig in my sig. My temperatures on stock clocks are very high! On idle, I hover around 35 and during gaming (Battlefield 1, a CPU intensive game) I am in the 80's with peaks of 89 degrees! Is it safe for the CPU to handle this kind of temp? Do I need to send it over to silicon lottery so they can delid it for me to just run at stock? Thanks


That is ok, I game at that temperature also. If you send the processor to silicon lottery it will void the 3 year warranty.


----------



## clubbin09

sorry i had to start again with the oc i was having problems with my out date bios


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> Hope this qualifies
> User name: clubbin09
> CPU Model: 7700K
> Base Clock: 100Mhz
> Core Multiplier: 53
> Core Frequency: 5300Mhz
> Cache Frequency: 5000Mhz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.375V
> Vcore: 1.376V
> FCLK: 1000Mhz
> Cooling Solution: Custom Loop
> Stability Test: OCCT 4.5.1 1 Hour Large Data Set
> 
> Batch Number: Vietnam X653B247
> Ram Speed: G.Skill Trident Z RGB GS-F4-3200C16Q-32GTZR 32GB (4x8GB) DDR4, 3200MHz, 16-18-18-38-2N, 1.35v
> Ram Voltage: 1.35V
> Motherboard: ASUS ROG Maximus IX Formula
> LLC Setting: 5
> Misc Comments: Ambient temp 20 degrees C. non Delidded


Nice chip







but your cache is at 4500Mhz not 5000Mhz, either way very nice.


----------



## clubbin09

i thinks mine is just bugged out every thing reads 50x on the cache


----------



## becks

Very NICE CPU samples lately!!

I'm still not done with OC-ing my chips and when I think that I started back in February


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> i thinks mine is just bugged out every thing reads 50x on the cache


What does CPU-Z show for NB on the memory tab say?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Very NICE CPU samples lately!!
> 
> I'm still not done with OC-ing my chips and when I think that I started back in February


Yeah kinda proves what silicon lottery have been saying that historically the best CPU samples tend to be produced at the beginning and the end of a models production cycle


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> i thinks mine is just bugged out every thing reads 50x on the cache




The chache speed is indicated at the other tab of CPU-Z. Check please.


----------



## scracy

NVM


----------



## clubbin09

i going to run the test on fresh windows see yous boys soon with the fresh windows i might push more but i don't know yet


----------



## EDK-TheONE

is it possible core and uncore has same ratio? my board is z270 m7. it is always at max uncore ratio=core ratio - 3 so if i set core=50 and uncore=48 then it automatically set uncore=47


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EDK-TheONE*
> 
> is it possible core and uncore has same ratio? my board is z270 m7. it is always at max uncore ratio=core ratio - 3 so if i set core=50 and uncore=48 then it automatically set uncore=47


Does it actually flip the setting in BIOS like that or are you just measuring it at 100mhz less than what it's supposed to be?

Uncore for me seems to like to throttle -100mhz of what it is set to when stressing the cpu, I dunno why (if memory serves some obscure power throttling flag is raised). That could be the culprit in this instance?


----------



## EDK-TheONE

I think it is limitation of bios in my broad and it is not related to be in idle or stress.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Yeah kinda proves what silicon lottery have been saying that historically the best CPU samples tend to be produced at the beginning and the end of a models production cycle


Can confirm, my incredible sample was a very late production model, just made in march. My old one was a mid production cycle and it was complete a potato.


----------



## clubbin09

Hope this qualifies
User name: clubbin09
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 100Mhz
Core Multiplier: 53
Core Frequency: 5300Mhz
Cache Frequency: 5300Mhz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.360V
Vcore: 1.376V
FCLK: 1000Mhz
Cooling Solution: Custom Loop
Stability Test: OCCT 4.5.1 1 Hour Large Data Set

Batch Number: Vietnam X653B247
Ram Speed: G.Skill Trident Z RGB GS-F4-3200C16Q-32GTZR 32GB (4x8GB) DDR4, 3200MHz, 16-18-18-38-2N, 1.35v
Ram Voltage: 1.35V
Motherboard: ASUS ROG Maximus IX Formula
LLC Setting: 5
Misc Comments: Ambient temp 20 degrees C. non Delidded, fresh windows , reset bois


----------



## MaKeN

Non delided 5.3 at 1.36 damn


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> Hope this qualifies
> User name: clubbin09
> CPU Model: 7700K
> Base Clock: 100Mhz
> Core Multiplier: 53
> Core Frequency: 5300Mhz
> Cache Frequency: 5300Mhz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.360V
> Vcore: 1.376V
> FCLK: 1000Mhz
> Cooling Solution: Custom Loop
> Stability Test: OCCT 4.5.1 1 Hour Large Data Set
> 
> Batch Number: Vietnam X653B247
> Ram Speed: G.Skill Trident Z RGB GS-F4-3200C16Q-32GTZR 32GB (4x8GB) DDR4, 3200MHz, 16-18-18-38-2N, 1.35v
> Ram Voltage: 1.35V
> Motherboard: ASUS ROG Maximus IX Formula
> LLC Setting: 5
> Misc Comments: Ambient temp 20 degrees C. non Delidded, fresh windows , reset bois


Your custom loop works like a champ and the silicon gods have favored you! Imagine if you did delid your chip. Keeping temps under 70c might even give you enough overhead to OC above 5.3ghz


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Non delided 5.3 at 1.36 damn


thank you


----------



## AyeYo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> VID is the voltage requested by the CPU and Vcore is what is actually supplied.
> 
> I would trust Vcore more because that is the software readout of the VRM output of the motherboard.


I get that. It was two, unrelated questions.

CPUZ shows Vcore 0.15-0.20v LOWER than HWinfo. Which should I believe? That's not a trivial difference.

Also, unrelated question, but HWinfo seems to have a stock, load VID measure in the CPU info. Is it accurate?


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> I get that. It was two, unrelated questions.
> 
> CPUZ shows Vcore 0.15-0.20v LOWER than HWinfo. Which should I believe? That's not a trivial difference.
> 
> Also, unrelated question, but HWinfo seems to have a stock, load VID measure in the CPU info. Is it accurate?


If you're using dynamic VCore, discrepancies can be due to poll rate.

I use HWiNFO64. It's VCore matches CPU-Z but updates far more frequently. HWinfo is easy, but sometimes off by a bit...


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> I get that. It was two, unrelated questions.
> 
> CPUZ shows Vcore 0.15-0.20v LOWER than HWinfo. Which should I believe? That's not a trivial difference.
> 
> Also, unrelated question, but HWinfo seems to have a stock, load VID measure in the CPU info. Is it accurate?


i've noticed HWinfo does not keep up with cpu-z. if cpu-z says something for more than half a second i noticed HWinfo will pick it up as well


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horakur333*
> 
> Your custom loop works like a champ and the silicon gods have favored you! Imagine if you did delid your chip. Keeping temps under 70c might even give you enough overhead to OC above 5.3ghz


sorry i don't want to delid i'm happy with how it is. if i don't delid i will get more money for it when i sell it


----------



## AyeYo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> If you're using dynamic VCore, discrepancies can be due to poll rate.
> 
> I use HWiNFO64. It's VCore matches CPU-Z but updates far more frequently. HWinfo is easy, but sometimes off by a bit...


That might make sense if we're talking about watching them during transients, but this occurs in all cases. Under steady load and steady voltage, HWinfo (and I'm pretty sure it's actually HWinfo64, would have to check) is consistently higher. For example, when encoding a video with Premiere Pro, CPUZ shows a steady 1.256v for minutes at a time - HWinfo is showing over 1.4v.


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> sorry i don't want to delid i'm happy with how it is. if i don't delid i will get more money for it when i sell it


Yeah I agree with you. I'm just jealous because I got an extremely mediocre 7700K as far as some of the stats I've seen. I would be leaving that bad boy exactly as it is too. My 7700K w/ 240mm AIO cooler & Gelid Thermal Compound @ a manually set 4.50ghz 1.25v (lowest stable clock I could achieve) was running at the same temp as your 5.3ghz pretty much mehhhh lol


----------



## Eletrox

Would someone very wise be as kind as to join me in skype or discord and help me a bit with my system overclock? looking to push the limits of my rig, but quite frankly I can't properly wrap my mind around everything







I've a stable OC of 5.2 but I am looking to push 5.3








>Kaby i7 7700k
> Rog Maximus Formula IX
>GTX 1080 Strix
>custom loop (360mm + 120mm rad)

My discord name is Munchies#7395
My Skype name is danielgronsberg

Really hope to hear from someone soon


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eletrox*
> 
> Would someone very wise be as kind as to join me in skype or discord and help me a bit with my system overclock? looking to push the limits of my rig, but quite frankly I can't properly wrap my mind around everything
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've a stable OC of 5.2 but I am looking to push 5.3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >Kaby i7 7700k
> > Rog Maximus Formula IX
> >GTX 1080 Strix
> >custom loop (360mm + 120mm rad)
> 
> My discord name is Munchies#7395
> My Skype name is danielgronsberg
> 
> Really hope to hear from someone soon


i added you on discord

clubbin09
#9895


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> Hope this qualifies
> User name: clubbin09
> CPU Model: 7700K
> Base Clock: 100Mhz
> Core Multiplier: 53
> Core Frequency: 5300Mhz
> Cache Frequency: 5300Mhz
> Vcore in UEFI: 1.360V
> Vcore: 1.376V
> FCLK: 1000Mhz
> Cooling Solution: Custom Loop
> Stability Test: OCCT 4.5.1 1 Hour Large Data Set
> 
> Batch Number: Vietnam X653B247
> Ram Speed: G.Skill Trident Z RGB GS-F4-3200C16Q-32GTZR 32GB (4x8GB) DDR4, 3200MHz, 16-18-18-38-2N, 1.35v
> Ram Voltage: 1.35V
> Motherboard: ASUS ROG Maximus IX Formula
> LLC Setting: 5
> Misc Comments: Ambient temp 20 degrees C. non Delidded, fresh windows , reset bois
> 
> [
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> IMG ALT=""]http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3117396/width/500/height/1000[/IMG]


Very nice.. but you gotta do something with that ram now. especially running cache at 5.3?


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Very nice.. but you gotta do something with that ram now. especially running cache at 5.3?


like what man


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> That might make sense if we're talking about watching them during transients, but this occurs in all cases. Under steady load and steady voltage, HWinfo (and I'm pretty sure it's actually HWinfo64, would have to check) is consistently higher. For example, when encoding a video with Premiere Pro, CPUZ shows a steady 1.256v for minutes at a time - HWinfo is showing over 1.4v.


Heh. He wrote HWinfo, but I read it as HWMonitor.
Gotta slow down on the multi-tasking...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> like what man


that kit will do 3466, 3600 or possibly higher. first, change 2T to 1T (command rate) add 25mV vdimm. 3466 with the same timings at 1.4 to 1.425V should be straight forward.

get some pointers *here*


----------



## Kalpa

Although when you do, be prepared for a lot of gray hairs. Tweaking memory up to ultimate performance is time consuming and will try your patience for minimal real-world performance gains.


----------



## MaKeN

I agree, memory OC'ing isnt fun


----------



## Jpmboy

wimps.


----------



## MaKeN

@Jpmboy

I own a : F4-3400C16D-16GTZ kit....
Apears to be that rare when some one buys this kit, did not really find any info on ocing it...

Any info at how this one OCs?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> @Jpmboy
> 
> I own a : F4-3400C16D-16GTZ kit....
> Apears to be that rare when some one buys this kit, did not really find any info on ocing it...
> 
> Any info at how this one OCs?


which MB?

edit: open aid64, MB> SPD...
what doe sit list as dram manufacturer?


----------



## AyeYo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> My Bios update lowered the stock voltage on my Gigabyte Z170. Post back what you get with the Bios update?


So I finally had time to actually do the BIOS update and my frustration continues. Maybe you guys can give me some more suggestions. Here's what I've got so far...

By way of recap, the original issue was excessively high auto vcore at stock speeds (like 1.36v in RB and occasionally cracking 1.4v or higher in random use). This is if you believe my CPUZ readings. If you believe HWinfo readings more, it's more like 1.45v in RB and occasionally getting up to 1.5v).

I had previously gotten these to more realistic numbers by setting vcore to "adaptive + offset" -0.110v. This yielded a max of about 1.272v in RB according to CPUZ.

Anywho...

I tried a BIOS update, there's been one BIOS released since the one I was running previously so that's what I used.

The first thing I noticed in the new BIOS is that all vcore power delivery settings are gone. The only option is to simply set vcore - no offset, no dynamic, no fixed, just a vcore set point that does who knows what. So I set my other voltages manually and left vcore on auto and left speeds at stock. I fired up RB and got 1.288v under load. Great, that's much better than my prior vcore with auto voltage.

Then things got weird. I figured maybe this chip isn't junk and was held back previous by a bad BIOS. So I set vcore to a very liberal 1.320v and multiplier to 48. I fired up CPUZ and noticed that this setting gives me 1.320v all the time - idle, RB load, P95 load, doesn't matter, 1.320v all the time. That's obviously not ideal, but I guess now I know that the ONLY manual vcore this new BIOS allows is fixed voltage. I'd also have to assume that "auto" LLC doesn't mean "no LLC" (there's no setting whatsoever for NO LLC), because there must be some mid level LLC getting applied under auto to keep voltage exactly at the set point under any amount of load.

I only had a couple minutes to play around with it this morning, but RB scores were 20k lower than at stock speeds, so I figured there must be some slight instability. Sure enough, firing up P95 had 6 of 8 workers error out almost instantly.

Now, I needed to use the computer to get actual work done, so went back into the BIOS and set everything back to how it was... auto multiplier, auto vcore. Keep in mind this previously produced 1.288v in RB under load. I booted back up, fired up RB and CPUZ just to check things quickly.... and now suddenly I'm back to insane vcore readings, at stock clocks. Light load was knocking around near 1.4v and RB full load was 1.360v. *** is going on?

So where to from here? This MB is pissing me off so much I hardly even care about overclocking the thing anymore. I just want to run stock clocks without having to test and screw around to get a proper vcore that isn't through the roof. If I do decide to overclock, I don't want to deal with forced high LLC and fixed voltage, but those seem to be the only options. This MB is cool looking but MSI's BIOS is trash.


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that kit will do 3466, 3600 or possibly higher. first, change 2T to 1T (command rate) add 25mV vdimm. 3466 with the same timings at 1.4 to 1.425V should be straight forward.
> 
> get some pointers *here*


ok but what real world performance will i gain by doing the ram


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> So I finally had time to actually do the BIOS update and my frustration continues. Maybe you guys can give me some more suggestions. Here's what I've got so far...
> 
> By way of recap, the original issue was excessively high auto vcore at stock speeds (like 1.36v in RB and occasionally cracking 1.4v or higher in random use). This is if you believe my CPUZ readings. If you believe HWinfo readings more, it's more like 1.45v in RB and occasionally getting up to 1.5v).
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Hidden parts of post
> 
> 
> 
> I had previously gotten these to more realistic numbers by setting vcore to "adaptive + offset" -0.110v. This yielded a max of about 1.272v in RB according to CPUZ.
> 
> Anywho...
> 
> I tried a BIOS update, there's been one BIOS released since the one I was running previously so that's what I used.
> 
> The first thing I noticed in the new BIOS is that all vcore power delivery settings are gone. The only option is to simply set vcore - no offset, no dynamic, no fixed, just a vcore set point that does who knows what. So I set my other voltages manually and left vcore on auto and left speeds at stock. I fired up RB and got 1.288v under load. Great, that's much better than my prior vcore with auto voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> Then things got weird. I figured maybe this chip isn't junk and was held back previous by a bad BIOS. So I set vcore to a very liberal 1.320v and multiplier to 48. I fired up CPUZ and noticed that this setting gives me 1.320v all the time - idle, RB load, P95 load, doesn't matter, 1.320v all the time. That's obviously not ideal, but I guess now I know that the ONLY manual vcore this new BIOS allows is fixed voltage. I'd also have to assume that "auto" LLC doesn't mean "no LLC" (there's no setting whatsoever for NO LLC), because there must be some mid level LLC getting applied under auto.
> 
> I only had a couple minutes to play around with it this morning, but RB scores were 20k lower than at stock speeds, so I figured there must be some slight instability. Sure enough, firing up P95 had 6 of 8 workers error out almost instantly.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: More Hidden Stuff
> 
> 
> 
> Now, I needed to use the computer to get actual work done, so went back into the BIOS and set everything back to how it was... auto multiplier, auto vcore. Keep in mind this previously produced 1.288v in RB under load. I booted back up, fired up RB and CPUZ just to check things quickly.... and now suddenly I'm back to insane vcore readings, at stock clocks. Light load was knocking around near 1.4v and RB full load was 1.360v. *** is going on?
> 
> 
> 
> So where to from here? This MB is pissing me off so much I hardly even care about overclocking the thing anymore. I just want to run stock clocks without having to test and screw around to get a proper vcore that isn't through the roof. If I do decide to overclock, I don't want to deal with forced high LLC and fixed voltage, but those seem to be the only options. This MB is cool looking but MSI's BIOS is trash.


What does your BIOS page look like when you're attempting Adaptive + Offset?

CPU Core / GT Voltage Mode = [Adaptive + Offset]
CPU Core Voltage = ?
CPU Core Voltage Offset Mode= ?
CPU Core Voltage Offset = ?

And what are your available LLC settings?

There's an F12 screen function in your BIOS. I think it writes to USB thumb drive....?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> ok but what real world performance will i gain by doing the ram


as "real world" as 5.2 vs 5.3









NP - enjoy your rig.


----------



## AyeYo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> What does your BIOS page look like when you're attempting Adaptive + Offset?
> 
> CPU Core / GT Voltage Mode = [Adaptive + Offset]
> CPU Core Voltage = ?
> CPU Core Voltage Offset Mode= ?
> CPU Core Voltage Offset = ?
> 
> And what are your available LLC settings?
> 
> There's an F12 screen function in your BIOS. I think it writes to USB thumb drive....?


I can post screenshots later when I'm back at home, but this: "CPU Core / GT Voltage Mode = [Adaptive + Offset] " is GONE. This option doesn't exist anymore.

Currently the only option is CPU Core Voltage = Auto

This option is preceded by the DigiPower menu (and voltage mode didn't get moved there, I checked) and followed by CPU SA Voltage.

Current settings are something in the neighborhood of:

Core Voltage = Auto
CPU SA = 1.18
CPU IO = 1.12
PLL OC = 1.20
PLL SFR = Auto
ST PLL = Auto
DRAM = 1.35 (applies as 1.36 for some reason)
DRAM VPP = Auto
DRAM VREF = Auto
PCH Voltage = 1.00

XMP is enabled - 3200mhz, no timings touched

LLC options are: Auto, 1-8... Auto is NOT off, it's whatever the board wants. mode 1 is NOT off, it's minimal LLC (I've tested this in the past and the example chart in the BIOS shows this as well). There is no setting to turn it off.

So here are my thoughts, tell me what you think....

I'm going to manually set LLC to lowest allowed to take that "auto" variable out. I'll set 1.33v core voltage and 4800mhz - then test. First thing I want to see is, does this produce dynamic voltage. If no, then MSI sucks and I need to go back to my old BIOS. If it does produce dynamic voltage, then the next thing I want to see is whether voltage sags from BIOS setting under load. This will tell me that high levels of LLC aren't getting applied in the background. If it does sag, then I think I've "solved" my problem as well as it can be and I'll simply have to play the voltage fishing game to find something stable.

In any case, I still hate this board, because I bought this setup as more or less plug and play with no intention of overclocking. Doing the boot it and forget it would have fried my chip very early with auto SA and IO voltages off the charts (1.35v+) and vcore >1.4v. That's absurd for any MB manufacturer to set auto voltages that aggressively at STOCK speeds. I found another thread from a few months ago that I bumped that seems to indicate that these excessive voltages are a known issue on MSI Z170/270 boards when XMP is enabled. I guess now that I'm forced to waste my time tweaking to even get stock settings, I might as well just OC the damn thing.


----------



## clubbin09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> as "real world" as 5.2 vs 5.3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NP - enjoy your rig.


so nothing really thank you


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *clubbin09*
> 
> so nothing really thank you


2℅ irl = 200℅ epeen ?


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> I can post screenshots later when I'm back at home, but this: "CPU Core / GT Voltage Mode = [Adaptive + Offset] " is GONE. This option doesn't exist anymore.
> 
> Currently the only option is CPU Core Voltage = Auto
> 
> This option is preceded by the DigiPower menu (and voltage mode didn't get moved there, I checked) and followed by CPU SA Voltage.
> 
> Current settings are something in the neighborhood of:
> 
> Core Voltage = Auto
> CPU SA = 1.18
> CPU IO = 1.12
> PLL OC = 1.20
> PLL SFR = Auto
> ST PLL = Auto
> DRAM = 1.35 (applies as 1.36 for some reason)
> DRAM VPP = Auto
> DRAM VREF = Auto
> PCH Voltage = 1.00
> 
> XMP is enabled - 3200mhz, no timings touched
> 
> LLC options are: Auto, 1-8... Auto is NOT off, it's whatever the board wants. mode 1 is NOT off, it's minimal LLC (I've tested this in the past and the example chart in the BIOS shows this as well). There is no setting to turn it off.
> 
> So here are my thoughts, tell me what you think....
> 
> I'm going to manually set LLC to lowest allowed to take that "auto" variable out. I'll set 1.33v core voltage and 4800mhz - then test. First thing I want to see is, does this produce dynamic voltage. If no, then MSI sucks and I need to go back to my old BIOS. If it does produce dynamic voltage, then the next thing I want to see is whether voltage sags from BIOS setting under load. This will tell me that high levels of LLC aren't getting applied in the background. If it does sag, then I think I've "solved" my problem as well as it can be and I'll simply have to play the voltage fishing game to find something stable.
> 
> In any case, I still hate this board, because I bought this setup as more or less plug and play with no intention of overclocking. Doing the boot it and forget it would have fried my chip very early with auto SA and IO voltages off the charts (1.35v+) and vcore >1.4v. That's absurd for any MB manufacturer to set auto voltages that aggressively at STOCK speeds. I found another thread from a few months ago that I bumped that seems to indicate that these excessive voltages are a known issue on MSI Z170/270 boards when XMP is enabled. I guess now that I'm forced to waste my time tweaking to even get stock settings, I might as well just OC the damn thing.


OK.
First off: If you don't have Adaptive or Adaptive + Offset, I can't help you, so get those back. Reflash if you have to.

Once you get Adaptive back:

Leave XMP off. I've found that if you manually enter the XMP values for you memory, you don't need XMP enabled. In the end, you may still need 1.360 Volts, though.
You can leave Memory @ 1.360 for now. It doesn't matter.

Set
CPU SA = 1.190. (1.180 - 1.210)
CPU IO = 1.170. (1.160 - 1.200) <--- There's a symbiotic relationship between SA and IO in the specs. Don't set them too far apart.
PLL OC = 1.180 (1.170 - 1.200)
PLL SFR = Auto
ST PLL = 1.000
DRAM = 1.36. XMP=off
DRAM VPP = Auto
DRAM VREF = Auto
PCH Voltage = 1.00

The trick: On some MSI boards, the Adaptive + Offset actually works. The support staff has no idea how to do this.

*The Adaptive Voltage you enter becomes your new Virtual VID. At least that's what I call it. This number +.005V is what will show in HWiNFO64 as VID.*

To get it going:

CPU Core / GT Voltage Mode = [Adaptive + Offset]
CPU Core Voltage = 1.395V. (Or whatever Voltage is the highest you'll ever want Vcore to go - .005V.)
CPU Core Voltage Offset Mode= [+]
CPU Core Voltage Offset = 0.00

LLC = Mode 8 or lowest it will go.

Try your lowest overclock (4.6) and work up from there to your highest stable overclock. If at any speed running GeekBench 4 CPU Test with HWiNFO64 open crashes at the 1:52 point, you don't have enough VCore.

In practice, you'll want dynamic Voltage, so you'll want to have some C-states enabled (I set mine to C2) and EIST working, so the Offset is going to best work as a [+]. Any offset is applied to your entire curve and stock idle is already below .8V. If you go much lower, you run the risk of VCore being too low to boot.

On the other hand, some higher overclocks will fail because it's too hard for your system to jump quickly up from .7970V to 1.375 Volts. In this case, you want to lower your Adaptive VCore Voltage and add positive offset to raise VCore back up. You'll idle a little higher and still have the same top VCore, but will be more stable during transitions.

You want to use the lowest possible LLC, but sometimes you just can't. If your case is well cooled, try setting your CPU Switching freq and GT Switching freq to 500KHz or higher to keep things stable.

As far as VCore dropping on load, _it should_. I've found that LLC is properly used only when VDroop is > .0500 Volt on load. If VCore drops by .035V or so, you're golden.

Probably gonna catch grief for that last bit, but whatever...







*Nomex : [ON]*

Oh, and relax. Occasional forays above 1.4000V won't fry your chip. Even setting your VVID @1.400 won't fry it because it will almost always be lower than that. Setting your VCore @ 1.385 and running LLC = Mode 1 may very well fry it up, but we ain't gonna do that.

At least that's how it works on my Z170 M7 and my Z270 XPower Gaming Titanium...

Good luck.


----------



## NeoandGeo

With my lack of knowledge in OC'ing RAM I have currently ran into a wall and it's getting tedious finding out which of the RAM settings I can change in order to continue the slow climb upwards in performance increases that include long nights of clearing the CMOS several times and starting over.

My main issue being CR1 is a pain to get stable on my Maximus IX Hero for whatever reason even if I underclock everything to JEDEC. I have been able to get it stable in the past, but even then I will still get the occasional 55 error code on reboots and cold boots. When that happens trying to tweak it to get it working again will just cause the BIOS to eventually become corrupted and then reapplying my best known to work settings and trying again.

Also I haven't been able to OC the RAM with Manual OC settings, only applying XMP and OC'ing from there will create a stable environment, even if I copy over the settings exactly as the XMP profile has, Manual just produces a bootloop of A0 and D0 (May be A1 and D1, unsure at the moment) alternating Q-Codes. Does XMP add any noticeably higher offsets to any of the BIOS settings that I have to remember to apply in Manual OC mode?

I have used several resources and guides online, the biggest gains I found were playing around with some of the suggestions in the Skylake Guide on HWBot Memory forum. Not really sure what I can tighten/loosen at this point to provide better results. Also are any of the additional voltages outside of CPU Core/Cache, DRAM, VCCIO or SA important to stability? Those are all left at defaults since no guide really touches on them.

Any suggestions as to what changes I can make to increase performance further? I use the following RAM timings:




With: [email protected] | 50x Cache | Min. Cache: Auto | 1.39v | G.Skill Ripjaws V 4x8GB [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | MCH Full Check: On | MRC Fast Boot: Disabled

I can get more detailed BIOS settings if needed later on, but that's the quick rundown.

Thanks!


----------



## AyeYo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NeoandGeo*
> 
> Also I haven't been able to OC the RAM with Manual OC settings, only applying XMP and OC'ing from there will create a stable environment, even if I copy over the settings exactly as the XMP profile has, Manual just produces a bootloop of A0 and D0 (May be A1 and D1, unsure at the moment) alternating Q-Codes. Does XMP add any noticeably higher offsets to any of the BIOS settings that I have to remember to apply in Manual OC mode?


I've noticed this issue as well since upgrading from my Sandybridge. This never seemed to be a problem on that platform, but with these newer setups I can literally copy every XMP speed, timing, and sub-timing exactly and still get no boot. Switch on XMP and it magically boots.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NeoandGeo*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Many words....
> 
> 
> 
> With my lack of knowledge in OC'ing RAM I have currently ran into a wall and it's getting tedious finding out which of the RAM settings I can change in order to continue the slow climb upwards in performance increases that include long nights of clearing the CMOS several times and starting over.
> 
> My main issue being CR1 is a pain to get stable on my Maximus IX Hero for whatever reason even if I underclock everything to JEDEC. I have been able to get it stable in the past, but even then I will still get the occasional 55 error code on reboots and cold boots. When that happens trying to tweak it to get it working again will just cause the BIOS to eventually become corrupted and then reapplying my best known to work settings and trying again.
> 
> Also I haven't been able to OC the RAM with Manual OC settings, only applying XMP and OC'ing from there will create a stable environment, even if I copy over the settings exactly as the XMP profile has, Manual just produces a bootloop of A0 and D0 (May be A1 and D1, unsure at the moment) alternating Q-Codes. Does XMP add any noticeably higher offsets to any of the BIOS settings that I have to remember to apply in Manual OC mode?
> 
> I have used several resources and guides online, the biggest gains I found were playing around with some of the suggestions in the Skylake Guide on HWBot Memory forum. Not really sure what I can tighten/loosen at this point to provide better results. Also are any of the additional voltages outside of CPU Core/Cache, DRAM, VCCIO or SA important to stability? Those are all left at defaults since no guide really touches on them.
> 
> Any suggestions as to what changes I can make to increase performance further? I use the following RAM timings:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With: [email protected] | 50x Cache | Min. Cache: Auto | 1.39v | G.Skill Ripjaws V 4x8GB [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | MCH Full Check: On | MRC Fast Boot: Disabled
> 
> I can get more detailed BIOS settings if needed later on, but that's the quick rundown.
> 
> Thanks!


Question: Why the high VCCSA and VCCIO Voltages? By the book, the max on SA is actually 1.20V and IO is always less than SA. These are 'sweet spot' Voltages where more is usually not better. Are your values a result of experimentation?

Also, high quality boards will often boot loop multiple times with new Memory settings. They're pretty smart and are trying different combos based on the numbers you've entered. Mentioning this just so you aren't _too_ quick on the draw and interrupt the process before it succeeds or fails completely...


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> which MB?
> 
> edit: open aid64, MB> SPD...
> what doe sit list as dram manufacturer?


yep Samsung it is


----------



## Jpmboy

3400c16 kit is either a low bin B-die, or E-die. Need more info - please fill out rig builder and add it to your sig. Get a copy of ASrock timing configurator 4.0.3 and post a snip of your current best settings.









yeah - on a dual channel gaming rig the benes are hard to measure - never mind "notice". There's a half dozen reviews out there.
Quad channel, moving chunks of data (or 4K gaming) the difference is "real world".


----------



## NeoandGeo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Question: Why the high VCCSA and VCCIO Voltages? By the book, the max on SA is actually 1.20V and IO is always less than SA. These are 'sweet spot' Voltages where more is usually not better. Are your values a result of experimentation?
> 
> Also, high quality boards will often boot loop multiple times with new Memory settings. They're pretty smart and are trying different combos based on the numbers you've entered. Mentioning this just so you aren't _too_ quick on the draw and interrupt the process before it succeeds or fails completely...


I think it was the Asus ROG guide where I had seen ~1.2-1.25v for speeds above 3600Mhx. I'll play with some lower voltages there to see what that does.

Also yeah, this bootloop was definitely not going anywhere, the computer doesn't even really restart, physically like when the motherboard is finding appropriate settings to boot, it's running, but the codes would keep alternating back and forth along with the CPU and DRAM lights. Have let it sit like that for 20 minutes and it just keeps doing that.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> ...
> 
> "CPU Core / GT Voltage Mode = [Adaptive + Offset] " is GONE. This option doesn't exist anymore.
> 
> Currently the only option is CPU Core Voltage = Auto
> 
> ....


Check to see if there's an option at the top of the page that allows you to switch from [Normal Mode] to [Expert Mode].


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 3400c16 kit is either a low bin B-die, or E-die. Need more info - please fill out rig builder and add it to your sig. Get a copy of ASrock timing configurator 4.0.3 and post a snip of your current best settings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - on a dual channel gaming rig the benes are hard to measure - never mind "notice". There's a half dozen reviews out there.
> Quad channel, moving chunks of data (or 4K gaming) the difference is "real world".


not the best settings,it stays on auto now ..


----------



## AyeYo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> OK.
> First off: If you don't have Adaptive or Adaptive + Offset, I can't help you, so get those back. Reflash if you have to.
> 
> Once you get Adaptive back:
> 
> Leave XMP off. I've found that if you manually enter the XMP values for you memory, you don't need XMP enabled. In the end, you may still need 1.360 Volts, though.
> You can leave Memory @ 1.360 for now. It doesn't matter.
> 
> Set
> CPU SA = 1.190. (1.180 - 1.210)
> CPU IO = 1.170. (1.160 - 1.200) <--- There's a symbiotic relationship between SA and IO in the specs. Don't set them too far apart.
> PLL OC = 1.180 (1.170 - 1.200)
> PLL SFR = Auto
> ST PLL = 1.000
> DRAM = 1.36. XMP=off
> DRAM VPP = Auto
> DRAM VREF = Auto
> PCH Voltage = 1.00
> 
> The trick: On some MSI boards, the Adaptive + Offset actually works. The support staff has no idea how to do this.
> 
> *The Adaptive Voltage you enter becomes your new Virtual VID. At least that's what I call it. This number +.005V is what will show in HWiNFO64 as VID.*
> 
> To get it going:
> 
> CPU Core / GT Voltage Mode = [Adaptive + Offset]
> CPU Core Voltage = 1.395V. (Or whatever Voltage is the highest you'll ever want Vcore to go - .005V.)
> CPU Core Voltage Offset Mode= [+]
> CPU Core Voltage Offset = 0.00
> 
> LLC = Mode 8 or lowest it will go.
> 
> Try your lowest overclock (4.6) and work up from there to your highest stable overclock. If at any speed running GeekBench 4 CPU Test with HWiNFO64 open crashes at the 1:52 point, you don't have enough VCore.
> 
> In practice, you'll want dynamic Voltage, so you'll want to have some C-states enabled (I set mine to C2) and EIST working, so the Offset is going to best work as a [+]. Any offset is applied to your entire curve and stock idle is already below .8V. If you go much lower, you run the risk of VCore being too low to boot.
> 
> On the other hand, some higher overclocks will fail because it's too hard for your system to jump quickly up from .7970V to 1.375 Volts. In this case, you want to lower your Adaptive VCore Voltage and add positive offset to raise VCore back up. You'll idle a little higher and still have the same top VCore, but will be more stable during transitions.
> 
> You want to use the lowest possible LLC, but sometimes you just can't. If your case is well cooled, try setting your CPU Switching freq and GT Switching freq to 500KHz or higher to keep things stable.
> 
> As far as VCore dropping on load, _it should_. I've found that LLC is properly used only when VDroop is > .0500 Volt on load. If VCore drops by .035V or so, you're golden.
> 
> Probably gonna catch grief for that last bit, but whatever...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Nomex : [ON]*
> 
> Oh, and relax. Occasional forays above 1.4000V won't fry your chip. Even setting your VVID @1.400 won't fry it because it will almost always be lower than that. Setting your VCore @ 1.385 and running LLC = Mode 1 may very well fry it up, but we ain't gonna do that.
> 
> At least that's how it works on my Z170 M7 and my Z270 XPower Gaming Titanium...
> 
> Good luck.


So, as Beagle pointed out, I'm just an idiot and forgot to switch to expert mode. That's why voltage modes weren't showing.

I did most of what you suggested. Adaptive + offset works awesome. I did leave XMP enabled because, as pointed out in another post, even copying XMP settings doesn't seem to yield stable RAM.

I started with 1.330v vcore and 0.005 (0 turned into auto) offset. After playing around for awhile, here's what I came up with...

4900mhz will not stabilize at any vcore I want without significant LLC, which I also don't want. I originally made it to 4900mhz -2 AVX and was getting like 1.320v under load (I think BIOS set at this point was 1.355v + 0.020 offset). This would error out in P95 quickly, so I tried -3 AVX. This worked in P95 but would freeze the system exactly at 1:21 in GeekBench 4. I then dropped to 4800mhz with -2 AVX and lowered BIOS voltage to 1.330 + 0.020 offset. This passed GeekBench, 15 minutes of small FFT Prime (only in mid 80C range), two hours of RB, and ran all night at idle + whatever Windows does (this is how I like to check transient and low-load stability).

So that current combo yields only 1.312v on Large FFT, 1.288 on Small FFT, and 1.320v in RB were the load is lower. So mode 8 definitely has some vdroop, but I want that anyway. What I don't like about this setting is that AVX is only at 4600mhz, which is hardly an increase. This isn't a gaming computer, it's a work computer, and I actually use AVX heavy applications and would like the extra speed. A 100mhz increase almost doesn't seem worth it.

Any suggestions for bringing AVX closer to normal core speed other than just more vcore? I went as high as 1.355v + 0.020 offset and that still wasn't enough for 4800mhz with AVX -1. Also, is the cache speed worth increasing? Most sources seem to say no, but most sources are also focused on gaming. For the few people that do bother, how high up in relation to core speed does it typically come?


----------



## TheADLA

Hey guys,

long time no update. Sitting nicely on my Chip, finally delidded.. 1.36v Vcore, low temps, ran XTU, Cinebench and 3DMark for my 24/7 use. Also ran Prime for a while but because its the later version with AVX (which I set to -3 in my Bios) temps are also fine and it was stable. It is good enough for me and a stable 24/7 OC @5 Ghz. My LLC is at Mode 4 (On an MSI Board) so the VCore I saw was 1.384v (with LLC). Overall I'm happy







Did a delid with Liquid metal on all (Die on IHS and IHS on AIO) and also did Liquid Metal on my 1080 Ti







Summing up. Good enough 24/7 OC for me. I am happy








I actually saw a vid on the Hell machine from Der8auer on youtube who also had an average delidded chip and I used his settings (also on an MSI) to try it. I did not try to go down on Voltage since it runs fine and temps are very nice. (My chip is really just not super obviously. Might be able to go lower on VCore but it's ok for me, did not try to go further than 5 Ghz)

VCore: 1.36v
LLC: Mode 4
Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4 3000 @ 3200 (Via Memory Try! it function)
AVX Offset -3






I'm good

Cheers


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> So, as Beagle pointed out, I'm just an idiot and forgot to switch to expert mode. That's why voltage modes weren't showing.
> 
> I did most of what you suggested. Adaptive + offset works awesome. I did leave XMP enabled because, as pointed out in another post, even copying XMP settings doesn't seem to yield stable RAM.
> 
> I started with 1.330v vcore and 0.005 (0 turned into auto) offset. After playing around for awhile, here's what I came up with...
> 
> 4900mhz will not stabilize at any vcore I want without significant LLC, which I also don't want. I originally made it to 4900mhz -2 AVX and was getting like 1.320v under load (I think BIOS set at this point was 1.355v + 0.020 offset). This would error out in P95 quickly, so I tried -3 AVX. This worked in P95 but would freeze the system exactly at 1:21 in GeekBench 4. I then dropped to 4800mhz with -2 AVX and lowered BIOS voltage to 1.330 + 0.020 offset. This passed GeekBench, 15 minutes of small FFT Prime (only in mid 80C range), two hours of RB, and ran all night at idle + whatever Windows does (this is how I like to check transient and low-load stability).
> 
> So that current combo yields only 1.312v on Large FFT, 1.288 on Small FFT, and 1.320v in RB were the load is lower. So mode 8 definitely has some vdroop, but I want that anyway. What I don't like about this setting is that AVX is only at 4600mhz, which is hardly an increase. This isn't a gaming computer, it's a work computer, and I actually use AVX heavy applications and would like the extra speed. A 100mhz increase almost doesn't seem worth it.
> 
> Any suggestions for bringing AVX closer to normal core speed other than just more vcore? I went as high as 1.355v + 0.020 offset and that still wasn't enough for 4800mhz with AVX -1. Also, is the cache speed worth increasing? Most sources seem to say no, but most sources are also focused on gaming. For the few people that do bother, how high up in relation to core speed does it typically come?


I know of no tricks for AVX. I wish there were a separate 'AVX VCore Max' setting in BIOS. I'd just set it a bit higher than normal VCore and be done with it.

I have found performance-wise on my MSI MBs, Ring runs best at these speeds, though heat will increase with speed and stability can become an issue @ 4.7GHz:
CPU=4.0-4.3GHz, Ring=4.0GHz
CPU=4.4-4.7 GHz, Ring=4.4GHz
CPU>4.7GHz, Ring 4.7GHz

Thanks for keeping us in the loop as you work things out.

Still hating your MSI MB?


----------



## AyeYo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> I know of no tricks for AVX. I wish there were a separate 'AVX VCore Max' setting in BIOS. I'd just set it a bit higher than normal VCore and be done with it.
> 
> I have found performance-wise on my MSI MBs, Ring runs best at these speeds, though heat will increase with speed and stability can become an issue @ 4.7GHz:
> CPU=4.0-4.3GHz, Ring=4.0GHz
> CPU=4.4-4.7 GHz, Ring=4.4GHz
> CPU>4.7GHz, Ring 4.7GHz
> 
> Thanks for keeping us in the loop as you work things out.
> 
> Still hating your MSI MB?


Lol no, not hating it now that I know the quirks. I think my biggest frustration is that I've really been out of the loop since the Clarkdale days. I had a Sandybridge i5 setup for a good long time, but that platform was so easy to OC I just set something that looked good on paper, fixed voltage and multiplier and it chugged along like that at I think 4.8ghz from release day until a couple months ago - took five minutes to setup. I never really learned that architecture or anything that came after it. I didn't even read a tech article or post here for years.

Now I'm trying to play catch up with everything that's changed and I really don't have the time or patience for it anymore, so I get annoyed easily.

I guess that brings up a semi related question... Why hasn't overclockability scaled over the past few generations of Intel chips? Taking a 2.9ghz Clarkdale to 4.4ghz yielded night and day performance increases without any crazy voltage or temps. Same thing with Sandy, which is probably the last gen of great overclockers. Is Intel just pushing the chips harder from the factory with the advent of newer turbo modes? Were they sand bagging us all those years prior? Have smaller processes decreased silicon quality? These 10% or less clock speed gains hardly seem worth the effort. If it wasn't for this board basically requiring me to set things manually, I wouldn't even have bothered to OC.


----------



## scracy

Quick question guys, have any of you had issues with "fast boot"? Recently I have had a couple of BSOD as a result of fast boot, after doing some searching I have found out that fast boot doesn't always allow all the drivers to load properly hence my issue with BSOD's. I have not had any BSOD's since disabling fast boot both within windows and the UEFI


----------



## ViTosS

Well, my 8 hours Realbench 2.54 stable OC of 5.0Ghz and AVX -1 offset at LLC5 and 1.370v (1.376v idle and 1.360v full load) just BSOD in the first Battlefield 1 round I joined, so it kept BSODing at 1.375v, 1.380v, 1.385v, and was finally stable (at least for 2h of gameplay) at 1.390v, the only problem now is most of the time my full load vcore is 1.376v and 1.392v idle, but rarely jumps to 1.408v, and if I change LLC to 4 or 3, there is always a little bit higher vcore than idle when gaming/web browsing, so this way I don't have ONLY lower full load vcore compared to idle, but I think it's ok nothing to worry about having a little higher full load vcore ocasionaly.

I'm considering to reduce to 4.9Ghz and AVX -1 offset, I don't like my temps going to 75ºC in Battlefield 1. 1.390v is too much for my H110i even delided 7700k, because it's really hot in Brazil, ambient temperature is like 35ºC.


----------



## AyeYo

What stability tests other than RB did you run?


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> What stability tests other than RB did you run?


1h of Prime 28.10 and 8h of Realbench, played a lot of games stable, but Battlefield 1 made me BSOD.


----------



## ViTosS

@Beagle Box

Is it better to have LLC 5 idle 1.344v to drop to 1.328v full load or LLC 3 idle 1.360v to drop to 1.344v~1.328v? If I could have a precisier drop like using LLC 5 I would use LLC 3, but it is always huge differences between load and idle voltages.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> @Beagle Box
> 
> Is it better to have LLC 5 idle 1.344v to drop to 1.328v full load or LLC 3 idle 1.360v to drop to 1.344v~1.328v? If I could have a precisier drop like using LLC 5 I would use LLC 3, but it is always huge differences between load and idle voltages.


I'd probably use the higher VCore and lower LLC. It's more representative of what's really happening, and _what's supposed to happen_. Why complicate things by giving less and then artificially supplementing more? Adding LLC should be your last resort.

Your VDroop on 1.360/LLC3 only seems large. It's not. I normally don't increase LLC for a VDroop less than ~.050V.

That's just been my experience, though, with high quality boards. YMMV.


----------



## wingman99

Auto LLC is set by Intel and is the same on all motherboards.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> I'd probably use the higher VCore and lower LLC. It's more representative of what's really happening, and _what's supposed to happen_. Why complicate things by giving less and then artificially supplementing more? Adding LLC should be your last resort.
> 
> Your VDroop on 1.360/LLC3 only seems large. It's not. I normally don't increase LLC for a VDroop less than ~.050V.
> 
> That's just been my experience, though, with high quality boards. YMMV.


So what's so bad about LLC 5 compared to 3? For me it just makes vcore more precisely from what I set in BIOS, I mean, I had in BIOS 1.320v set for 1.360v using LLC 3 and for LLC 5 I had in BIOS 1.340v and in SO it was 1.344v, so much more accurate of what I set in BIOS. But if you recommend LLC 3 I will use it then.

Also if I want a lower idle voltage like 1.344v when using LLC 5 but using LLC 3, I would have to deal with the bad effect of LLC 3, the idle voltage would end up 1.344v but the full load would drop to 1.296v or 1.312v, and that would probably end up unstable and BSOD.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Auto LLC is set by Intel and is the same on all motherboards.


Are you absolutely sure? Re: my experiences with this gigabyte board (3 options: auto, high, standard), with 'auto' acting differently than 'standard' (which supposedly is the 'follow intel spec' option)

But yes you're right in that one would always *expect* the default settings to conform to specs. And undoubtedly every motherboard at the very least has an option to set loadline according to Intel specification (be it default or not)


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> So what's so bad about LLC 5 compared to 3? For me it just makes vcore more precisely from what I set in BIOS, I mean, I had in BIOS 1.320v set for 1.360v using LLC 3 and for LLC 5 I had in BIOS 1.340v and in SO it was 1.344v, so much more accurate of what I set in BIOS.


Something something transient load voltage/current spikes in the timescale of microseconds which can go very high and kill or degrade your cpu.

Addendum: in short, it might not make it as precise as it looks like, if you have a good oscilloscope go ahead and see how it is on your exact system (no one can really tell from far away)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Auto LLC is set by Intel and is the same on all motherboards.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you absolutely sure? Re: my experiences with this gigabyte board (3 options: auto, high, standard), with 'auto' acting differently than 'standard' (which supposedly is the 'follow intel spec' option)
> 
> But yes you're right in that one would always *expect* the default settings to conform to specs. And undoubtedly every motherboard at the very least has an option to set loadline according to Intel specification (be it default or not)
Click to expand...

That is what my manual says.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is what my manual says.


I have the same manual, written for bios version X, and I'm sure we can agree Gigabyte doesn't make the best documentation around


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is what my manual says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have the same manual, written for bios version X, and I'm sure we can agree Gigabyte doesn't make the best documentation around
Click to expand...

Gigabyte receives the build kit specifications from Intel, then they set it up and write a manual, how could they screw up LLC in the manual. Load Line has been used by AMD and Intel for as long as I can remember, however calibration was new since 2007.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Gigabyte receives the build kit specifications from Intel, then they set it up and write a manual, how could they screw up LLC in the manual. Load Line has been used by AMD and Intel for as long as I can remember, however calibration was new since 2007.


My point here being the actual functionality of bios seems to differ from what's said in the manual. Hence faulty documentation (alternatively: faulty BIOS implementation, but I rather blame the docs







)


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> So what's so bad about LLC 5 compared to 3? For me it just makes vcore more precisely from what I set in BIOS, I mean, I had in BIOS 1.320v set for 1.360v using LLC 3 and for LLC 5 I had in BIOS 1.340v and in SO it was 1.344v, so much more accurate of what I set in BIOS. But if you recommend LLC 3 I will use it then.
> 
> Also if I want a lower idle voltage like 1.344v when using LLC 5 but using LLC 3, I would have to deal with the bad effect of LLC 3, the idle voltage would end up 1.344v but the full load would drop to 1.296v or 1.312v, and that would probably end up unstable and BSOD.


VCore is meant to be dynamic and it should drop under load. From my experience, with good boards Kaby Lakes and Sky Lakes should run fine if VDroop is less than .050V. I don't know how else to say it.

I stated what _I_ would try to make work.

Certainly, if you're experiencing BSODs, you will need to make changes.

How are you testing for VDroop?

Test both settings with OCCT for an hour. Compare results. If they're the same, go with less LLC.

In the end, it's whatever you think is best for your application.


----------



## AyeYo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> So what's so bad about LLC 5 compared to 3? For me it just makes vcore more precisely from what I set in BIOS, I mean, I had in BIOS 1.320v set for 1.360v using LLC 3 and for LLC 5 I had in BIOS 1.340v and in SO it was 1.344v, so much more accurate of what I set in BIOS. But if you recommend LLC 3 I will use it then.
> 
> Also if I want a lower idle voltage like 1.344v when using LLC 5 but using LLC 3, I would have to deal with the bad effect of LLC 3, the idle voltage would end up 1.344v but the full load would drop to 1.296v or 1.312v, and that would probably end up unstable and BSOD.


See the link in my sig about temps and voltage. As someone else said, LLC should be a last resort. The CPU's ability to handle voltage decreases as load increases. Your idle vcore really isn't that big of a deal, what matters is your load vcore. Vdroop isn't a defect, it's part of Intel's spec. Voltage is intended to sag under load because when the load ends, voltage spikes briefly. With the load voltage drooping, this spike doesn't go over or not far over your actual voltage set point. Example:. say you set 1.400v in the BIOS, this sags to 1.350v under load. When load comes off voltage briefly spikes back to 1.400v, maybe higher. If you have LLC removing that droop, you're now at 1.400v under load just like your BIOS set. Now you're spiking to 1.450v or higher, constantly, as the chips goes on and off load. This might not matter at lower voltages, but the higher you go on vcore, the higher these spikes get and they can get up into unsafe ranges. It's far safer to run more vcore at idle when it won't hurt the chip than to give it constant, unsafe spikes at load.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> VCore is meant to be dynamic and it should drop under load. From my experience, with good boards Kaby Lakes and Sky Lakes should run fine if VDroop is less than .050V. I don't know how else to say it.
> 
> I stated what _I_ would try to make work.
> 
> Certainly, if you're experiencing BSODs, you will need to make changes.
> 
> How are you testing for VDroop?
> 
> Test both settings with OCCT for an hour. Compare results. If they're the same, go with less LLC.
> 
> In the end, it's whatever you think is best for your application.


Thanks for the clarification, I didn't experience BSOD but what I was trying to say is that LLC 3 has a wide range of variation in vcore, I mean, if I set 1.320v in BIOS it is 1.360v idle voltage but varies from 1.344v to 1.328v, and if I keep using LLC 3 and set a lower voltage in BIOS like 1.310v, probably the idle voltage would drop to 1.344v but the full load voltage would be lower than 1.328v, it should be 1.312v or lower, and that would probably making me BSOD, so with LLC 5 the full load voltage variation is much more precise and smaller range. I teste using custom x264v loop and also playing games/web browsing to see the maximum voltage (monitoring through HWiNFO64). I would like to use LLC 3 but what I explained is what is hapening, the range of LLC 3 of vcore is wide and I end up having lower full load voltage if I want to decrease the idle voltage.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> See the link in my sig about temps and voltage. As someone else said, LLC should be a last resort. The CPU's ability to handle voltage decreases as load increases. Your idle vcore really isn't that big of a deal, what matters is your load vcore. Vdroop isn't a defect, it's part of Intel's spec. Voltage is intended to sag under load because when the load ends, voltage spikes briefly. With the load voltage drooping, this spike doesn't go over or not far over your actual voltage set point. Example:. say you set 1.400v in the BIOS, this sags to 1.350v under load. When load comes off voltage briefly spikes back to 1.400v, maybe higher. If you have LLC removing that droop, you're now at 1.400v under load just like your BIOS set. Now you're spiking to 1.450v or higher, constantly, as the chips goes on and off load. This might not matter at lower voltages, but the higher you go on vcore, the higher these spikes get and they can get up into unsafe ranges. It's far safer to run more vcore at idle when it won't hurt the chip than to give it constant, unsafe spikes at load.


But what should I do if I can't decrease idle voltage without decreasing more load voltage? I mean, I want 1.344v idle and 1.328v load like I have now using LLC 5, but if I use LLC 3 this would up ending 1.296v or 1.312v load voltage and I think I'm not stable at that load voltage.


----------



## AyeYo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> But what should I do if I can't decrease idle voltage without decreasing more load voltage? I mean, I want 1.344v idle and 1.328v load like I have now using LLC 5, but if I use LLC 3 this would up ending 1.296v or 1.312v load voltage and I think I'm not stable at that load voltage.


You raise your vcore set voltage with LLC3 until you have 1.328v under load. This will give idle voltage higher than your current 1.344v, but that doesn't really matter.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AyeYo*
> 
> You raise your vcore set voltage with LLC3 until you have 1.328v under load. This will give idle voltage higher than your current 1.344v, but that doesn't really matter.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> My point here being the actual functionality of bios seems to differ from what's said in the manual. Hence faulty documentation (alternatively: faulty BIOS implementation, but I rather blame the docs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


the default operation condition is zero load line compensation (no added voltage, no mitigation of vdroop). All MBs and bios authors deal with this differently (for example, Asrock and ASUS number their bios settings in the exact opposite manner). A setting of AUTO is not the same on every MB, even within the same brand. It is always best to examine the vdroop behavior of any configuration. Some vdroop is a healthy habit.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Gigabyte receives the build kit specifications from Intel, then they set it up and write a manual, how could they screw up LLC in the manual. Load Line has been used by AMD and Intel for as long as I can remember, however calibration was new since 2007.
> 
> 
> 
> My point here being the actual functionality of bios seems to differ from what's said in the manual. Hence faulty documentation (alternatively: faulty BIOS implementation, but I rather blame the docs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
Click to expand...

My LLC works just like the manual states. What does not work like the manual states for you?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> My point here being the actual functionality of bios seems to differ from what's said in the manual. Hence faulty documentation (alternatively: faulty BIOS implementation, but I rather blame the docs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> 
> 
> the default operation condition is zero load line compensation (no added voltage, no mitigation of vdroop). All MBs and bios authors deal with this differently (for example, Asrock and ASUS number their bios settings in the exact opposite manner). A setting of AUTO is not the same on every MB, even within the same brand. It is always best to examine the vdroop behavior of any configuration. Some vdroop is a healthy habit.
Click to expand...

Auto is set to Intel's Load line specifications. Do you have proof Auto is not set to Intel's specifications? I have proof it is.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Auto is set to Intel's Load line specifications. Do you have proof Auto is not set to Intel's specifications? I have proof it is.


What is the Intel-determined [AUTO] LLC Voltage addition/subtraction for a Kaby Lake i7-7700k running at a beyond-Intel-spec 5.1 GHz?
It would really help to know...


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> But what should I do if I can't decrease idle voltage without decreasing more load voltage? I mean, I want 1.344v idle and 1.328v load like I have now using LLC 5, but if I use LLC 3 this would up ending 1.296v or 1.312v load voltage and I think I'm not stable at that load voltage.


If you really want to go all the way with this, you'll want to run [Adaptive+Offset] if your board supports it. You'll be able to hit your 1.344V under load and still idle ~.8Volts.








You've already got your target Voltages.
You just need to plug them in...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> What is the Intel-determined [AUTO] LLC Voltage addition/subtraction for a Kaby Lake i7-7700k running at a beyond-Intel-spec 5.1 GHz?
> It would really help to know...


there is none... the spec is for the stock freq and voltage.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> there is none... the spec is for the stock freq and voltage.


*Exactly!*
So why is somebody wanting to argue over stock LLC specs on a site where ignoring stock settings is the Official Step #1?


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> If you really want to go all the way with this, you'll want to run [Adaptive+Offset] if your board supports it. You'll be able to hit your 1.344V under load and still idle ~.8Volts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You've already got your target Voltages.
> You just need to plug them in...


What do you mean? I have 1.33v LLC 3 right now, 1.36v idle and 1.328~1.344v load, you saying that I should reduce my voltage to example 1.31v and add positive offset of 0.02v? That would result what I want? Because if I set negative offset from 1.33v, it's the same thing of setting a lower voltage without offset.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> What do you mean? I have 1.33v LLC 3 right now, 1.36v idle and 1.328~1.344v load, you saying that I should reduce my voltage to example 1.31v and add positive offset of 0.02v? That would result what I want? Because if I set negative offset from 1.33v, it's the same thing of setting a lower voltage without offset.


I think he is referring to using an offset value (negative) when using adaptive to adjust for a situation where the VID is requesting more voltage than needed for the clocks you have set (peak turbo freq). Just need to watch for a non-turbo clock undervolt condition (not straight forward to test for).


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I think he is referring to using an offset value (negative) when using adaptive to adjust for a situation where the VID is requesting more voltage than needed for the clocks you have set (peak turbo freq). Just need to watch for a non-turbo clock undervolt condition (not straight forward to test for).


Hmm I see, yea that is not what I was trying to say, I wanted 1.344v idle and 1.328v load but I can't have this using LLC 3, only LLC 5, and everyone said the less LLC level the better.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Hmm I see, yea that is not what I was trying to say, I wanted 1.344v idle and 1.328v load but I can't have this using LLC 3, only LLC 5, and everyone said the less LLC level the better.


it's not really a matter of the "LLC number". If you feel that that nominal vdroop is sufficient, then you are good to go. Remember, the 1.328V and 1.344V values are only a result of the 8-bit SIO report to the OS.. so 16mV is the limit of "resolution". Truth is, with those values, the load and idle voltage could only differ by a few mV. I personally prefer more droop. You can safely raise the bios voltage to say.. 1.36V and allow more vdroop under load ~ 25-50mV of droop (llc4 or 3). Idle voltage is pretty meaningless - within reason. It is the load voltage - eg, the voltage at which the current/amperage to do the work (load) is delivered at. When load changes abruptly - and is does all the time - the vdroop keeps the load transient spike a bit more tamed. (not a voltgae swing you can detect without specialized equipment.








So.. long story, short, some vdroop is a good thing in the long term.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's not really a matter of the "LLC number". If you feel that that nominal vdroop is sufficient, then you are good to go. Remember, the 1.328V and 1.344V values are only a result of the 8-bit SIO report to the OS.. so 16mV is the limit of "resolution". Truth is, with those values, the load and idle voltage could only differ by a few mV. I personally prefer more droop. You can safely raise the bios voltage to say.. 1.36V and allow more vdroop under load ~ 25-50mV of droop (llc4 or 3). Idle voltage is pretty meaningless - within reason. It is the load voltage - eg, the voltage at which the current/amperage to do the work (load) is delivered at. When load changes abruptly - and is does all the time - the vdroop keeps the load transient spike a bit more tamed. (not a voltgae swing you can detect without specialized equipment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So.. long story, short, some vdroop is a good thing in the long term.


Problem is if I do that I would result in 1.392v voltage for sure or higher and the drop would be to 1.360v~1.376v instead of the 1.328v~1.344v, I know is it good to have drop like that, but I just wanted a lower idle voltage, but if you are saying that idle voltage doesn't matter, I will trust in you







. Also I wish I could have only lower voltage than idle during load without AVX negative offset, like 49x/49x, it always end up having a little jump in vcore when web browsing, but most of the time the other values (gaming and stress testing) are always lower than idle, do you think is not a problem too having that little higher vcore during web browsing? Like mantains all the time 1.392v and rarely jumps to 1.408v, but most of the time is 1.376v for example, I promise I won't bother anymore asking these things, just want to read your opinion, thanks for all the help!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Problem is if I do that I would result in 1.392v voltage for sure or higher and the drop would be to 1.360v~1.376v instead of the 1.328v~1.344v, I know is it good to have drop like that, but I just wanted a lower idle voltage, but if you are saying that idle voltage doesn't matter, I will trust in you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Also I wish I could have only lower voltage than idle during load without AVX negative offset, like 49x/49x, it always end up having a little jump in vcore when web browsing, but most of the time the other values (gaming and stress testing) are always lower than idle, do you think is not a problem too having that little higher vcore during web browsing? Like mantains all the time 1.392v and rarely jumps to 1.408v, but most of the time is 1.376v for example, I promise I won't bother anymore asking these things, just want to read your opinion, thanks for all the help!


you should set the voltage and LLC in bios so that it is at the value you want it to idle at, and delivers the necessary voltage under load (and this will vary by load) - while allowing for 25 or more mV of vdroop. Web browsing is a low load activity (low current, low wattage), so the slightly higher voltage during light load is okay - and quite normal. Again - the thing to watch is the amount of current/watts/amperage/TDP or which ever term you are most familiar with, being used. For the most part, and within reason, it is current that kills, not voltage. systems don't die or crash at idle - they do when asked to do work.









... or, switch to adaptive vcore.

edit - oh yeah, my 7700K is running adaptive, but this 7740X (4c/8t) is on manual cause the VID stack is too high and adaptive can't run lower than the VID - it idles at 1.3V and droops under Y-cruncher load to 1.26V for 5.2/5.2 core/avx (llc 5 on this x299 board), same when Folding.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you should set the voltage and LLC in bios so that it is at the value you want it to idle at, and delivers the necessary voltage under load (and this will vary by load) - while allowing for 25 or mnore mV of vdroop Web browsing is a low load activity (low current, low wattage), so the slightly higher voltage during light load is okay - and quite normal. Again - the thing to watch is the amount of current/watts/amperage/TDP or which ever term you are most familiar with, being used. For the most part, and within reason, it is current that kills, not voltage. systems don't die or crash at idle - they do when asked to do work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... or, switch to adaptive vcore.


I see... But I'm already using adaptive vcore, all I do is change the value of ''Additional CPU Turbo Frequency Vcore'' to 1.33v atm and the OFFSET I leave on auto (positive, but it doesn't matter since it's on auto), so this way I have 1.36v idle and 1.328~1.344v load (and without jumping the load vcore while web browsing, only because I'm running AVX negative offset, I noticed if I don't use it, there is the little jump in vcore while web browsing.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Auto is set to Intel's Load line specifications. Do you have proof Auto is not set to Intel's specifications? I have proof it is.


No, I have no proof. I must concede defeat.

(As far as I know there is no gigabyte documentation for this BIOS version (F23a) for this board (Gigabyte Gaming Z170-K3 EU 1.1) anywhere that would state exactly what the loadline calibration setting of 'standard' should do. If a few words in a pdf file are only things considered proof, then there is no proof. I can only tell from my own experience that the setting of 'standard' produces lower VCore under load ie. more Vdroop than setting of 'auto' does. It is possible that 'standard' is misleadingly labeled and commented in the BIOS setup, and it is rather a 'relaxed' loadline setting which gives more Vdroop to the CPU than what Intel would specify for. I do not know. I apologize for the confusion caused in this matter. I have no wish to proceed further in this debate.)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I see... But I'm already using adaptive vcore, all I do is change the value of ''Additional CPU Turbo Frequency Vcore'' to 1.33v atm and the OFFSET I leave on auto (positive, but it doesn't matter since it's on auto), so this way I have 1.36v idle and 1.328~1.344v load (and without jumping the load vcore while web browsing, only because I'm running AVX negative offset, I noticed if I don't use it, there is the little jump in vcore while web browsing.


What windows power plan is your rig set to? High?... what min proc state? 5%? I'm becoming confused by this discussion. What is the issue?
set windows power plan to "Balanced" and you idle vcore will be ~ 0.8V - no jumping.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> What windows power plan is your rig set to? High?... what min proc state? 5%? I'm becoming confused by this discussion. What is the issue?
> set windows power plan to "Balanced" and you idle vcore will be ~ 0.8V - no jumping.


I said many times the ''problem'', I want a lower range voltage drop using LLC 3 instead of the actual one (1.360v idle and 1.328~1.344v), I would like 1.344v idle and 1.328v load using LLC 3, BUT that only is possible (from a lot of try) with LLC 5, and people here say the less the LLC the better for the CPU. That's what is wrong, and also a way to have 49x/49x without AVX offset to have the lower load voltage compared to idle, that is not possible from everything I tried, always end up having a little jump in vcore when web browsing comparing to my 99% time average idle voltage, again, only when I don't have an AVX negative offset.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I said many times the ''problem'', I want a lower range voltage drop using LLC 3 instead of the actual one (1.360v idle and 1.328~1.344v), I would like 1.344v idle and 1.328v load using LLC 3, BUT that only is possible (from a lot of try) with LLC 5, and people here say the less the LLC the better for the CPU. That's what is wrong, and also a way to have 49x/49x without AVX offset to have the lower load voltage compared to idle, that is not possible from everything I tried, always end up having a little jump in vcore when web browsing comparing to my 99% time average idle voltage, again, only when I don't have an AVX negative offset.


Again - the "lower" LLC number is not what you should focus on.. .focus on the vdroop (vdrop is a different thing and a separate terminology). If you get what you want with LLC 5 then use LLC5.
I'll ask one more time.. how are you determining Idle voltage when the system is set to adaptive?


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Again - the "lower" LLC number is not what you should focus on.. .focus on the vdroop (vdrop is a different thing and a separate terminology). If you get what you want with LLC 5 then use LLC5.
> I'll ask one more time.. how are you determining Idle voltage when the system is set to adaptive?


I have C-States and SpeedStep disabled and also High Performance mode with minimum and maximum state of 100%, so this way I can check.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the default operation condition is zero load line compensation (no added voltage, no mitigation of vdroop). All MBs and bios authors deal with this differently (for example, Asrock and ASUS number their bios settings in the exact opposite manner). A setting of AUTO is not the same on every MB, even within the same brand. It is always best to examine the vdroop behavior of any configuration. Some vdroop is a healthy habit.


Yes. This is pretty much what I've been trying to say all along...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I have C-States and SpeedStep disabled and also High Performance mode with minimum and maximum state of 100%, so this way I can check.


okay, so if the voltage is running a bit high when using adaptive, it's the vid stack. switch to manual override, disable CPUSVID, enable speedstep and c-states. and set the LLC you want. this way the VID stack is not driving the voltage request. Select Balanced power plan and report back with what you observe.
*"I would like 1.344v idle and 1.328v load using LLC 3, BUT that only is possible (from a lot of try) with LLC 5
"*
you cannot change the amount of vdroop a given LLC will produce (with a set vcore and specific load), so forget about that. if the config needs LLC 5 to produce the droop you want, then use LLC5.


----------



## davidjo

All this talk about LLC got me worried. So I went from LLC 5 to auto.

I was previously running 5ghz with 7600k @ 1.35 adaptive vcore in bios with llc 5.

According to hwinfo I think it stays at 1.344 (from what I've seen). Idle and underload. Is this normal?

At LLC auto, nothing has changed? Is this normal?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> All this talk about LLC got me worried. So I went from LLC 5 to auto.
> 
> I was previously running 5ghz with 7600k @ 1.35 adaptive vcore in bios with llc 5.
> 
> According to hwinfo I think it stays at 1.344 (from what I've seen). Idle and underload. Is this normal?
> 
> At LLC auto, nothing has changed? Is this normal?


what MB?


----------



## TheADLA

Hey guys









Since my system seems to run freakishly stable at a current 5 Ghz with AVX Offset 3 and 1.36v Vcore and LLC 4 (which has a spike of 1.384v with an MSI Z270 Gaming Pro) and low temps thanks to delidding and AIO WC, I would like to check
if I can lower the Vcore and leave the LLC until I hit the no go. Also my DDR4 which is certified 3000 (Corsair Dominator Plats) currently runs at 3200. So would it be a go to lower the Vcore (and maybe put the Corsair back at 3000) ? I mean temps are very nice but I think since everything runs super nice, I might be able to reduce the Vcore though... Not sure..


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> okay, so if the voltage is running a bit high when using adaptive, it's the vid stack. switch to manual override, disable CPUSVID, enable speedstep and c-states. and set the LLC you want. this way the VID stack is not driving the voltage request. Select Balanced power plan and report back with what you observe.
> *"I would like 1.344v idle and 1.328v load using LLC 3, BUT that only is possible (from a lot of try) with LLC 5
> "*
> you cannot change the amount of vdroop a given LLC will produce (with a set vcore and specific load), so forget about that. if the config needs LLC 5 to produce the droop you want, then use LLC5.


Will do that, but I need first disable all the energy saving to test if I can reach, but even using manual mode with all that enabled the CPU is going to downclock/downvolt?


----------



## davidjo

Asus z270g


----------



## AyeYo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> I know of no tricks for AVX. I wish there were a separate 'AVX VCore Max' setting in BIOS. I'd just set it a bit higher than normal VCore and be done with it.
> 
> I have found performance-wise on my MSI MBs, Ring runs best at these speeds, though heat will increase with speed and stability can become an issue @ 4.7GHz:
> CPU=4.0-4.3GHz, Ring=4.0GHz
> CPU=4.4-4.7 GHz, Ring=4.4GHz
> CPU>4.7GHz, Ring 4.7GHz
> 
> Thanks for keeping us in the loop as you work things out.
> 
> Still hating your MSI MB?


Ended up with ring at 4.6ghz because with the AVX capped at 4.6ghz I wasn't sure how much sense 4.7ghz ring made or whether running it faster than core would actually cause instability. Surprisingly, it actually raised my RB 2.54 score by 5000 points. I ran that for a few hours, ran GeekBench a bunch of times, 15 minutes of small FFT P95, and then ran my photogrammetry software for about six hours. No issues. It definitely raises temps (about 7-10C in most load situations) and it also drew down load voltage even further but I didn't need to increase vcore. Even so, I'm still only in the low to mid 70s in the software I actually use for work, so that's good enough for me (and it's warm in my house this time of year). I think load voltage ended up being like 1.288. Not great but not terrible for 4.8ghz.


----------



## davidjo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> All this talk about LLC got me worried. So I went from LLC 5 to auto.
> 
> I was previously running 5ghz with 7600k @ 1.35 adaptive vcore in bios with llc 5.
> 
> According to hwinfo I think it stays at 1.344 (from what I've seen). Idle and underload. Is this normal?
> 
> At LLC auto, nothing has changed? Is this normal?


Ok never mind. Vcore was in manual mode ?

Back to adaptive 1.35 with LLC 4

Idles 1.328-1.344
Realbench 1.344


----------



## davidjo

I thought that vcore was supposed to droop under load?

Am i right to assume that even though mine doesnt droop, the overclock is still safe? Given that my bios vcore is set to 1.35 but it runs between 1.328 and 1.344, so it does not spike hgiher than 1.35


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Will do that, but I need first disable all the energy saving to test if I can reach, but even using manual mode with all that enabled the CPU is going to downclock/downvolt?


\

it's the same on all platforms: http://www.overclock.net/t/1632870/skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-combined-discussion/3180_20#post_26347551


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *davidjo*
> 
> I thought that vcore was supposed to droop under load?
> 
> Am i right to assume that even though mine doesnt droop, the overclock is still safe? Given that my bios vcore is set to 1.35 but it runs between 1.328 and 1.344, so it does not spike hgiher than 1.35


http://www.overclock.net/t/1510001/asus-rampage-v-extreme-owners-thread/2000_20#post_23088546
http://www.overclock.net/t/1510001/asus-rampage-v-extreme-owners-thread/2020_20#post_23088741
http://www.overclock.net/t/1510001/asus-rampage-v-extreme-owners-thread/2020_20#post_23089414


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> \
> 
> it's the same on all platforms: http://www.overclock.net/t/1632870/skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-combined-discussion/3180_20#post_26347551


Nice, I finally am confortable with my OC, at the moment I have manual mode 1.365v, 49x/49x, LLC 4 and I idle at 1.360v (nothing higher, even web browsing) and gaming/load is 1.344v or 1.328v sometimes, I tried many times to have 49x/49x using offset or adaptive mode and not have the little jump in vcore while web browsing or gaming but all the things I tried didn't went how I liked, the solution for this was to use 49x/48x (1 negative AVX offset).


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Nice, I finally am confortable with my OC, at the moment I have manual mode 1.365v, 49x/49x, LLC 4 and I idle at 1.360v (nothing higher, even web browsing) and gaming/load is 1.344v or 1.328v sometimes, I tried many times to have 49x/49x using offset or adaptive mode and not have the little jump in vcore while web browsing or gaming but all the things I tried didn't went how I liked, the solution for this was to use 49x/48x (1 negative AVX offset).


Glad you got it sorted out to your liking.








How are your temps?


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Glad you got it sorted out to your liking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How are your temps?


Thanks for the help man









My temps are good, considering it's like 35ºC ambient temperature now here where I live and my high vcore, I have an 7700k delided and H110i, gaming never exceed 65ºC.

Just wondering, there would be nothing to change beyond what I already changed to make adaptive good like this manual (good I mean only voltage drop in load compared to idle using no AVX offset), I changed pretty much only the voltage and the LLC, but I saw that are plenty of other options in BIOS that I can change from Auto to Extreme or percentages like from Auto to 140% of CPU capability and stuff like that.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Thanks for the help man
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My temps are good, considering it's like 35ºC ambient temperature now here where I live and my high vcore, I have an 7700k delided and H110i, gaming never exceed 65ºC.
> 
> Just wondering, there would be nothing to change beyond what I already changed to make adaptive good like this manual (good I mean only voltage drop in load compared to idle using no AVX offset), I changed pretty much only the voltage and the LLC, but I saw that are plenty of other options in BIOS that I can change from Auto to Extreme or percentages like from Auto to 140% of CPU capability and stuff like that.


Good boards have lots of options for greater optimization, but I'm not familiar with your particular BIOS. I would leave your settings as they are for now and do some research on your board. ASUS is usually pretty good with their documentation and you should be able to find some articles and maybe some vids on optimizing your settings.








Many tutorials will tell you to maximize your LLC and run high SA, IO and PLL Voltages. It's best to learn what the settings will do rather than just copying their settings.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Good boards have lots of options for greater optimization, but I'm not familiar with your particular BIOS. I would leave your settings as they are for now and do some research on your board. ASUS is usually pretty good with their documentation and you should be able to find some articles and maybe some vids on optimizing your settings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Many tutorials will tell you to maximize your LLC and run high SA, IO and PLL Voltages. It's best to learn what the settings will do rather than just copying their settings.


I see, but none of these are strictly linked to the problem I described, right? The little jump in vcore happening only when adaptive or offset mode and without an AVX offset.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> I see, but none of these are strictly linked to the problem I described, right? The little jump in vcore happening only when adaptive or offset mode and without an AVX offset.










Yes. You are correct. Those exact things I mentioned have nothing to do with your particular exact focus at this particular moment in time.

I'm merely saying that you may get advice along with any information. Learn any info you find that may relate to your particular focus of using Adaptive or offset VCore to reach exact Voltages under specific conditions, but don't necessarily follow any advice they give without giving it proper consideration.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Nice, I finally am confortable with my OC, at the moment I have manual mode 1.365v, 49x/49x, LLC 4 and I idle at 1.360v (nothing higher, even web browsing) and gaming/load is 1.344v or 1.328v sometimes, I tried many times to have 49x/49x using offset or adaptive mode and not have the little jump in vcore while web browsing or gaming but all the things I tried didn't went how I liked, the solution for this was to use 49x/48x (1 negative AVX offset).


Enjoy!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Thanks for the help man
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My temps are good, considering it's like 35ºC ambient temperature now here where I live and my high vcore, I have an 7700k delided and H110i, gaming never exceed 65ºC.
> 
> Just wondering, *there would be nothing to change beyond what I already changed to make adaptive good like this manual* (good I mean only voltage drop in load compared to idle using no AVX offset), I changed pretty much only the voltage and the LLC, but I saw that are plenty of other options in BIOS that I can change from Auto to Extreme or percentages like from Auto to 140% of CPU capability and stuff like that.


to know this, return to adaptive, set high perf plan and look at trhe VID in HWI. if the VID is high(er) than the voltage you (now) know the chip needs for your 49/49 oc, then, no. there is noting you can do since adaptive voltage can only be added to the VID. Sometimes you can use a negative offset with adaptive but it's not a very elegant solution. IA AC and IA DC load line values can affect adaptive behavior, but not likely in the direction you are looking to achieve (try 0.01 in each of these bios settings - if the voltage behaves better then work with that attenuation mechanism).
Manual override is perfectly fine... yes, I know Adaptive is much sexier, and when the VID stack is cooperative, it is the way to go.


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*


Charted.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*


You're supposed to show vcore reading in Hwinfo during the submission, but you have been charted.



     Sample Size60  Average OC5.03Median OC5.00 Average Vcore1.36Median Vcore1.36
 


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> Charted.


Thank you for your hard work!!


----------



## Nawafwabs

i7 7700k @50 @1.410v

when i test it on Cpu-z stress never crash and temp aboute 74c

when i test it on ROG Realbench it crash after 3 sec

i raise the voltage to 1.424v and it give me 30 sec and crash again

if i use 1.410v and play games never crash on me

so whats the problem ?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nawafwabs*
> 
> i7 7700k @50 @1.410v
> 
> when i test it on Cpu-z stress never crash and temp aboute 74c
> 
> when i test it on ROG Realbench it crash after 3 sec
> 
> i raise the voltage to 1.424v and it give me 30 sec and crash again
> 
> if i use 1.410v and play games never crash on me
> 
> so whats the problem ?


It's not stable

That's it

RealBench isn't the hardest test to pass already
The cpu-z one wouldn't even let you get charted here

For a reason

It's not hard enough, to be sure if it's stable or not

Games are likewise not hard enough on cpu's in general
Even the ones that can make a CPU go 100%

If you want to run you're system that way
Its you're system

But if you happen to get a crash at some point you should know why

I've had vcore thinking it was stable only to crash after the 4 hour mark in RealBench

Usually people want an as stable system as can be
Passing 8 hours of RealBench is definitely a good goal

No idea if you have delided you're chip or not (probably not, 74 degrees in cpu-z stresstest, would probably throttle in prime if it would run longer than a second, which it wouldn't if RealBench crashes in 3 seconds)

But giving the core cache ratio a lower value than the core multiplier should help already

Like 45 or so and see if it's stable


----------



## Nawafwabs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> It's not stable
> 
> That's it
> 
> RealBench isn't the hardest test to pass already
> The cpu-z one wouldn't even let you get charted here
> 
> For a reason
> 
> It's not hard enough, to be sure if it's stable or not
> 
> Games are likewise not hard enough on cpu's in general
> Even the ones that can make a CPU go 100%
> 
> If you want to run you're system that way
> Its you're system
> 
> But if you happen to get a crash at some point you should know why
> 
> I've had vcore thinking it was stable only to crash after the 4 hour mark in RealBench
> 
> Usually people want an as stable system as can be
> Passing 8 hours of RealBench is definitely a good goal
> 
> No idea if you have delided you're chip or not (probably not, 74 degrees in cpu-z stresstest, would probably throttle in prime if it would run longer than a second, which it wouldn't if RealBench crashes in 3 seconds)
> 
> But giving the core cache ratio a lower value than the core multiplier should help already
> 
> Like 45 or so and see if it's stable


i cant delided it , im too scare









also there is post talk about CPU PLL , i lower that to 1.18 and give me lower temp

maybe cuz my crash ?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1621111/i7-7700k-temps-vs-ram-speed-on-z270-mainboard


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nawafwabs*
> 
> i cant delided it , im too scare
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also there is post talk about CPU PLL , i lower that to 1.18 and give me lower temp
> 
> maybe cuz my crash ?
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1621111/i7-7700k-temps-vs-ram-speed-on-z270-mainboard


Mmm

I know about the PLL
We all had a long drawn out discussion about it

messing with this setting is not recommended
*Excpet* to manually set the voltage to it's normal standard value

If left on auto it *can* ramp up and give you higher temps

That being said

A not de-lidded chip with 1.4v+ at 5ghz is not going to run overly cool

Still
Lowering you're CPU core cache ratio is the thing I would recommend first

It's like the multiplier for the caches in the CPU
Lowering those has negliable effect on performance

But maybe it's holding you back

I would start at 45 for core cache ratio (or uncore depending on the manufacturer of you're board)


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nawafwabs*
> 
> when i test it on ROG Realbench it crash after 3 sec


By any chance, are you running MSI Afterburner or similar tool (anything with kernel-level drivers for probing hardware really, that would include most monitoring software) with realbench? They conflict rather easily. If you are, try disabling the monitoring software. If realbench still crashes, then you probably have a hardware fault, but if suddenly the problems disappear then you probably only had a driver conflict.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> By any chance, are you running MSI Afterburner or similar tool (anything with kernel-level drivers for probing hardware really, that would include most monitoring software) with realbench? They conflict rather easily. If you are, try disabling the monitoring software. If realbench still crashes, then you probably have a hardware fault, but if suddenly the problems disappear then you probably only had a driver conflict.


A hardware fault? Maybe if things would be at stock

More like unstable settings when *overclocking*
Don't you think?

We want Realbench to crash to find the settings that make it not crash

Also I'm thinking he means it's *halting* (hash mismatch)
Not that the PC is actually crashing

Running Realbench should not be more difficult in terms of software compatibility then say, converting a video or some photo editing


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> A hardware fault? Maybe if things would be at stock
> 
> More like unstable settings when *overclocking*


Yes, unstable overclock as in hardware-related fault, not software, to differentiate between the two when "instability" in an overclocked setting occurs.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Running Realbench should not be more difficult in terms of software compatibility then say, converting a video or some photo editing


Oh, but it is, because Realbench has its own set of (I believe) kernel-mode drivers it uses to monitor cpu temp and usage, and these can conflict with other kernel-mode drivers utilized by other monitoring software. MSI Afterburner has been widely reported (many times over the history of this thread already) to be one the worse combinations to use with Realbench. But, again, this is easy to check: just quit any other monitoring/hardware tweaking software you have before attempting Realbench.


----------



## Nawafwabs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> By any chance, are you running MSI Afterburner or similar tool (anything with kernel-level drivers for probing hardware really, that would include most monitoring software) with realbench? They conflict rather easily. If you are, try disabling the monitoring software. If realbench still crashes, then you probably have a hardware fault, but if suddenly the problems disappear then you probably only had a driver conflict.


yes, im running msi afterburner and HWmonitor with realbench

msi afterburner i use it bcuz fan not work at 50 c

its work on 80c

i will try without it today


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Yes, unstable overclock as in hardware-related fault, not software, to differentiate between the two when "instability" in an overclocked setting occurs.


When people are talking about a hardware fault
They mean faulty hardware
as in the CPU is broken
Not running it above specs

At least it would mean that to me, because it did
And depending on the language barrier, to others as well
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> has been widely reported (many times over the history of this thread already) to be one the worse combinations to use with Realbench.


Good to know
Don't know what afterburner these days is good for
Still good to know
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nawafwabs*
> 
> yes, im running msi afterburner and HWmonitor with realbench
> 
> msi afterburner i use it bcuz fan not work at 50 c
> 
> its work on 80c
> 
> i will try without it today


Btw
When stesstesting you can just uncheck the box for GPU testing


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> When people are talking about a hardware fault
> They mean faulty hardware
> as in the CPU is broken
> Not running it above specs
> 
> At least it would mean that to me, because it did
> And depending on the language barrier, to others as well
> Good to know


My apologies for the confusion. I will try to choose my words more carefully in the future.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> My apologies for the confusion. I will try to choose my words more carefully in the future.


I'm not complaining, really

It just seemed to hint at an actual defective piece of hardware

All is well


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nawafwabs*
> 
> i7 7700k @50 @1.410v
> 
> when i test it on Cpu-z stress never crash and temp aboute 74c
> 
> when i test it on ROG Realbench it crash after 3 sec
> 
> i raise the voltage to 1.424v and it give me 30 sec and crash again
> 
> if i use 1.410v and play games never crash on me
> 
> so whats the problem ?


In the no-delided case, I thnk no-chance [email protected] on 1.42V for a stable operation.
if you want 5GHz operation.
Turn off the HT and decreasing the voltage less than 1.38V.
In the case, the following setting may be your reference.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/680#post_25878530


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> In the no-delided case, I thnk no-chance [email protected] on 1.42V for a stable operation.
> if you want 5GHz operation.
> Turn off the HT and decreasing the voltage less than 1.38V.
> In the case, the following setting may be your reference.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/680#post_25878530


I'd still give the core cache ratio a try
Sometimes those have a noticeable impact

And as seen from the chart
Some had to lower the value to get stable

Because if you don't lower it manually it has the same multiplier as the cores


----------



## Nawafwabs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> In the no-delided case, I thnk no-chance [email protected] on 1.42V for a stable operation.
> if you want 5GHz operation.
> Turn off the HT and decreasing the voltage less than 1.38V.
> In the case, the following setting may be your reference.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/680#post_25878530


LLC Setting: No option " i have it on mode 4 "

you can find it in DigitalALL Power


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nawafwabs*
> 
> i7 7700k @50 @1.410v
> 
> when i test it on Cpu-z stress never crash and temp aboute 74c
> 
> when i test it on ROG Realbench it crash after 3 sec
> 
> i raise the voltage to 1.424v and it give me 30 sec and crash again
> 
> if i use 1.410v and play games never crash on me
> 
> so whats the problem ?


What is your stock voltage?

Are you delidded?

Kaby Lake gets much more stable the colder you can make the chip. To the point you might not even need 1.41V to do 5ghz.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> What is your stock voltage?
> 
> Are you delidded?
> 
> Kaby Lake gets much more stable the colder you can make the chip. To the point you might not even need 1.41V to do 5ghz.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nawafwabs*
> 
> i cant delided it , im too scare


gonna have to work around that I guess

or get him a tool to use


----------



## waqasr

Guys I seem to have gotten quite a poor clocker. Im needing 1.4v in bios with LLC mode 2 which brings it to 1.430v at load for 5ghz. Need to do some more testing and tweaking however it is stable.

Ive delidded and used conductonaut under ihs and gelid extreme ontop of ihs but my load temps seem high for triple rad custom loop. Under prime 95 I get 88/82/86/88 but with occt it max temp was 78°C.

I think above 5ghz is not feasible for my chip.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nawafwabs*
> 
> i cant delided it , im too scare
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *also there is post talk about CPU PLL* , i lower that to 1.18 and give me lower temp
> maybe cuz my crash ?
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1621111/i7-7700k-temps-vs-ram-speed-on-z270-mainboard


CPU PLL can affect the DTS (temperature) signal alignment skewing the temp to a false low(er) value. I wouldn't lower this much at all.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nawafwabs*
> 
> yes, im running msi afterburner and HWmonitor with realbench
> msi afterburner i use it bcuz fan not work at 50 c
> its work on 80c
> i will try without it today


IDK - I've been running AB (exclusively) with the last 3 versions of realbench - never an ABeta related problem. Sometimes, SLI can cause RB to hang. AB and RB are "mutex aware" and should not clash. Throw HWi or another monitoring software into the mix, and yeah, a polling clash is more likely. But this should not cause a crash, just a bad sensor reading.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> When people are talking about a hardware fault
> They mean faulty hardware
> as in the CPU is broken
> Not running it above specs
> 
> At least it would mean that to me, because it did
> And depending on the language barrier, to others as well
> Good to know
> Don't know what afterburner these days is good for
> Still good to know
> Btw
> *When stesstesting you can just uncheck the box for GPU testing*


Where is that box? I'm using 2.54 Realbench and didn't find where to uncheck in the Stress Test section.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Where is that box? I'm using 2.54 Realbench and didn't find where to uncheck in the Stress Test section.


when the openCL window opens, uncheck the box(es) for gpus.


----------



## Nawafwabs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> gonna have to work around that I guess
> 
> or get him a tool to use


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> What is your stock voltage?
> 
> Are you delidded?
> 
> Kaby Lake gets much more stable the colder you can make the chip. To the point you might not even need 1.41V to do 5ghz.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Mmm
> 
> I know about the PLL
> We all had a long drawn out discussion about it
> 
> messing with this setting is not recommended
> *Excpet* to manually set the voltage to it's normal standard value
> 
> If left on auto it *can* ramp up and give you higher temps
> 
> That being said
> 
> A not de-lidded chip with 1.4v+ at 5ghz is not going to run overly cool
> 
> Still
> Lowering you're CPU core cache ratio is the thing I would recommend first
> 
> It's like the multiplier for the caches in the CPU
> Lowering those has negliable effect on performance
> 
> But maybe it's holding you back
> 
> I would start at 45 for core cache ratio (or uncore depending on the manufacturer of you're board)


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> By any chance, are you running MSI Afterburner or similar tool (anything with kernel-level drivers for probing hardware really, that would include most monitoring software) with realbench? They conflict rather easily. If you are, try disabling the monitoring software. If realbench still crashes, then you probably have a hardware fault, but if suddenly the problems disappear then you probably only had a driver conflict.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> In the no-delided case, I thnk no-chance [email protected] on 1.42V for a stable operation.
> if you want 5GHz operation.
> Turn off the HT and decreasing the voltage less than 1.38V.
> In the case, the following setting may be your reference.
> 
> Http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/680#post_25878530


I disable any software for monitoring that gives me 180sec and crash with "irql not less or equal "

so I back to 49 with 1.360v seems stable but with high temp after 8min goes to 90c

when I play games temp not goes above 60c so do I need those testing if I only play games?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nawafwabs*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> gonna have to work around that I guess
> 
> or get him a tool to use
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> What is your stock voltage?
> 
> Are you delidded?
> 
> Kaby Lake gets much more stable the colder you can make the chip. To the point you might not even need 1.41V to do 5ghz.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> Mmm
> 
> I know about the PLL
> We all had a long drawn out discussion about it
> 
> messing with this setting is not recommended
> *Excpet* to manually set the voltage to it's normal standard value
> 
> If left on auto it *can* ramp up and give you higher temps
> 
> That being said
> 
> A not de-lidded chip with 1.4v+ at 5ghz is not going to run overly cool
> 
> Still
> Lowering you're CPU core cache ratio is the thing I would recommend first
> 
> It's like the multiplier for the caches in the CPU
> Lowering those has negliable effect on performance
> 
> But maybe it's holding you back
> 
> I would start at 45 for core cache ratio (or uncore depending on the manufacturer of you're board)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> By any chance, are you running MSI Afterburner or similar tool (anything with kernel-level drivers for probing hardware really, that would include most monitoring software) with realbench? They conflict rather easily. If you are, try disabling the monitoring software. If realbench still crashes, then you probably have a hardware fault, but if suddenly the problems disappear then you probably only had a driver conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> In the no-delided case, I thnk no-chance [email protected] on 1.42V for a stable operation.
> if you want 5GHz operation.
> Turn off the HT and decreasing the voltage less than 1.38V.
> In the case, the following setting may be your reference.
> 
> Http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/680#post_25878530
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I disable any software for monitoring that gives me 180sec and crash with "irql not less or equal "
> 
> so I back to 49 with 1.360v seems stable but with high temp after 8min goes to 90c
> 
> when I play games temp not goes above 60c so do I need those testing if I only play games?
Click to expand...

I would not worry about testing just use the PC for playing games so you can have fun with it.


----------



## jodasanchezz

Hi Guys,

if managed to Run my 7700k at 5gh 24/7 at 1.38V under Load (Prime) Temps are in teh 70Range......
Now i desided to test undervolting my Chip atm im at 4.5ghz @ 1.152V is this a good value?
Chip is Delided an resealed


----------



## SaltLord

Username: SaltLord

CPU Model: 7700K

Base Clock Bclk: 100

Core Multiplier: 51

Core Frequency: 5100 Mhz / 5.04 Ghz

Cache Frequency: 4500

Vcore in UEFI: 1.390

Vcore: 1.421

Cooling Solution: De-Lidded (With Razor, Did NOT silicon back together) / Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut Liquid Metal / Corsair H115i

Stability Test: x264 16T on normal. Ran from 7:18am till 4:08pm (Almost 9 hours)

Batch Number: Bought in South Australia around April 2017. I really dont want to take the liquid metal off to tell you batch number sorry!

Ram Speed: DDR4 2133 (I left RAM untouched, XMP isnt supported)

Ram Voltage: -

VCCIO: -

VCCSA: -

Motherboard: ASUS PRIME Z270-AR

LLC Setting: 7 (Lowest Vdroop)

Misc Comments: No AVX Offset used. I tried 5.2 for ages but always had it crashing after like 2 hours of stress testing with x264. This is my first proper overclock so i'm pretty happy with the results so far.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaltLord*


If you dial in ram settings which are more then likely over the top on auto (being an Asus board ...) you might get some few degrees off your CPU ...and maybe be able to drop in V a bit lower. Ignore that..

Looking at your hwinfo they are all pretty low... (you did mentioned no XMP)


----------



## ducegt

@SaltLord You may want to try to find a version of HWinfo that reads correctly. Your CPU power should be triple digits like 130w at that voltage. Also I highly doubt those temperature are accurate. I'm delided with H115i as well and at that voltage temps she can get near 90c when PLL is default 1.2v. Regardless... If it's stable ... Rock it! You could take one tip that has been discussed the last several pages about changing LLC so that your loaded voltage is less than what's set in the BIOS. Higher idle voltage with less underload will be more efficient and cooler


----------



## Mr.Cigar

My 7700k is very weird.
It's stable at 5ghz, 50 uncore, xmp enabled. VCCIO 0.960, VCCSA 1.050.
But won't go to 5.1ghz, uncore 51 or 42, xmp enabled or disabled.
Tried to increase UEFI vcore to 1.420, still nope. Error p95 after 1 min or so. Temp was just around 77* when the error appeared, so obviously wasn't overheating.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr.Cigar*


Happened to me as well with one of my i7's ...would be perfectly stable at 5.0/5.0 @ 1.375... would not do 5.1/5.0-4.6 @ 1.475 ++


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr.Cigar*
> 
> My 7700k is very weird.
> It's stable at 5ghz, 50 uncore, xmp enabled. VCCIO 0.960, VCCSA 1.050.
> But won't go to 5.1ghz, uncore 51 or 42, xmp enabled or disabled.
> Tried to increase UEFI vcore to 1.420, still nope. Error p95 after 1 min or so. Temp was just around 77* when the error appeared, so obviously wasn't overheating.


Your chip hit the clock ceiling for the Silicon. My 1.375V 5ghz sample didn't do 5.1ghz either it would boot fine and everything but would throw out numerous L1 cache errors the minute it was stressed.

It's all in the silicon lottery, my old chip needed 1.24V to run at stock while my new one started at 1.125V. This ultra low bin was what allowed my current chip to run 5.2ghz at 1.36V.


----------



## Kalpa

Heh, I'm starting to feel lucky I can run stock (4 cores 4.4GHz AVX workload) at 1.17V


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Heh, I'm starting to feel lucky I can run stock (4 cores 4.4GHz AVX workload) at 1.17V


I've had the privilege of owning chips at both ends of the spectrum. The difference is absolutely night and day.


----------



## Beagle Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr.Cigar*
> 
> My 7700k is very weird.
> It's stable at 5ghz, 50 uncore, xmp enabled. VCCIO 0.960, VCCSA 1.050.
> But won't go to 5.1ghz, uncore 51 or 42, xmp enabled or disabled.
> Tried to increase UEFI vcore to 1.420, still nope. Error p95 after 1 min or so. Temp was just around 77* when the error appeared, so obviously wasn't overheating.


Those VCCSA and VCCIO values are very low for those speeds. Did you set them higher for the 5.1GHz attempt?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Your chip hit the clock ceiling for the Silicon. My 1.375V 5ghz sample didn't do 5.1ghz either it would boot fine and everything but would throw out numerous L1 cache errors the minute it was stressed.
> 
> It's all in the silicon lottery, my old chip needed 1.24V to run at stock while my new one started at 1.125V. This ultra low bin was what allowed my current chip to run 5.2ghz at 1.36V.


100% agree most chips will hit a wall once you try to push them too far, I can get a rock solid [email protected] stable but cant get 5.3Ghz at pretty much any sane voltage level


----------



## Mr.Cigar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Those VCCSA and VCCIO values are very low for those speeds. Did you set them higher for the 5.1GHz attempt?


I tried 1.2 both before, no difference.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Your chip hit the clock ceiling for the Silicon. My 1.375V 5ghz sample didn't do 5.1ghz either it would boot fine and everything but would throw out numerous L1 cache errors the minute it was stressed.
> 
> It's all in the silicon lottery, my old chip needed 1.24V to run at stock while my new one started at 1.125V. This ultra low bin was what allowed my current chip to run 5.2ghz at 1.36V.


Not really sure, feels more like the PSU is holding me back?? Just tried to push 5.1Ghz again, with LLC set to high, vcore in cpu-z and hwinfo was 1.390. It ran prime for like 5 mins and then 1 error in 1 thread. Increased vcore by 0.5, small ffts stress -> Computer shutdown immediately.
PSU: Silverstone SFX 600W Gold
Spec at sign, seriously this is the first time I have a stress test causes computer to shutdown immediately like that







I don't know but I was stressing only the CPU, I heard there was something about itx mobo that it runs mostly on the 12V rail...could it be the cause here??


----------



## Mr.Cigar

Ok it's not the PSU. I tried to keep the same everything except the core down to 5ghz, and it does prime95 small ffts no problem. 5.1Ghz + ffts = immediate shutdown.
Looks like it's really my CPU can only do 5Ghz
Oops sorry double posting!!!


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Beagle Box*
> 
> Those VCCSA and VCCIO values are very low for those speeds. Did you set them higher for the 5.1GHz attempt?


I use IO 1.0v and SA 1.05v for 5.1 and ram is at 3600CL14 with very tight settings. Toying with IO and SA has never helped with 5.2 as far as I could tell.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr.Cigar*
> 
> Ok it's not the PSU. I tried to keep the same everything except the core down to 5ghz, and it does prime95 small ffts no problem. 5.1Ghz + ffts = immediate shutdown.
> Looks like it's really my CPU can only do 5Ghz
> Oops sorry double posting!!!


I killed 2 CPU's at over 5.3 with a 550w PSU so I can reassure you its not the PSU or the ITx mobo...I have a small one as well (Maximus VIII Impact)

@ducegt is that 2x8Gb sticks ?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> @ducegt is that 2x8Gb sticks ?


Yes.


----------



## MaKeN

Heh, idknhow to say that, but my cpu is back to life again.... for the second time it does that...
Basically, after trying 2 othe gaming m7 , one gigabyte gaming k8 , asus apex boards, different psu/gpu,2 different brands /speeds ram,redellid with no resoults...
The cpu started to work back again after a case swap.
Went from this:

To that:


Now i get same exact Oc resoults as before and plus to that my ram now can boot up to 3766 but stable at 3600 on only 1.36v.( before it wont go 3600 at any volts.) im on my same old mobo...

I really wont underatand what it was and why it was . I hope it wont decide to go bad again. This time i keep it at 5.0 1.36v , already passed 8h RB 15.

Only one thing that come to my mind...
Old case was shorting something causing this.


----------



## ViTosS

I'm using my Corsair Vengeance LED Red at 3200Mhz (stock they are 3000Mhz model and I just copied the timmings from Corsair website for the 3200Mhz model and it is working without adding more voltage), should I try go to copy the 3400Mhz models? I don't know if I can raise the voltage, stock is 1.35v


----------



## ducegt

Haha, too funny. The trick of taking everything apart and putting it back together has solved many unknown problems for me over the years.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Haha, too funny. The trick of taking everything apart and putting it back together has solved many unknown problems for me over the years.


Lol , yea seems like it, but this was done 5 times, and only on 6th it fixed


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*


maybe you have "sausage" fingers and tighten the cpu block to much....


----------



## MaKeN

Hah







right


----------



## PontiacGTX

hey just wondering if there is a Core i5 owner who has a Ryzen 5 too?


----------



## SimCity2000

Hello; I'm looking for some help getting the best overclock for the 7700k I recently purchased.

Right now, I have all cores at 4.6 Ghz at 1.215 V. Under load, my temps go from 68 - 77 C, with occasional spikes (the highest I've recorded while stress testing on this frequency was 81 C). I am only using a 212 Evo for cooling, and I used the thermal paste included with the cooler, so I'm not exactly expecting a stellar overclock or anything.

Once I push to 4.7 Ghz, things get hairy quickly. If I set the Vcore to 1.250, the CPU runs stable in Prime 95, but the temps go crazy. At one point they reached 95 C, so I quickly stopped the torture test and reverted to my previous overclock.

Has my cooling solution simply hit a wall? Or are there other things I can do to reduce temps?

System Specs:

MSI Mortar Z270
i7 7700K
650W EVGA Supernova G3 GOLD+
GTX 970
16 GB 8x2 Dual Channel DDR4 3000 Mhz Corsair Vengeance


----------



## MaKeN

Dellid or change the cooler
You already reached your best overclock out of that evo 212...


----------



## SimCity2000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Dellid or change the cooler
> You already reached your best overclock out of that evo 212...


Thank you. What about the AVX offset? I've found that setting it to -5 drastically reduces my temps and allows a "stable" 4.7 Ghz overclock. I only really use my computer for gaming; is reducing the frequency to 4.2 Ghz whenever AVX instructions are needed going to affect my games?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SimCity2000*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Dellid or change the cooler
> You already reached your best overclock out of that evo 212...
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you. What about the AVX offset? I've found that setting it to -5 drastically reduces my temps and allows a "stable" 4.7 Ghz overclock. I only really use my computer for gaming; is reducing the frequency to 4.2 Ghz whenever AVX instructions are needed going to affect my games?
Click to expand...

Some games use AVX so they will clock down the processor in speed.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SimCity2000*
> 
> Thank you. What about the AVX offset? I've found that setting it to -5 drastically reduces my temps and allows a "stable" 4.7 Ghz overclock. I only really use my computer for gaming; is reducing the frequency to 4.2 Ghz whenever AVX instructions are needed going to affect my games?


In your situation i would really better run it stock ( with lowest voltage possible/stable) than oc to 4.7 and -5 avx ofsset
My friend , do not expect something big out of non dellided 7700k with a evo 212... in your situation running stock with ok temps at 4.5 turbo boost vs an oc to 4.7 and high temps ( for that little% add) it is really a no reason .
Keep it stock, find lowest voltage for running it stock.
You wont ever feel the difference stock vs 4.7 .... ( only in temps in your case)

I may be completely wrong let other users correct me . Its what i think.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Some games use AVX so they will clock down the processor in speed.


I understand bro, but 4.7 oc - 5 avx and increased volts vs stock... Well , idkn , for me its kinda not as good


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SimCity2000*
> 
> Thank you. What about the AVX offset? I've found that setting it to -5 drastically reduces my temps and allows a "stable" 4.7 Ghz overclock. I only really use my computer for gaming; is reducing the frequency to 4.2 Ghz whenever AVX instructions are needed going to affect my games?


if you are using an ASUS ROG board, you can use the thermal control toll in bios to force the downclock based on temperature and not the AVX instruction set. Works great on 4 thru 10 core cpus (z270 and x99)


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Some games use AVX so they will clock down the processor in speed.


I'm not aware of any games using AVX instructions
A quick Google didn't give any results either

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SimCity2000*
> 
> Thank you. What about the AVX offset? I've found that setting it to -5 drastically reduces my temps and allows a "stable" 4.7 Ghz overclock. I only really use my computer for gaming; is reducing the frequency to 4.2 Ghz whenever AVX instructions are needed going to affect my games?


I only game as well

The only things that I'm aware off that would use an AVX instruction are things I haven't used in a few years
Like editing videos/ converting them

I think chrome uses some AVX

In real life 24/7 I have set an offset of 2, as 5ghz for me was prime stable (with avx) and 200mhz is not going to matter in those situations (it does in some unoptimzed games though)

Hell running chrome shouldn't even wake up the CPU a lot in the first place


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I'm not aware of any games using AVX instructions
> A quick Google didn't give any results either


Set a hefty AVX drop like -4/-5 and you will start seeing common things using avx...
Especially DX12 applications/games lean more towards that trend.

Chrome.. ... the full list has been discussed here couple of pages back.

PUBG = I can't find any source on google but I can swear my cpu locks to AVX freq when I play it...so either the game itself or some of my background programs is doing that.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Set a hefty AVX drop like -4/-5 and you will start seeing common things using avx...
> Especially DX12 applications/games lean more towards that trend.
> 
> Chrome.. ... the full list has been discussed here couple of pages back.
> 
> PUBG = I can't find any source on google but I can swear my cpu locks to AVX freq when I play it...so either the game itself or some of my background programs is doing that.


tried looking for it
like there?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coc_james*
> 
> I'm a gamer. DX12 fully supports AVX. There are titles available and many more titles coming that use AVX. 7zip and most other compression software use AVX. Photoshop uses it Handbrake uses it. I really could go on and on


didn't really find anything

again

its not like I'm running Photoshop 24/7, which cant multi thread well either but needs strong IPC and freqency
not converting videos, so handbrake is out

and that one time in a month running 7zip or winrar I could handle waiting 2 minutes longer if it downclocks

and as far as Player unknown
there is nothing stating it actually uses those extentions
that said, maybe it does, only found a few reddit rumor like threads about it, without a lot of responses
but in such cases the AVX offset would exactly work like we want it to

btw Ryzens performance would suck under those instances, as AMD's AVX path is way slower as far as I read about it

Quote:


> Especially DX12 ...games


can you show even one?
one that you *know* uses AVX?

I'm kinda running empty on upcoming titles that are going to use it

as far as I understand it, its an extension like SSE, nothing to do with DX12 per sè


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*


Its very hard to replicate results on this matter as we are, or at least me, unable to separate the actual game from the environment (OS) its running on..
I'm still doing tests in regards but the answer is far from black and white..and has many shades of gray.
At the moment I would strongly say that AVX in games is nothing to concern us yet..

One would have to do rigorous testing to prove hes idle-ing pc is not using any avx under any circumstance and than buy every single game out there rumored to be using AVX and start testing it.
And its not as simple as Opening the game and watching the CPU freq... as AVX might appear only in certain situations.


----------



## n1kobg

Username: n1kobg
CPU Model: 7600k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 52
Core Frequency: 5200
Cache Frequency: 4000
Vcore in UEFI: 1.355
Vcore: 1.375
FCLK: 1000
Cooling: LUCIFER K2
Stability Test: 2 hours Aida64, 6hours BF4,

Batch Number:
Ram Speed: 2666mhz (15-15-15-36)
VCCIO: stock
VCCSA: stock
Ram Voltage: 1.250v - (stock)
Motherboard: AsRock z170 Extreme 4
LLC Setting: 1
p.s. custom bios provided by AsRock with added SpeedShift: v7.32A 5ghz/ cache:46 / RAM:3200mhz /1.255v (5.1ghz /cache:43 / RAM:3200mhz / 1.295v)


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *n1kobg*
> 
> Username: n1kobg
> 
> Stability Test: 2 hours Aida64, 6hours BF4, Cinebench 4 times in a row.


----------



## n1kobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*


Ok i deleted it, left just Aida & BF4..Its just the way I test. The first thing is to run cinebench & if passes 3-4 times in a row I consider it good for further testing. 1 - 2 times is one thing. Try to pass unstable OC 4-5 timesd & youll see what i mean.
ps. BTW I ran this 5.2ghz OC all winter, because in the summer the max I hit is 51.57ghz. The Highest stable is 52 with 101 bclk
Asus realbench I got until 1 hour but i stopped it because i had work to do btw.

BTW I HAVE QUESTION FOR PEOPLE WHO DELIDED THEIR CHIPS. I SEE PEOPLE GET MY VOLTAGESD & TEMPS WHEN DELID THEIR CHIPS.
SO AM I GOING TO SEE LOWER VOLTAGES IF I DELID MY CPU?
I GET 5.3GHZ NOT STABLE BUT I WONDER IF I GET 5.4GHZ WHEN DELID?


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *n1kobg*
> 
> Ok i deleted it, left just Aida & BF4..Its just the way I test.


thats fine
you just made it look like an official entry
you know
all the small things listed and so on
also you woukd need a screenshot showing









I used to run RealBench for half an hour and see if its stable, then change something
only ran 8 hours when I thought I had it (still halted after 4 hours, had to tweak settings)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *n1kobg*
> 
> BTW I HAVE QUESTION FOR PEOPLE WHO DELIDED THEIR CHIPS. I SEE PEOPLE GET MY VOLTAGESD & TEMPS WHEN DELID THEIR CHIPS.
> SO AM I GOING TO SEE LOWER VOLTAGES IF I DELID MY CPU?
> I GET 5.3GHZ NOT STABLE BUT I WONDER IF I GET 5.4GHZ WHEN DELID?


maybe

no one can guarantee such a thing

but its a possibility

but not massivly

btw

if you want to be listed you still have to pass with something from the medium list


----------



## n1kobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> thats fine
> you just made it look like an official entry
> you know
> all the small things listed and so on
> also you woukd need a screenshot showing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I used to run RealBench for half an hour and see if its stable, then change something
> only ran 8 hours when I thought I had it (still halted after 4 hours, had to tweak settings)
> maybe
> 
> no one can guarantee such a thing
> 
> but its a possibility
> 
> but not massivly


Is this good for screenshot

http://valid.x86.fr/5p22eu

I havent made screenshot of Aida64, I guess I have to do it again


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *n1kobg*
> 
> Is this good for screenshot
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/5p22eu


more like this











you can see the timer in RealBench (all RAM used, hashes match), voltages, temps, the time how long HWinfo was open

at the time (been a few months)
HWinfo didn't read out voltages properly, but for that CPU-Z is fine as well


----------



## n1kobg

you can see the timer in RealBench (all RAM used, hashes match), voltages, temps, the time how long HWinfo was open

I see nothing in this small screen but I get the point


----------



## n1kobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> more like this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you can see the timer in RealBench (all RAM used, hashes match), voltages, temps, the time how long HWinfo was open
> 
> at the time (been a few months)
> HWinfo didn't read out voltages properly, but for that CPU-Z is fine as well


I see nothing in this small screenshot but I get the point


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *n1kobg*
> 
> I see nothing in this small screenshot but I get the point


Click the picture... than underneath it...click on "original"... that will open a new tab with the original resolution and you can zoom in/out


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> can you show even one?
> one that you *know* uses AVX?
> 
> I'm kinda running empty on upcoming titles that are going to use it
> 
> as far as I understand it, its an extension like SSE, nothing to do with DX12 per sè


The talk about DX12 is that supposedly some of its common/core libraries have functions which utilize AVX instruction set if present and as such software adopting them will be using more cycles of AVX instructions. Now, whether this use is really significant or not remains to be seen. Also talk is talk, mostly done by hobbyists like ourselves who may or may not have a clue what they're even talking about (for example I'm a bus driver)

As to current games, the only one I know that really utilizes AVX instructions is Witcher 3. Whenever you're in game world any monitoring software will show your CPU throttling down to AVX offset consistently and constantly (which makes me believe something major like game world update threading is involved)

Other game that seems to have intermittent utilization is Hearts of Iron 4.

Also Windows background processes can be seen dropping CPU frequency to AVX offset if you leave the machine idle and monitor carefully.


----------



## PontiacGTX

then anyone owns a Ryzen 5 and a core i5?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> then anyone owns a Ryzen 5 and a core i5?


had a 1600x, and have a 6600K


----------



## Mr.Cigar

Got my 7700k stable at 5.1Ghz 1.4V CPu-z and Hwinfo, by connecting rad push fan, and case exhaust fan (Got disconnected since idk when).
Well can't say for sure fully stable but it's been a few rounds of p95 small ffts and blend and so far so good, no sudden shutdown no matter how hard I try (????).


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> had a 1600x, and have a 6600K


needed to compare si by side in games since Ryzen 5 has more cores/threads


----------



## ViTosS

ROFL I don't understand, 8h Realbench stable 5.0Ghz at 1.36v, many hours of Battlefield 1 gameplay and just 5 minutes of x264 BSOD.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> ROFL I don't understand, 8h Realbench stable 5.0Ghz at 1.36v, many hours of Battlefield 1 gameplay and just 5 minutes of x264 BSOD.


Maybe ram related


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Maybe ram related


Nope, I thought it could be my RAM OC from 3000Mhz to 3200Mhz, but I just downclocked to 3000Mhz and tried again x264 and still BSOD.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Nope, I thought it could be my RAM OC from 3000Mhz to 3200Mhz, but I just downclocked to 3000Mhz and tried again x264 and still BSOD.


It happens quickly right? So its worth to try increase a bit the v core and not spend much of time to see if its v core voltage related? Bump it to 1.38 and quick try?


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> It happens quickly right? So its worth to try increase a bit the v core and not spend much of time to see if its v core voltage related? Bump it to 1.38 and quick try?


Yea it was at 1.395v in BIOS resulting to 1.360v, so I bumped to 1.400 and still BSOD, happens in 5 minutes, so I decided to go back to 4.9Ghz at 1.328v


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> needed to compare si by side in games since Ryzen 5 has more cores/threads


sorry - can;t help with that. I gave the 1600x/RX580 to a nephew.


----------



## tomatohill

Hi, I registered today to first to say thanks to the Darkwizzie for starting this thread since I've made use of the spreadsheet stats to make some significant headway toward 5GHz and to thanks everybody on the chart, also want to say hi to everyone on this thread.

The second reason I'm here has to do with oc the new i7 77K that I've just put together









PROB : It was originally ran too hot even with avx offset of -4, heat up to 100C, bombed out after running realbench for 20 min.
SOLUTION: so I delidded the cpu, replaced tim with CLU, disabled and run with avx offset 0.

RESULT 1: still too much heat (ie. 100c) after much trial and error without any progress I came across this thread and read Darkwizzie's comment on HT that it generates lots of heat and he disabled ot himself so I disabled HT and saw much cooler temp as the result 2 shows below.

RESULT 2 : 203 min. and it bombed out of realbench with following settings: eufi vcore 1.33, (actual vcore 1.36v)50x cpu, 46x cache, llc 4, vccio 1.10, vccsa 1.15, XMP enabled ram freq. 3.2GHz(xmp 3000MHz oced to 3200MHz), avx offset 0, and most significant setting is HT disabled. Idle temp was 24C, max 69C (it was in the wee hours and it was nippy in Sac., CA, was 20C ambient). the system has 32GB but on this run I select only 8GB. At the time of bombing out I was the first time moving the HWinfo window around the desktop after 203 min untouched, so this could be the reason for crashing ?

So it seems the pc can not run with HT enabled at all with avx offset 0 for a few minutes without heating up to 100C. I've re delidded and replaced CLU under cpu lid and TIM on cooler base/over cpu lid but temp with avx offset 0, HT on, is still up there at 100C at 5GHz.

it is perplexing to me and i want to do another delid but Im out of CLU ( the stuff is expensive, I m thinking of getting the big tube to save money by spending more money on it







) so now im just out of idea and asking for the wisdom of the group here for any pointer.

also, do ppl run stress test on this forum with HT on or off ? Anyway thank you for any suggestion, idea...etc...

system: i7-7700k, aircool noctua NH-D14, PS evga supernova 750 platinum, 32 GB ram 3000MHz oced to 3200MHz, ram voltage 1.35, gtx 1070 stock speed.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tomatohill*
> 
> 
> Hi, I registered today to first to say thanks to the Darkwizzie for starting this thread since I've made use of the spreadsheet stats to make some significant headway toward 5GHz and to thanks everybody on the chart, also want to say hi to everyone on this thread.
> 
> The second reason I'm here has to do with oc the new i7 77K that I've just put together
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PROB : It was originally ran too hot even with avx offset of -4, heat up to 100C, bombed out after running realbench for 20 min.
> SOLUTION: so I delidded the cpu, replaced tim with CLU, disabled and run with avx offset 0.
> 
> RESULT 1: still too much heat (ie. 100c) after much trial and error without any progress I came across this thread and read Darkwizzie's comment on HT that it generates lots of heat and he disabled ot himself so I disabled HT and saw much cooler temp as the result 2 shows below.
> 
> RESULT 2 : 203 min. and it bombed out of realbench with following settings: eufi vcore 1.33, (actual vcore 1.36v)50x cpu, 46x cache, llc 4, vccio 1.10, vccsa 1.15, XMP enabled ram freq. 3.2GHz(xmp 3000MHz oced to 3200MHz), avx offset 0, and most significant setting is HT disabled. Idle temp was 24C, max 69C (it was in the wee hours and it was nippy in Sac., CA, was 20C ambient). the system has 32GB but on this run I select only 8GB. At the time of bombing out I was the first time moving the HWinfo window around the desktop after 203 min untouched, so this could be the reason for crashing ?
> 
> So it seems the pc can not run with HT enabled at all with avx offset 0 for a few minutes without heating up to 100C. I've re delidded and replaced CLU under cpu lid and TIM on cooler base/over cpu lid but temp with avx offset 0, HT on, is still up there at 100C at 5GHz.
> 
> it is perplexing to me and i want to do another delid but Im out of CLU ( the stuff is expensive, I m thinking of getting the big tube to save money by spending more money on it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) so now im just out of idea and asking for the wisdom of the group here for any pointer.
> 
> also, do ppl run stress test on this forum with HT on or off ? Anyway thank you for any suggestion, idea...etc...
> 
> system: i7-7700k, aircool noctua NH-D14, PS evga supernova 750 platinum, 32 GB ram 3000MHz oced to 3200MHz, ram voltage 1.35, gtx 1070 stock speed.


welcome to OCN.

Yeah, I would think that the NH-D14 would be able to cope with a [email protected] Other voltages can really heat things up too. What VSa, vccio.. etc, and what mother board?
Also, when you delid, it is really important to PAINT the liquid metal on both the die and the underside of the IHS. You can immediately see that CLU really does not adhere to the IHS as soon as you put some on.. and it really needs to be coaxed to surface bond properly. In addition, for both the delid and cooler regarding TIM - less is more.
So, post back with bios screenshots or key voltage settings, LLC etc:thumb:


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *n1kobg*
> 
> I see nothing in this small screenshot but I get the point


You can also open images to its full size by right clicking and opening it in a new tab.


----------



## tomatohill

mobo is asus maximus ix hero, latest bios.
other voltages are under result 2 in my orig. post.
Right, i did not paint on both sides of the delidded part, something to do next round.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> welcome to OCN.
> 
> Yeah, I would think that the NH-D14 would be able to cope with a [email protected] Other voltages can really heat things up too. What VSa, vccio.. etc, and what mother board?
> Also, when you delid, it is really important to PAINT the liquid metal on both the die and the underside of the IHS. You can immediately see that CLU really does not adhere to the IHS as soon as you put some on.. and it really needs to be coaxed to surface bond properly. In addition, for both the delid and cooler regarding TIM - less is more.
> So, post back with bios screenshots or key voltage settings, LLC etc:thumb:


----------



## Mr.Cigar

Painting both side does help? I applied on the die only, but temp is good now, under 80 @ 5.1Ghz, I wonder if opening everything and doing it all over again worth it?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tomatohill*
> 
> also, do ppl run stress test on this forum with HT on or off ? Anyway thank you for any suggestion, idea...etc...[/QUOTE]
> 
> Almost all of us test with HT on.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> ROFL I don't understand, 8h Realbench stable 5.0Ghz at 1.36v, many hours of Battlefield 1 gameplay and just 5 minutes of x264 BSOD.


What are your temperatures?

Can you check Windows Event Manager, go the Administrative Events tab and see if you have any logged WHEA errors since you dialed in the overclock?


----------



## tomatohill

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Almost all of us test with HT on.


Oh my. That makes my cpu a POS more than it already is









EDIT: just crashed when using firefox on this thread. Firefox error saying this website causing it to crash. I used firefox for its background color that can be overide. Now I got to deal with the white background of chrome. I was playing rise of the tomb raider for half an hour with no issue but got into firefrox for 5 minutes and BSOD. strange.

EDIT: found an extension to change background color to dark color in chrome."Care your eyes" is the name of the extension.


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> What are your temperatures?
> 
> Can you check Windows Event Manager, go the Administrative Events tab and see if you have any logged WHEA errors since you dialed in the overclock?


At 1.360v between 65~70ºC running x264, but is really hot here the ambient temp.

I have some WHEA Logger from time ago, but I really don't remember the exactly time it BSOD while I was stress testing, since then I changed to 4.9Ghz and been using 1.328v stable.


----------



## EDK-TheONE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> At 1.360v between 65~70ºC running x264, but is really hot here the ambient temp.
> 
> I have some WHEA Logger from time ago, but I really don't remember the exactly time it BSOD while I was stress testing, since then I changed to 4.9Ghz and been using 1.328v stable.


DID YOU OVERCLOCK uncore or cache?


----------



## ViTosS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EDK-TheONE*
> 
> DID YOU OVERCLOCK uncore or cache?


Yes, cache is at 4.500Mhz


----------



## EDK-TheONE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ViTosS*
> 
> Yes, cache is at 4.500Mhz


Set it as default: 4200 and test BF1. BF1 is a doomed CPU stress i have ever seen. in Ameins map my 7700K @ 5100 sometimes hits 100% usage @ 1440p check this map!


----------



## Mr.Cigar

Should I worry if my idle voltage goes up to 1.44? It's around 1.390 under load. I know it's because of Vdroop but I don't know if I should be worried?


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr.Cigar*
> 
> Should I worry if my idle voltage goes up to 1.44? It's around 1.390 under load. I know it's because of Vdroop but I don't know if I should be worried?


That isn't too bad. The voltage under load is what matters. Just as long as you aren't shooting up to like 1.5 randomly.


----------



## SimCity2000

So I did a bunch of amateur testing last night, mostly messing with the AVX offset, as that seems to be the bane of my temperatures.

Preliminary info:
7700K
212 Evo
Ambient Temps: 23 C

If I underclock all cores to 4.2 Ghz with no AVX offset, I am able to volt the CPU to a stable 1.160 V.

- Prime 95 will cause variations in temperature from 68 C to 75 C in all tests, which I consider to be very stable and safe temperatures, especially considering AVX is being used heavily in these scenarios.
- When gaming with all cores on full load, the CPU will cap out around 65 C.

If I overclock all cores to 4.6 Ghz with an AVX offset of -4, I am able to volt the CPU to a stable 1.200 V.

- Prime 95 will cause variations in temperature from 74 C to 93 C. Despite running AVX in the same frequency as the previous rest, it is apparent that the extra voltage really ramps up the temperatures, which I do not consider stable or safe.
- When gaming will all cores on full load, the CPU will cap out around 75 C. All of the games I tested (see below) did not seem to use any AVX instructions, as the CPU never downclocked from 4.6 Ghz, and temperatures did not spike as would be expected with AVX on at this voltage. CPU-Z consistently reported the CPU running at 4.6 Ghz as well.

Games tested:
GTA V
Cities Skylines
Starcraft 2

In summation, it appears that Prime 95 does not represent my typical workload in the slightest, but I would still like to ensure everything is stable in the event that I run into sustained AVX workloads. I am going to try additional configurations to see how much I can do with my paltry cooler, but I'm honestly fine with running things close to stock settings until I start exploring far better cooling methods.


----------



## n1kobg

Ok this screenshot, is it ok? thats the far I can wait without doing nothing









I just delided it but i gues i have good chip & the benefits are not great. arounnd 5-7C less, but 5.3ghz is still not 100% stable.
The minuses are more than the pluses in my case because I still had waranty & damaged it a little on the side because I wanted the perfect angle I can get and placed it closest to the vice edge. Thank God its still working. I hope I havent lost some features or worse. The performance is the same.
ps. Now as usual BF4 benchmark for 4-6 hours


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SimCity2000*
> 
> So I did a bunch of amateur testing last night, mostly messing with the AVX offset, as that seems to be the bane of my temperatures.
> 
> Preliminary info:
> 7700K
> 212 Evo
> Ambient Temps: 23 C
> 
> If I underclock all cores to 4.2 Ghz with no AVX offset, I am able to volt the CPU to a stable 1.160 V.
> 
> - Prime 95 will cause variations in temperature from 68 C to 75 C in all tests, which I consider to be very stable and safe temperatures, especially considering AVX is being used heavily in these scenarios.
> - When gaming with all cores on full load, the CPU will cap out around 65 C.
> 
> If I overclock all cores to 4.6 Ghz with an AVX offset of -4, I am able to volt the CPU to a stable 1.200 V.
> 
> - Prime 95 will cause variations in temperature from 74 C to 93 C. Despite running AVX in the same frequency as the previous rest, it is apparent that the extra voltage really ramps up the temperatures, which I do not consider stable or safe.
> - When gaming will all cores on full load, the CPU will cap out around 75 C. All of the games I tested (see below) did not seem to use any AVX instructions, as the CPU never downclocked from 4.6 Ghz, and temperatures did not spike as would be expected with AVX on at this voltage. CPU-Z consistently reported the CPU running at 4.6 Ghz as well.
> 
> Games tested:
> GTA V
> Cities Skylines
> Starcraft 2
> 
> In summation, it appears that Prime 95 does not represent my typical workload in the slightest, but I would still like to ensure everything is stable in the event that I run into sustained AVX workloads. I am going to try additional configurations to see how much I can do with my paltry cooler, but I'm honestly fine with running things close to stock settings until I start exploring far better cooling methods.


Running prime95 4.6GHz with my i5 7600k Hyper 212 temperatures are 94c maximum. That is fine for me.


----------



## Kalpa

Running prime95 4.4ghz with my 7700k Thermalright macho rev B temperatures are 85c maximum. That is fine for me.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SimCity2000*
> 
> In summation, it appears that Prime 95 does not represent my typical workload in the slightest


I will go out on a limb here and say it represents no ones workload
Prime with or without AVX is heavier at 100% on a CPU than any real life app (say blender) or game that taxes the CPU a 100%
That's why it's also hotter than so many other tests
So much that Intel (seemingly) has chosen to bring down the AVX offset from the HEDT line of chips to the desktop

That being said

I would venture to guess that we test with as difficult and hard programs, within reason (look at the list from the first page), to make sure that we dont run into problems in everyday situations
Like a certain Map in a game causing 100% on the CPU and getting a BSOD

No one is asking you to
But realistically to be even called stable by anyone's standard one has to pass a test that can be reliably recreated

Playing games is not a way to make a reliably way of testing for dozens or more people

The gist of it

It passes RealBench it should be fine, cross testing with something more heavy isn't going to hurt
But you don't have to go all out with Prime
It's no ones typical workload and as far as I can see the "community" is turning away from it over time

There are no games on the market that use AVX, nor are there any on the horizon as far as the eye can see
Some say it's DX12 games or part of, which isn't true
AVX is like SSE or 3dnow if that tells you something

As far as software goes
The list of programs that use AVX is rather short as far as the Wiki page goes
Adobe software uses AVX as it seems, software for converting videos (blender, that's when the AVX offset gets triggered in Realbench, during the blender test)

I think chrome, but maybe that was only during a beta Release, don't know

Even still
Chrome using AVX isn't going to break anything or cause heavy temp problems
Running chrome wouldn't even wake up you're CPU fully

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Running prime95 4.4ghz with my 7700k Thermalright macho rev B temperatures are 85c maximum. That is fine for me.


Mmm
That may very well be true

But I think my Asus board would auto OC higher if I left it all on auto than 4.4Ghz

I don't really know, but I'm guessing you're not delided?
Because 4.4 isn't that outlandish high and voltage shouldn't be high as well
Probably stock voltage would do


----------



## Kalpa

Yeah, no I've not delidded indeed, and even my urges to do so have dissipated somewhat lately. This chip is mediocre at best, and the potential gains for daily use wouldn't be too huge (I'd expect to hit ~4600-4700 avx, ~4800-4900mhz non-avx, 5ghz might be possible, but would likely require excessive voltage and with current cooling solution temps would be in the 90s even after delid. I estimate. Impossible to know without delidding of course...)

My current configuration could probably best be described as undervolted stock. CPU runs 4400MHz AVX / 4600MHz non-AVX at 1.17 volts under load. My cooling gives overclocking headroom only up to 4800MHz (non-AVX, AVX would need to stay 2-3 multipliers lower) or so, and running that would require vastly increased voltage (1.35V *or more* under load, long term stability untested) for 24/7 stability, it's just not appealing enough performance increase for me compared to the power cost.

I've gone 42 days without incident with this configuration now so I'm kinda happy to claim it is stable  [email protected] workloads run happily and drain (according to onboard sensors) bit under 80W of power.


----------



## noslen27185

Hello all!!! I want to know why the rog realbench always crash on LUXMARK.EXE when i stress my [email protected], the stress keep going but one windows appears with the message LUXMARk.EXE stopped working!!! any ideas!!?? this happen with and without overclock on my gpu...always happen...until with ram a 2133mhz...and without cpu oc

my system:
[email protected] stable on x264 10hrs, prime95 27.9 8hrs
ddr4 3000mhz 15-17-17-35 1.35v
gtx 1080
ssd uv400


----------



## Mr.Cigar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *noslen27185*
> 
> Hello all!!! I want to know why the rog realbench always crash on LUXMARK.EXE when i stress my [email protected], the stress keep going but one windows appears with the message LUXMARk.EXE stopped working!!! any ideas!!?? this happen with and without overclock on my gpu...always happen...until with ram a 2133mhz...and without cpu oc
> 
> my system:
> [email protected] stable on x264 10hrs, prime95 27.9 8hrs
> ddr4 3000mhz 15-17-17-35 1.35v
> gtx 1080
> ssd uv400


Turn all background OSD off, like Afterburner for example. They crash luxmark.


----------



## becks

RB can be run with luxmark on Pause...so it does not run the GPU stress part..


----------



## nrpeyton

Anyone using the ASUS Maximus IX APEX mobo?

I just updated BIOS from 0906 to a new version 1010.

Anyone else did this and noticed improvements to overclocking headroom?

(I'm wondering if it's worth revisiting).


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaltLord*


You have been charted.

Sample size: 62

Avg: 5.03

Avg voltage: 1.36

Median: 5

Median voltage: 1.36

---

Alright guys. Coffee Lake launches tomorrow. When that happens I still plan to chart people from time to time, but my "official support period" for this thread is over. I got kind of lazy with it like halfway into the thread's lifespan, but I did chart every single person in the end. Thanks for your submissions and rock on!























I'm not sure if I'm going to be doing Coffee Lake thread right now. Part of it depends on the single thread perf of the part since I don't care about the extra cores. Part of it has to do with the cost. (All of the time, energy, and money that goes into buying the chips and motherboard, selling the old stuff, writing and testing a new thread, and maintaining the chart I do for free and do not have any sponsorship.)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Anyone using the ASUS Maximus IX APEX mobo?
> 
> I just updated BIOS from 0906 to a new version 1010.
> 
> Anyone else did this and noticed improvements to overclocking headroom?
> 
> (I'm wondering if it's worth revisiting).


yes,. didn't notice any change in OC tho.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> You have been charted.
> 
> Sample size: 62
> 
> Avg: 5.03
> Avg voltage: 1.36
> 
> Median: 5
> Median voltage: 1.36
> 
> ---
> 
> Alright guys. Coffee Lake launches tomorrow. When that happens I still plan to chart people from time to time, but my "official support period" for this thread is over. I got kind of lazy with it like halfway into the thread's lifespan, but I did chart every single person in the end. Thanks for your submissions and rock on!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if I'm going to be doing Coffee Lake thread right now. Part of it depends on the single thread perf of the part since I don't care about the extra cores. Part of it has to do with the cost. (All of the time, energy, and money that goes into buying the chips and motherboard, selling the old stuff, writing and testing a new thread, and maintaining the chart I do for free and do not have any sponsorship.)


I kinda agree with you Darkwizzie about coffee lake single threaded performance, Im looking forward to the official reviews to see where it is at. Thanks for all the effort you have put into the Kaby lake chart over the last 9 months


----------



## ducegt

Ditto. Thank you for your efforts and sharing knowledge in a consumable fashion.


----------



## Regnitto

Got 5.0 stable on 7700k 1.325v only adjusted multi and voltage. Fractal design Celsius S24

Aida64 & cinebench for stability

Had 5.1 @ 1.385 cinebench stable, but hot hot hot


----------



## ducegt

After seeing 8700K reviews and OCs done with Engineering Samples, I'll stick with 7700k without envy or regret. I wish I would have gone with SKL at launch after sticking out Lynnfeild in retrospect.


----------



## MaKeN

Having my 7700k at 5000 ghz also kinda stops me from 8700k, unless its a minimum 5.3 one , but something tells me its rare


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> After seeing 8700K reviews and OCs done with Engineering Samples, I'll stick with 7700k without envy or regret. I wish I would have gone with SKL at launch after sticking out Lynnfeild in retrospect.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Having my 7700k at 5000 ghz also kinda stops me from 8700k, unless its a minimum 5.3 one , but something tells me its rare


The real chip worth waiting for is the 8 core Cannon Lake (which may likely have more PCIe lanes) or Ryzen 2. Whichever is better. Coffeelake feels like a stopgap solution that, an iteration instead of a revolution.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Having my 7700k at 5000 ghz also kinda stops me from 8700k, unless its a minimum 5.3 one , but something tells me its rare


Mmm
A prebinned, de-lidded one at 5.2 is not a cheap one to have here in Germany
Binned with Prime
So maybe with "only" RealBench it could go higher

Huh
Also wonder about the marketing speak claiming a silver IHS would reduce temps further

Also voltages seem to be less to reach 5ghz
Time will tell
Though in no particular hurry

In 2018 we'll have z390, maybe something actually new with it

Some of those z370 boards have a 5g network adapter
Didn't even know that's a standard

Thought it went: 1/10/40/100

Also in a lot of benches the 7700k isn't exactly falling behind, even if it losses it usually looses only by a bit

Edit
Also MaKeN
You might want to keep an eye on HardOCP then








Quote:


> So, now that I have gotten a little sleep, we are back at the test bench this afternoon trying to figure out what we are going to have to do in order to get this 8600K to 5.2GHz without having to delid. And I am fairly sure we are going to delid anyway. On the upside it is still running strong as I am typing this but I am waiting for the cooler to heatload. We will see.


----------



## nrpeyton

Anyone ever noticed their CPU runs hotter when running PC outside the case. (I.E. with motherboard just placed on top of a book on your desk).

I've had it sitting out like this since upgrading my CPU about 5 months ago. Never even tried it in the case, lol.

(I set it up like this primarily to make sure it was working. Then decided I might do some extreme cooling (Dry Ice) some time down the line... so then suddenly the case became irrelevant.

However I've always been frustrated with my CPU's overclocking performance. (Despite having an ASUS IX APEX motherboard).

At 24/7 volts I can only do 4.8Ghz. (not delidded). At border-line 24/7 safe temps 4.9Ghz. But 5Ghz requires very unsafe voltage and causes thermal throttling.

When I had my old CPU (AMD FX 8350 in the case - I had an extra fan pointing to the back of the motherboard blowing behind the CPU and VRM area and this knocked about 15c off CPU temp during extreme load scenarios.

So with the back of the motherboard blocked (instead of being inside case with an air gap directly behind it) I thought maybe this could affect temps.

Anyone ever experienced with this?


----------



## n1kobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *n1kobg*
> 
> 
> 
> Ok this screenshot, is it ok? thats the far I can wait without doing nothing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just delided it but i gues i have good chip & the benefits are not great. arounnd 5-7C less, but 5.3ghz is still not 100% stable.
> The minuses are more than the pluses in my case because I still had waranty & damaged it a little on the side because I wanted the perfect angle I can get and placed it closest to the vice edge. Thank God its still working. I hope I havent lost some features or worse. The performance is the same.
> ps. Now as usual BF4 benchmark for 4-6 hours


I guess its not enough


----------



## Agalpaf

What would be the absolute max voltage I could run through a 7600k that's going to be replaced in a little over 12 months ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agalpaf*
> 
> What would be the absolute max voltage I could run through a 7600k that's going to be replaced in a little over 12 months ?


IME, low 1.5V range IF you can keep the temp below 80c (any core and package)


----------



## dtfkev

Starting on my 7700K overclock today. Mostly being used for light gaming a few hours a week. Have a few questions before I get started.

1) Which stress test application should I run for NON AVX workloads to establish a baseline overclock?
2) Which stress test application should I run for AVX workloads to establish my AVX offset?

I'm having trouble getting a stable baseline OC, I think the application I'm using runs AVX.

PC Specs:
Intel 7700K Delid
Asus Maximus IX Hero
Asus Strix GTX 1080 Ti
Gskill Trident Z RGB DDR4-3200
Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVME
Corsair RM750x
Custom loop cooling both CPU & GPU


----------



## MaKeN

Guys what would you take if its for the same price, z270 apex or code?
I want to switch to h500p case , need aura rg efect...


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Starting on my 7700K overclock today. Mostly being used for light gaming a few hours a week. Have a few questions before I get started.
> 
> 1) Which stress test application should I run for NON AVX workloads to establish a baseline overclock?
> 2) Which stress test application should I run for AVX workloads to establish my AVX offset?
> 
> I'm having trouble getting a stable baseline OC, I think the application I'm using runs AVX.
> 
> PC Specs:
> Intel 7700K Delid
> Asus Maximus IX Hero
> Asus Strix GTX 1080 Ti
> Gskill Trident Z RGB DDR4-3200
> Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVME
> Corsair RM750x
> Custom loop cooling both CPU & GPU


Start with cinabench r15 to get the idea of your cpu max clock at lowest voltage
For exemple you will get 5.0 ghz at 1.35v passing cinabench , after that do the realbench , set it on like 1 hour, im mostly sure you will get an error, so bump the vcore one step and run realbench again, if there is a error bump votage again , and so on... keep in mind you also have an LLC there...I suggest all the time to keep an eye on the vcore voltage during tests.

First find that stability in realbench ... after play with avx, who knows mb your aplication isnt using avx that hard and you be fine, if not, OCCT or prime 95 are the stresstests.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agalpaf*
> 
> What would be the absolute max voltage I could run through a 7600k that's going to be replaced in a little over 12 months ?


1.52v at 100 amps max.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Starting on my 7700K overclock today. Mostly being used for light gaming a few hours a week. Have a few questions before I get started.
> 
> 1) Which stress test application should I run for NON AVX workloads to establish a baseline overclock?
> 2) Which stress test application should I run for AVX workloads to establish my AVX offset?
> 
> I'm having trouble getting a stable baseline OC, I think the application I'm using runs AVX.
> 
> PC Specs:
> Intel 7700K Delid
> Asus Maximus IX Hero
> Asus Strix GTX 1080 Ti
> Gskill Trident Z RGB DDR4-3200
> Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVME
> Corsair RM750x
> Custom loop cooling both CPU & GPU


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Start with cinabench r15 to get the idea of your cpu max clock at lowest voltage
> For exemple you will get 5.0 ghz at 1.35v passing cinabench , after that do the realbench , set it on like 1 hour, im mostly sure you will get an error, so bump the vcore one step and run realbench again, if there is a error bump votage again , and so on... keep in mind you also have an LLC there...I suggest all the time to keep an eye on the vcore voltage during tests.
> 
> First find that stability in realbench ... after play with avx, who knows mb your aplication isnt using avx that hard and you be fine, if not, OCCT or prime 95 are the stresstests.


I'll download R15 and give it a go thanks.

I've only used RealBench thus far, and I think it uses AVX - so I'm looking for something that doesn't to get me started as I haven't been able to pass realbench yet.

I'm not very familiar with LLC, so I haven't messed with it.

I have hardware monitor, but honestly outside of looking at temps I'm not sure what else I'm looking for.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Starting on my 7700K overclock today. Mostly being used for light gaming a few hours a week. Have a few questions before I get started.
> 
> 1) Which stress test application should I run for NON AVX workloads to establish a baseline overclock?
> 2) Which stress test application should I run for AVX workloads to establish my AVX offset?
> 
> I'm having trouble getting a stable baseline OC, I think the application I'm using runs AVX.
> 
> PC Specs:
> Intel 7700K Delid
> Asus Maximus IX Hero
> Asus Strix GTX 1080 Ti
> Gskill Trident Z RGB DDR4-3200
> Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVME
> Corsair RM750x
> Custom loop cooling both CPU & GPU


I recommend you "OCCT linpack".
for 1) not check of AVX option.
for 2) check the AVX option.
and run the test. When it shows no-error for 1hour, your system is very stable. I feel 20-30 minits is enough for actual stability.

For the stability Including the video card, real bench 2.54 is better than OCCT. It is for 2).


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> I'll download R15 and give it a go thanks.
> 
> I've only used RealBench thus far, and I think it uses AVX - so I'm looking for something that doesn't to get me started as I haven't been able to pass realbench yet.
> 
> I'm not very familiar with LLC, so I haven't messed with it. (outside of setting IA AC and IA DC to 0.01 as suggested in the asus z270 guide)
> 
> I have hardware monitor, but honestly outside of looking at temps I'm not sure what else I'm looking for.


I used IA&AC setting of 0.05. Because, at using 0.05 CPU temperature has been bit cooler than the case using 0.01,


----------



## MaKeN

So download cpuz or hwinfo and run cinabench , look at vcore volts, remember thwm, after go bios change the llc level, run thw cinabench again and see the changes to vcore , you will get the idea of what tcurrwnt level of llc did to your manually set vcore volts. It will rayse it , keep it same or dowgrade /lower it.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Guys what would you take if its for the same price, z270 apex or code?
> I want to switch to h500p case , need aura rg efect...


for me it would be the code

having a Formula, before that a saber tooth

I prefer the rather clean look of the shroud (on that note, I wonder why only *Intel* Asus boards have that shroud, its just optics anyway)


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> for me it would be the code
> 
> having a Formula, before that a saber tooth
> 
> I prefer the rather clean look of the shroud (on that note, I wonder why only *Intel* Asus boards have that shroud, its just optics anyway)


Thx for replying, i kinda dont get it about the shroud you talk about...
For looks, i agree overall, code, looks way better than apex.

As i understand with apex , i cant hope for better cpu oc, but may get a bit extra from ram right?
And as i see apex is larger 10.7inch vs code has 9.6 inch


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Guys what would you take if its for the same price, z270 apex or code?
> I want to switch to h500p case , need aura rg efect...


Apex... But bare in mind its resale value may be hit a bit more due to the number of dimm slots.

I took off the shroud from my z170 Hero. I don't want random plastic on my mobo.


----------



## n1kobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Agalpaf*
> 
> What would be the absolute max voltage I could run through a 7600k that's going to be replaced in a little over 12 months ?


I run my 7600k on 5.2ghz on 1.376v. Maybe the higest voltage is somewhere around 1.44v for every day usage but thats still a very high. If you want to be on the safe side 1.395-1.410v


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Thx for replying, i kinda dont get it about the shroud you talk about...
> For looks, i agree overall, code, looks way better than apex.
> 
> As i understand with apex , i cant hope for better cpu oc, but may get a bit extra from ram right?
> And as i see apex is larger 10.7inch vs code has 9.6 inch


In terms of looks go with the code, in terms of a better board go the Apex


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> In terms of looks go with the code, in terms of a better board go the Apex


Apparently , apex m.2 holder/or what ever it's called, is stiking out higher then ram slots..... it would definitely be in the way of a push/pull on the rad on top.
I wonder if i could dremel/cut the top side of ear to make it fit


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Apparently , apex m.2 holder/or what ever it's called, is stiking out higher then ram slots..... it would definitely be in the way of a push/pull on the rad on top.
> I wonder if i could dremel/cut the top side of ear to make it fit


If there is no circuitry there or components maybe you could, I dont have an Apex board but based on what others have said that do have one, it appears to be a better board in terms of memory overclocking than anything else on the market, Im not saying the Code is a bad board by any means but really you have to ask yourself what features are important to me, how much do I want to pay, how are the chipset lanes arranged and will that suit my needs, does it look nice etc. Really only you can answer that







Forgot to ask how thick is the rad you are planning to use?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> If there is no circuitry there or components maybe you could, I dont have an Apex board but based on what others have said that do have one, it appears to be a better board in terms of memory overclocking than anything else on the market, Im not saying the Code is a bad board by any means but really you have to ask yourself what features are important to me, how much do I want to pay, how are the chipset lanes arranged and will that suit my needs, does it look nice etc. Really only you can answer that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Forgot to ask how thick is the rad you are planning to use?


Thx for the input...
The rad isnt that thick , the push/pull makes it thick, as for exemple look at my setup now, that i want to transfer in other case with a code or apex ....

There is almost no clearance between fan and rams... on apex m.2 thing its even less....
As you say, ill have to check if there is no circuit

Ps: fans would be lower about 3/8 than rams starts from the top...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Thx for the input...
> The rad isnt that thick , the push/pull makes it thick, as for exemple look at my setup now, that i want to transfer in other case with a code or apex ....
> 
> There is almost no clearance between fan and rams... on apex m.2 thing its even less....
> As you say, ill have to check if there is no circuit


What I was trying to allude to was unless you are using a radiator that 60mm thick or more push/pull is not going to help you achieve better temps, all it will do is add cost with 3 extra fans you wont need and will add noise too when its not achieving anything


----------



## BoredErica

I think the usefulness of PP depends on the air restriction of the radiator. Radiator thickness is a factor that contributes to air restriction, but tube geometry among other things can affect that as well.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> I used IA&AC setting of 0.05. Because, at using 0.05 CPU temperature has been bit cooler than the case using 0.01,


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> So download cpuz or hwinfo and run cinabench , look at vcore volts, remember thwm, after go bios change the llc level, run thw cinabench again and see the changes to vcore , you will get the idea of what tcurrwnt level of llc did to your manually set vcore volts. It will rayse it , keep it same or dowgrade /lower it.


What is the idea behind LCC? Like what am I trying to improve with it?

Also, regarding OCCT, do I use the test "CPU:OCCT" or "CPU:LINKPACK" ?

Does the "CPU:OCCT" use AVX?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darkwizzie*
> 
> I think the usefulness of PP depends on the air restriction of the radiator. Radiator thickness is a factor that contributes to air restriction, but tube geometry among other things can affect that as well.


Agreed it comes down to fins per inch but generally thicker radiators are more restrictive, comes down to fans used and fan speed too, many variables


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> What is the idea behind LCC? Like what am I trying to improve with it?
> 
> Also, regarding OCCT, do I use the test "CPU:OCCT" or "CPU:LINPACK" ?
> 
> Does the "CPU:OCCT" use AVX?


If you want to check the AVX, you have to use "CPU:LINPACK".
CPU:Linpack on no-AVX option is very light.
So, for check the cpu stbility other than AVX "CPU:OCCT" is better.
However, I feel it is too severe for recent CPUs.

In my case, by using IA AC&DC load line of 0.05, the cpu temp. at load decreased about 3 degrees C.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> If you want to check the AVX, you have to use "CPU:LINPACK".
> CPU:Linpack on no-AVX option is very light.
> So, for check the cpu stbility other than AVX "CPU:OCCT" is better.
> However, I feel it is too severe for recent CPUs.
> 
> In my case, by using IA AC&DC load line of 0.05, the cpu temp. at load decreased about 3 degrees C.


So I've currently r15 with the following settings:

XMP enabled
50 Sync all cores
1.36 Adaptive Voltage

Everything else is currently set to default / auto.

What should my next step be? Real bench? OCCT?


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> So I've currently r15 with the following settings:
> 
> XMP enabled
> 50 Sync all cores
> 1.36 Adaptive Voltage
> 
> Everything else is currently set to default / auto.
> 
> What should my next step be? Real bench? OCCT?


I like Realbench, because the error alarm of OCCT is very harsh.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> I like Realbench, because the error alarm of OCCT is very harsh.


Just passed 1 hour of real bench. I had to increase voltage in BIOS.

Current settings:
XMP Enabled
50 Sync All Cores
1.38 Adaptive Voltage
Everything else default / auto

Vcore voltages from hardware info during realbench:
1.376 Min
1.424 Max
1.388 Avg


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Guys what would you take if its for the same price, z270 apex or code?
> I want to switch to h500p case , need aura rg efect...


both are fine boards. the Apex might get you higher memory frequencies and lower timings, but only has 2 dimm slots. The Dimm.2 slot makes for a very fast nvme raid 0 using m.2 drives.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Just passed 1 hour of real bench. I had to increase voltage in BIOS.
> 
> Current settings:
> XMP Enabled
> 50 Sync All Cores
> 1.38 Adaptive Voltage
> Everything else default / auto
> 
> Vcore voltages from hardware info during realbench:
> 1.376 Min
> 1.424 Max
> 1.388 Avg


Should I be worried about the spike to 1.424v?

Also, I have very few settings changed in BIOS as you can see above. Is there anything else I need to look at / adjust?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Just passed 1 hour of real bench. I had to increase voltage in BIOS.
> 
> Current settings:
> XMP Enabled
> 50 Sync All Cores
> 1.38 Adaptive Voltage
> Everything else default / auto
> 
> Vcore voltages from hardware info during realbench:
> 1.376 Min
> 1.424 Max
> 1.388 Avg
> 
> 
> 
> Should I be worried about the spike to 1.424v?
> 
> Also, I have very few settings changed in BIOS as you can see above. Is there anything else I need to look at / adjust?
Click to expand...

That looks great that is how I have mine set for 1 year. I would not worry about the 1.424 max.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> both are fine boards. the Apex might get you higher memory frequencies and lower timings, but only has 2 dimm slots. The Dimm.2 slot makes for a very fast nvme raid 0 using m.2 drives.


Just bought Code.... unfortunately apex wont fit in my case because Dimm.2 is a bit too tall
Code is 206 $ open box, in mc
And apex on new egg is about 180$ after rebates and 20% off promo code till monday... i would really take apex price wise
Uhh, time to do the swap from old to new case... its going to take me a good 4-5 hours as i see


----------



## Bride

Hey Guys,
I have an i5 7600K overclocked at 4.6GHz. After 10 hours OCCT don't give particular errors but from the CPU0 chart, there are spikes on the frequency:


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> Hey Guys,
> I have an i5 7600K overclocked at 4.6GHz. After 10 hours OCCT don't give particular errors but from the CPU0 chart, there are spikes on the frequency:


Looks like you were thermal throttling at 100c.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Looks like you were thermal throttling at 100c.


If it were thermal throttling would it not down clock?,CPU temp didn't go above 70 degrees C from what I can see though hardware info doesn't show temps for the whole 10 hours so maybe it did?


----------



## Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Looks like you were thermal throttling at 100c.


can to be a problem of temperature on chokes?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> If it were thermal throttling would it not down clock?,CPU temp didn't go above 70 degrees C from what I can see though hardware info doesn't show temps for the whole 10 hours so maybe it did?


I opened HWinfo just at the end of the OCCT test, so I'll try to make it another time tonight


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> can to be a problem of temperature on chokes?
> I opened HWinfo just at the end of the OCCT test, so I'll try to make it another time tonight


From what I could see it looked like the VRM's were hot


----------



## Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> From what I could see it looked like the VRM's were hot


Thanks man, probably this mobo is not suitable for an heavy overclock (http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z170A-X13.1/index.us.asp)


----------



## nrpeyton

Anyone bother with *secondary* timings?

I am currently running at:
-3600Mhz
-14, 15, 15, 32, CR-1
-1.475v

However everything else is set to auto and I can't help thinking there MUST be room for improvement here.

There's plenty documentation everywhere on how to setup your primary timings (as above).

But I can't find anything to help me calculate proper secondary timings to try.

Anyone have experience here? _(rep++)?_

Is there a way to make my ROG board train tighter secondaary timinings auutomatically?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> Thanks man, probably this mobo is not suitable for an heavy overclock (http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z170A-X13.1/index.us.asp)


its a 5 phase board so more than likely 4 phases for the CPU and 1 phase for the memory, might be an idea to have some more airflow over the VRM that said what are these temperature values sitting at during normal P.C usage?


----------



## Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> its a 5 phase board so more than likely 4 phases for the CPU and 1 phase for the memory, might be an idea to have some more airflow over the VRM that said what are these temperature values sitting at during normal P.C usage?


I'm using a http://www.phanteks.com/PH-TC14PE.html but looks that air flow is not catching the VRM.
Here a screenshot after a short time in game...


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bride*
> 
> I'm using a http://www.phanteks.com/PH-TC14PE.html but looks that air flow is not catching the VRM.
> Here a screenshot after a short time in game...


maybe those values are not the VRM considering you are not loading up the CPU very much, not sure what those value represent


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Anyone bother with *secondary* timings?
> 
> I am currently running at:
> -3600Mhz
> -14, 15, 15, 32, CR-1
> -1.475v
> 
> However everything else is set to auto and I can't help thinking there MUST be room for improvement here.
> 
> There's plenty documentation everywhere on how to setup your primary timings (as above).
> 
> But I can't find anything to help me calculate proper secondary timings to try.
> 
> Anyone have experience here? _(rep++)?_
> 
> Is there a way to make my ROG board train tighter secondaary timinings auutomatically?


I have the 3600CL15 kit. My timings aren't perfect, but they work for me 24/7 100% stable and error free. 1.45v. These values boosted XTU scores by several hundred. I've tried other advice people have given me to improve, but it doesn't work with my setup.


----------



## n1kobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I have the 3600CL15 kit. My timings aren't perfect, but they work for me 24/7 100% stable and error free. 1.45v. These values boosted XTU scores by several hundred. I've tried other advice people have given me to improve, but it doesn't work with my setup.


IDK about the secondary but you need to lower your IO-L's. Increase your IO-L Offset channels & if you post the IO-L should be lower value. Watch RTL CH:A&B. They need to be same values or differ by 1 at most. If you have difference between the IO-L more than 1-2 values- you have bad training. Ideally they should be same values.
Increase your IO-L Offset channels by +1 value at each step. Sometimes one channel can post but the other dont so if you increase both at once and doesnt post try to increase only one of them. they also must be differ no more than 1 value (A channel:22, B: 23 for ex)
You can try lower the IO-L Initial Value. You also could weak RTL Initial Value- this one is usually same as RTL CH:A/B D:1 values

I hope I explained it understandable. If you have something usefull post it here for us.


----------



## n1kobg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Anyone bother with *secondary* timings?
> 
> I am currently running at:
> -3600Mhz
> -14, 15, 15, 32, CR-1
> -1.475v
> 
> However everything else is set to auto and I can't help thinking there MUST be room for improvement here.
> 
> There's plenty documentation everywhere on how to setup your primary timings (as above).
> 
> But I can't find anything to help me calculate proper secondary timings to try.
> 
> Anyone have experience here? _(rep++)?_
> 
> Is there a way to make my ROG board train tighter secondaary timinings auutomatically?


You need to lower your latencies. Increase IO-L Offsets by+1 at each step for both channels.If you post then IO-L will get lower. Sometimes one of the channels cant post so when you increase both of them and doesnt post try them 1 by 1. They should be differ by 1 value at most. The IO-L channels should be differ by 1 as well, ideally they should be same value. Try that as far as you can post. After reach the limit you can try to increase RFR Delay by +1 at each step.If doesnt work , leave it.
You can try lower the IO-L Initial Value as well. And tweak RTL Initial Value-this one is the same as RTL Ch:AorB D1 value.


I hope I explained it well. I wrote that twice since the 1st time gave an error.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *n1kobg*
> 
> IDK about the secondary but you need to lower your IO-L's. Increase your IO-L Offset channels & if you post the IO-L should be lower value. Watch RTL CH:A&B. They need to be same values or differ by 1 at most. If you have difference between the IO-L more than 1-2 values- you have bad training. Ideally they should be same values.
> Increase your IO-L Offset channels by +1 value at each step. Sometimes one channel can post but the other dont so if you increase both at once and doesnt post try to increase only one of them. they also must be differ no more than 1 value (A channel:22, B: 23 for ex)
> You can try lower the IO-L Initial Value. You also could weak RTL Initial Value- this one is usually same as RTL CH:A/B D:1 values
> 
> I hope I explained it understandable. If you have something usefull post it here for us.


You did explain things well, but I'm very certain I already tried most of that. One channel IO-L Offset is set to 21 while the other is 22. Both at 22 didn't post.

jpmboy has kindly given me this advice before, but I can't seem to get RTL CHA/B D1 values do be within 1 of each other. I'm stable so it doesn't seem to matter. I manually lowered the D0s as much as what would post. Can't recall messing with IO-L Initial value. What should that be set to? The higher or lower IO-L value?

I'll give it another shot some day. Got nothing else to tinker with at the moment


----------



## BoredErica

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Anyone bother with *secondary* timings?
> 
> I am currently running at:
> -3600Mhz
> -14, 15, 15, 32, CR-1
> -1.475v
> 
> However everything else is set to auto and I can't help thinking there MUST be room for improvement here.
> 
> There's plenty documentation everywhere on how to setup your primary timings (as above).
> 
> But I can't find anything to help me calculate proper secondary timings to try.
> 
> Anyone have experience here? (rep++)?
> 
> Is there a way to make my ROG board train tighter secondaary timinings auutomatically?


I've done my secondary timings before, but I've forgotten the intricacies of it. Bad memory on my part. I do know the ram stability thread could help you out. I think I managed to get 3733 C15 to performance better than 3804 C15 with auto secondary and tertiary timings.

It's like CPU overclocking on steroids because there are so many settings and it must be verified to be stable every step of the way.

I was considering getting back into it with Coffee Lake and a new motherboard, possibly with 4600 c19 kit. But since I decided to pass on upgrades this time, it's not in the cards anymore.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Just bought Code.... unfortunately apex wont fit in my case because Dimm.2 is a bit too tall
> Code is 206 $ open box, in mc
> And apex on new egg is about 180$ after rebates and 20% off promo code till monday... i would really take apex price wise
> Uhh, time to do the swap from old to new case... its going to take me a good 4-5 hours as i see


good choice, the code is a fine board.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> good choice, the code is a fine board.


Thx.
Now its time to OC....

After all that years with msi mobos, looking into asus bios... it's totally different

I wonder how to make asus aura sync detect/control my gigabyte 1080ti.... would flashing an asus bios on it help?


----------



## nrpeyton

Hi guys,

I've been doing some tinkering (and research) to try and tighten up my *secondary* *memory timings* and so far here are the results:

*BEFORE* (3600 Mhz - 14, 15, 15, 32, 1-T @ 1.475V) with secondary timings below _and_ results:



*AFTER* (with secondary timings changed as shown) with results:











*Before:*
_(average *read* between two tests)_
49,836 MB/s
] _(average *write* between two tests)_
52,395 MB/s
_(average *copy*between two tests)_
43,156 MB/s

*After:* .. . .








_(average *read* between two tests)_
53,405 MB/s
_(average *write* between two tests)_
55,343 MB/s
_(average *copy*between two tests)_
44,114 MB/s

Anyone got any advice R.E. the secondary timings I've changed? (On bottom table). Is there anything I've miscalculated that could cause a problem/or is there anything you think I could safely tighten up some more?

Thanks.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> I've been doing some tinkering (and research) to try and tighten up my *secondary* *memory timings* and so far here are the results:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> *BEFORE* (3600 Mhz - 14, 15, 15, 32, 1-T @ 1.475V) with secondary timings below _and_ results:
> 
> 
> 
> *AFTER* (with secondary timings changed as shown) with results:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Before:*
> _(average *read* between two tests)_
> 49,836 MB/s
> ] _(average *write* between two tests)_
> 52,395 MB/s
> _(average *copy*between two tests)_
> 43,156 MB/s
> 
> *After:* .. . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _(average *read* between two tests)_
> 53,405 MB/s
> _(average *write* between two tests)_
> 55,343 MB/s
> _(average *copy*between two tests)_
> 44,114 MB/s
> 
> Anyone got any advice R.E. the secondary timings I've changed? (On bottom table). Is there anything I've miscalculated that could cause a problem/or is there anything you think I could safely tighten up some more?
> 
> Thanks.


here's a couple of basic ram "rules" that when not followed can result in instability or correction of the timing error by the MB (and the correction may not be reported to the OS):
for 24.7 settings (bench settings only need to be stable to the benchmark)
tRAS >= cas +tRCD+tRTP (+/- 2) (the RAS window has to be open while all three operations complete, early closure results in a recycle and lost efficiency, at best)
tFAW >= 4x tRRD(_S)
Excessively long tREFI can result in signal decay before a refresh. Usually 2x Auto value is fine. One possible way to test this is use sleep (suspend to ram) and see if the system fails to restore (with fidelity) after various times.
\hope this helps. Check the OP in this thread for really good help and proper stability testing

lastly, the RTLs and IOLs are training with quite a skew. Channel A is out of whack.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> here's a couple of basic ram "rules" that when not followed can result in instability or correction of the timing error by the MB (and the correction may not be reported to the OS):
> for 24.7 settings (bench settings only need to be stable to the benchmark)
> tRAS >= cas +tRCD+tRTP (+/- 2) (the RAS window has to be open while all three operations complete, early closure results in a recycle and lost efficiency, at best)
> tFAW >= 4x tRRD(_S)
> Excessively long tREFI can result in signal decay before a refresh. Usually 2x Auto value is fine. One possible way to test this is use sleep (suspend to ram) and see if the system fails to restore (with fidelity) after various times.
> \hope this helps. Check the OP in this thread for really good help and proper stability testing
> 
> lastly, the RTLs and IOLs are training with quite a skew. Channel A is out of whack.


Thanks, that was quite helpful. rep+

I entered the fixes you suggested:

tRAS = CAS (tCL) + tRCD + tRTP

And:

tFAW >= 4x tRRD(_S)

And this is how it now looks (RTL Channel A seems to have fixed it's self). And I'm also scoring slightly higher too. As shown below:



Anyone have any suggestions on how I could further tighten things up a little more?
(I have entered the numbers mainly by *coping other entries from around the internet*. (*Not* by knowing any formulas or what needs to correspond to what or add up to what).

There is literally no material for *DDR4* calculations for *secondary* timings. Or even how to start lowering them. I.E. what to lower first (and if I lower one, do I have to also change another). e.t.c.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*


Triple post







) to much becks beer for me...see next post


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> You might want to lower your tRAS to increase Copy and/or decrease latency..I'd go as low as 26-28 with it...


----------



## becks

@nrpeyton

NVM


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> @nrpeyton
> 
> NVM


There are so many different theories out there regarding the correct calculation for tRAS.

So far I've heard:

tRAS = CAS (tCL) + tRCD _(sum of first two primary timings only)_
tRAS = CAS (tCL) + tRCD + tRP _(sum of the three main primary timings)_
tRAS = CAS (tCL) + tRCD + tRTP _(and this one which I just learnt today)._
The most _common_ misconception seems to be that it's the sum of the first three primary timings. But anyone who knows anything at all should know this can't possibly be true. You just need to look at ratings for almost any kit out there.

So why so many guides across the internet are instructing people of that -- I do not know!


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> !


I personally have not went trough any online guides and just did it in a haste true self testing ... my main goal was to have it running asap.
Not the best at patient ...still telling myself everyday that I should push it just a bit more..but never really find the time to do it..always in a rush..


----------



## MaKeN

Im surprised that swaping msi gaming 7 for asus Code , is such a big memory oc loss.
With msi able to boot at 3700
With code not eve 3400 boots ... strange mb thats the reason it was open box?








Edit: after setting the timings manually, it boots at 3600 for now , will continue testing


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> There are so many different theories out there regarding the correct calculation for tRAS.
> 
> So far I've heard:
> 
> tRAS = CAS (tCL) + tRCD _(sum of first two primary timings only)_
> tRAS = CAS (tCL) + tRCD + tRP _(sum of the three main primary timings)_
> tRAS = CAS (tCL) + tRCD + tRTP _(and this one which I just learnt today)._
> The most _common_ misconception seems to be that it's the sum of the first three primary timings. But anyone who knows anything at all should know this can't possibly be true. You just need to look at ratings for almost any kit out there.
> 
> So why so many guides across the internet are instructing people of that -- I do not know!


guides are mostly guesses... Timing rules are ... rules. The jedec document discusses the timing windows. like I said, cas+rcd_rtp = ras, +/- 2 since some MBs may have an offset. Low values may not actually run the bios value, since dram training will correct the timing error (and not report it to the OS, so you will not see the substituted value). The correction can only do so much.. then the system will either not boot or fail rigorous ram stability testing like HCi memtest or GSAT. Be sure to do more than simple AID64 Memtest, which is only one measure of ram performance. There are others.

as an example (burst = 4, tRTP= 6 clocks, tRAS = sum of cas, rcd. rtp +/- 2 )


Remember - a bad ram OC, unlike a bad cpu OC kindly which bsods, can result in a slow but steady corruption of the OS - to the point where it wil be unrecoverable.

more importantly, your ram sticks are training RTL and IOL values for channel B that are waaaay off. try increasing VSA slightly and monitor RTL values. They should either be the same or B=A+1. Eg, 52/53 and 7/7. You can set these manually. If 52/53 and 7/7 fails, try 52/53 and 7/8. Lower RTLs increase performance significantly (round trip latency).

From a real ram guy:
_Raja:
"No need for tRAS at 30. It's below the minimum time so the chipset will have to resort to some arbitrary timing. tRCD is the time it take to latch the row and transfer the data into the sense amps. CAS is the time it takes to find the column address have have the data ready for burst. Adding those two together brings you to 30 clocks. Each burst is 4 clock cycles in length. That brings you to 34. However, tRTP is set to 10. Which means that 40 clocks must elapse before tRAS elapses and the precharge command can be sent to transfer the data in the sense amps back into the dram cells. The minimum proper tRAS value for your setup is therefore 40 clocks.
All of the timings follow the same laws as DDR3 for minimum value, apart from tRRD_L which has a minimum spacing of 6 clocks

tRAS is the minimum time the row should be active. The row needs to be active for the entire duration it takes to perform tRCD, CAS and tRTP. Any lower and the chipset has to apply the minimum value arbitrarily - there may be an additional penalty for the collision as well.
So while it may look nice in screenshots to set tRAS to some low value (below the min threshold) in reality it is not helping and may be worse than setting the correct minimum value instead on relying on the IMC to correct the timing issue._"

It that example, the rig was running below 40. And yeah, Of course you can run chipset minimums (I do frequently for benchmarks) but they are only stable to the specific benchmark running (eg, like 4000 12-12-12-28-1t, tho even in this case tRTP is 4, so it is still in play







)


----------



## nrpeyton

4000, 12, 12, 12 - 28

omg...

what voltage do you need to run that?


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> 4000, 12, 12, 12 - 28
> 
> omg...
> 
> what voltage do you need to run that?


If you have a good set of b-die modules, then 4000 12-12-12-28-220-1T, can be achieved with approx. 1.88-1.92 Dram volts and approx. 1.25-1.27 io and sa voltages..
Lesser quality modules may need between 1.94 - 1.98 Dram volts and a higher IO maybe upto 1.3 volts and higher SA upto 1.38 volts.

It also depends on your board, as some boards such as the MOCF overvolt automatically and you can set a lower voltage in the bios and the board will compensate.

Boards like Asus for example, require higher voltages to be put in the bios as they do not overvolt as much.

Samsung B-die can handle voltages as high as 2.10 DRAM volts for benching purposes.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


What would be the minimum default for my little z170 platform than ?


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> If you have a good set of b-die modules, then 4000 12-12-12-28-220-1T, can be achieved with approx. 1.88-1.92 Dram volts and approx. 1.25-1.27 io and sa voltages..
> Lesser quality modules may need between 1.94 - 1.98 Dram volts and a higher IO maybe upto 1.3 volts and higher SA upto 1.38 volts.
> 
> It also depends on your board, as some boards such as the MOCF overvolt automatically and you can set a lower voltage in the bios and the board will compensate.
> 
> Boards like Asus for example, require higher voltages to be put in the bios as they do not overvolt as much.
> 
> Samsung B-die can handle voltages as high as 2.10 DRAM volts for benching purposes.


And would you only apply that voltage to a DDR4 module under LN2? I assume there is less chance of destroying the module at voltages as high as that if under LN2?

(I have used Dry Ice before (but only on CPU) and I run my loop on an Acquarium Water Chiller- but can't get LN2 here in Scotland as it's not available at a pheasable price due to distance to nearest company that sells it). Also my DDR4 modules aren't part of my chilled water loop.

I know the maximum voltage for a DDR4 XMP certification is 1.5v (which I _also_ use as my own maximum 24/7 DDR4 voltage). Are there people on this thread going higher than 1.5v for 24/7 on DDR4?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*


As a general thumb up rule...no. I personally would not advise to go over 1.475 for 24/7 ....as many MB overshoot without being able to read that in OS...and you would need an oscilloscope to measure spikes.
Also the main thing to watch out is IO and SA...those 2 overshooting or set to high can kill stuff...

As far as I know...(again... me and my darn knowledge) Samsung dyes don't like cold weather...so they perform worse under sub zero..

Also if you have typhoon burner you can monitor DDR modules temperature...and figure out for yourself if the temp is getting to high for 24/7 or bench run...

I went as far as 1.65 for bench runs with just a cooler on top of the bench to provide some DDR airflow.

EDIT: You can always get some CO2 extinguishers and do some dry ice if you wish.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> As a general thumb up rule...no. I personally would not advise to go over 1.475 for 24/7 ....as many MB overshoot without being able to read that in OS...and you would need an oscilloscope to measure spikes.
> Also the main thing to watch out is IO and SA...those 2 overshooting or set to high can kill stuff...
> 
> As far as I know...(again... me and my darn knowledge) Samsung dyes don't like cold weather...so they perform worse under sub zero..
> 
> Also if you have typhoon burner you can monitor DDR modules temperature...and figure out for yourself if the temp is getting to high for 24/7 or bench run...
> 
> I went as far as 1.65 for bench runs with just a cooler on top of the bench to provide some DDR airflow.


I see. Thanks,

G.Skill actually have some fairly new modules that run at 1.5v by *default* in their XMP profile. (which I was quite surprised to see -- but you can check that out on the product page on their site).

As soon as I seen that -- 1.5v became my new 24/7 daily safe maximum for DDR4. Although I actually run at 1.475v as the small jump to 1.5v doesn't gain me any extra mhz or lower primary timings.
_
I have a fan that sits directly ontop of my modules (blowing down) and some of that airflow also hits my boards VRM._

*
I'm about to delid my i7 7700k using this:*





*(which was removed from the blue one in this pic below):*



*I've been desperate to do it for ages -- I just hope the blade isn't too thick.*

*The blade on the orange one is actually a bit thinner -- but also too sharp I think....*


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> And would you only apply that voltage to a DDR4 module under LN2? I assume there is less chance of destroying the module at voltages as high as that if under LN2?
> 
> (I have used Dry Ice before (but only on CPU) and I run my loop on an Acquarium Water Chiller- but can't get LN2 here in Scotland as it's not available at a pheasable price due to distance to nearest company that sells it). Also my DDR4 modules aren't part of my chilled water loop.
> 
> I know the maximum voltage for a DDR4 XMP certification is 1.5v (which I _also_ use as my own maximum 24/7 DDR4 voltage). Are there people on this thread going higher than 1.5v for 24/7 on DDR4?


The voltages i listed above are for running on ambient/air cooled. Samsung B-die handles those high voltages under air cooled conditions, with no problems at all.

They are not 24/7 voltages, they are for benching only, which Jpmboy also stated he benches at 4000 C12.

For 24/7 general use, i personally run between 1.35-1.4 Dram volts. I have run memory from 3200mhz upto 4266mhz and to be honest, i find running 3600C15 or 3600C16 at 1.35 volts, more than ample for everyday computing.

Its only when benching that i run at 4000 or 4133 C12-11-11-28-1T at the voltages i mentioned in my previous post.


----------



## Slayyar

Hey guys, I would like some advice on what to do next I think I am missing something.

So I have achieved 5100 mhz on my 7700k at 1.425v LLC level 5, 70C max on realbench. I want to push more, I am happy to go up to 1.5v as my cooling is ok for it but is it as simple as just applying more voltage at this point?

I have tried 5200 mhz at 1.488v and it crashes as soon as i stress test on real bench. I have also tried adjusting the bclk by a little bit but that also causes instability. Im thinking maybe there is a power limit option or I have to raise the system agent voltage and vccio ?

My motherboard is a Z270 MSI Gaming m5.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slayyar*
> 
> Hey guys, I would like some advice on what to do next I think I am missing something.
> 
> So I have achieved 5100 mhz on my 7700k at 1.425v LLC level 5, 70C max on realbench. I want to push more, I am happy to go up to 1.5v as my cooling is ok for it but is it as simple as just applying more voltage at this point?
> 
> I have tried 5200 mhz at 1.488v and it crashes as soon as i stress test on real bench. I have also tried adjusting the bclk by a little bit but that also causes instability. Im thinking maybe there is a power limit option or I have to raise the system agent voltage and vccio ?
> 
> My motherboard is a Z270 MSI Gaming m5.


Imho it means after 5.1 your chip requires a big jump in voltage for 5.2 , same as mine .
Mine need 1.41 for 5.1 and ad even know mb 1.5-1.51 for stable 5.2.
5.2 vs 5.1 is only 2% performance gain ... i wouldnt go for 5.2 even at 1.48 volts... no sense...


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> I see. Thanks,
> 
> G.Skill actually have some fairly new modules that run at 1.5v by *default* in their XMP profile. (which I was quite surprised to see -- but you can check that out on the product page on their site).
> 
> As soon as I seen that -- 1.5v became my new 24/7 daily safe maximum for DDR4. Although I actually run at 1.475v as the small jump to 1.5v doesn't gain me any extra mhz or lower primary timings.
> _
> I have a fan that sits directly ontop of my modules (blowing down) and some of that airflow also hits my boards VRM._
> 
> *
> I'm about to delid my i7 7700k using this:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(which was removed from the blue one in this pic below):*
> 
> 
> 
> *I've been desperate to do it for ages -- I just hope the blade isn't too thick.*
> 
> *The blade on the orange one is actually a bit thinner -- but also too sharp I think....*


This blade is too thick man....
Go to a dolar store and buy some razor one sided blades, or shaving 2 sided blades and electrecal tape one side of it....
you risk bending your chip with sheetrock knife blade


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> This blade is too thick man....
> Go to a dolar store and buy some razor one sided blades, or shaving 2 sided blades and electrecal tape one side of it....
> you risk bending your chip with sheetrock knife blade


*
What about this?

Ebay Link:*
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/3x-Fimo-Canes-Blades-Nail-Art-Single-Sided-Razor-DIY-Hobby-Arts-Crafts-UK-/182181781003?hash=item2a6ae15e0b:g:Yn0AAOSw3utY49k~



Not sure how thick the blade is though.. it may not even be any thnner than what I already have (in the pictures above).....


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> *
> What about this?
> 
> Ebay Link:*
> http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/3x-Fimo-Canes-Blades-Nail-Art-Single-Sided-Razor-DIY-Hobby-Arts-Crafts-UK-/182181781003?hash=item2a6ae15e0b:g:Yn0AAOSw3utY49k~
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure how thick the blade is though.. it may not even be any thnner than what I already have (in the pictures above).....


Thats the one I dellided with....

Its literally super easy to do...
It took me about 2 mins for first chip
And about 30 sec on second , i understood the technical thing...
Just cut all 4 corners first, i mean not cut but insirt/slide, after same with rest 4 middle spots left...


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Thats the one I dellided with....
> 
> Its literally super easy to do...
> It took me about 2 mins for first chip
> And about 30 sec on second , i understood the technical thing...
> Just cut all 4 corners first, i mean not cut but insirt/slide, after same with rest 4 middle spots left...


Okay excellent,

I just found this which was even cheaper. (only £1) and free shipping for one.

0.23mm thick, 2cm high and 4cm long.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Okay excellent,
> 
> I just found this which was even cheaper. (only £1) and free shipping for one.
> 
> 0.23mm thick, 2cm high and 4cm long.


Made in USA , heh i bought 10 for 1 dolar here


----------



## MaKeN

Stock timing for my 3400 mhz kit is 16/18/18 38
I ran hci overnight at 3733 at this timing and no errors
For now cant find a way for the kit to even boot at 3866 or 4000 ....


----------



## nrpeyton

Okay REALLY puzzled about what's going on here.

I found my "memory sweet spot" to be 4000, 18, 19, 19, 39, CR-2. _(Timings copied from the 4000 kit on G.Skills website)._
My own is a a 3600 16, 16, 16, 36 twin kit..

I set DRAM frequency to 4000 18, 19, 19, 39, CR-2.
Then:
Begun lowering primary timings to those copied from slightly slower kits on G.Skill site. I.E. Their 3866Mhz is 18, 18, 18, 38.

I KEPT frequency at 4000 Mhz. Increased voltage and tested for stability. Got to 2265 % coverage error free.

However my memory scores are lower. Not higher. After repeated benchmarks I CANNOT replicate the score I was getting with higher timings.

I got down to as low as 16, 16, 16, 36, CR-2 (4000 MHz at 1.55v). and even at that my DDR4 read/write & copy scores are _still_ lower at lower primary timings. (Despite passing multiple stress tests).

*Secondary* timings to were to *auto.*

Anyone any how idea how this could happen: ?

*18, 19, 19, 39, CR-2 (4000 MHZ @ 1.5v)* <- best despite _highest_ timings!



*18, 18, 18, 38, CR-2 (4000 MHZ @ 1.55v)*



*17, 18, 18, 38, CR-2 (4000 MHZ @ 1.55v)*



*17, 17, 17, 37, CR-2 (4000 MHZ @ 1.55v)*



*16, 16, 16, 36, CR-2 (4000 MHZ @ 1.55v)* <--worst result despite _lowest_ timings



Update: By upping DRAM voltage to 1.645v on the last screenshot (16, 16, 16, 36) I _was_ able to "approximately" match the performance at 19, 19, 19, 39. But _still_ not beat it. Still doens't make sense. As stress tests were always being passed.


----------



## Falkentyne

In the first screenshot, try setting your tras to 49, from 39.

Try to keep TRAS>=Cas=TRCD+tRTP.


----------



## Randallel

I've stablized my OC at 4.9 GHz with 1.33 VCORE. If I want to jump to 5 then I have to bump the VCORE to 1.39. I was wondering if my motherboard is causing stability issues.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> In the first screenshot, try setting your tras to 49, from 39.
> 
> Try to keep TRAS>=Cas=TRCD+tRTP.


I tried that...

But it begs the question. Why do the XMP profiles of the modules on the G.SKILL website never follow that rule?


----------



## nrpeyton

Well i just de-lidded my CPU using a razor as shown below:

Can u guys see any physical damage (i can't)
I tried to push the blade upwards towards the IHS to avoid scratching the PCB and i think i succeded.
(Unless anyone can see anything different from my pic).

I'm worried i may have slightly warped (bent) the PCB *very slightly". But don't see any damage.

I applied a tiny bit of tape over the bit electrics (4.dots.of metal wbich is part of PCB). I applied it as incase any liquid metal runs off.

Here's pics so far.

I am not planning to reseal the GPU yet. So i'll just:
1. Apply LM
2. Insert CPU into socket.
4. Place IHS ontop.
3. Hold onto IHS while i close retention bracket on MB to hold everything in place.
5. Prey to god the system boots up.



Note: slight discolpuration on one side of DIE is only the photo quality/light.





Have i missed anything?
Thx. Nick

P.S.The razor method was.EASY. Took me less than two mins.a lot LESS painsteaking than i thought it would be lol.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Okay REALLY puzzled about what's going on here.
> 
> I found my "memory sweet spot" to be 4000, 18, 19, 19, 39, CR-2. _(Timings copied from the 4000 kit on G.Skills website)._
> My own is a a 3600 16, 16, 16, 36 twin kit..
> 
> I set DRAM frequency to 4000 18, 19, 19, 39, CR-2.
> Then:
> Begun lowering primary timings to those copied from slightly slower kits on G.Skill site. I.E. Their 3866Mhz is 18, 18, 18, 38.
> 
> I KEPT frequency at 4000 Mhz. Increased voltage and tested for stability. Got to 2265 % coverage error free.
> 
> However my memory scores are lower. Not higher. After repeated benchmarks I CANNOT replicate the score I was getting with higher timings.
> 
> I got down to as low as 16, 16, 16, 36, CR-2 (4000 MHz at 1.55v). and even at that my DDR4 read/write & copy scores are _still_ lower at lower primary timings. (Despite passing multiple stress tests).
> 
> *Secondary* timings to were to *auto.*
> 
> Anyone any how idea how this could happen: ?
> 
> *18, 19, 19, 39, CR-2 (4000 MHZ @ 1.5v)* <- best despite _highest_ timings!
> 
> *18, 18, 18, 38, CR-2 (4000 MHZ @ 1.55v)*
> 
> *17, 18, 18, 38, CR-2 (4000 MHZ @ 1.55v)*
> 
> *17, 17, 17, 37, CR-2 (4000 MHZ @ 1.55v)*
> 
> *16, 16, 16, 36, CR-2 (4000 MHZ @ 1.55v)* <--worst result despite _lowest_ timings
> 
> Update: By upping DRAM voltage to 1.645v on the last screenshot (16, 16, 16, 36) I _was_ able to "approximately" match the performance at 19, 19, 19, 39. But _still_ not beat it. Still doens't make sense. As stress tests were always being passed.


Stress testing and performance are two different things and not linked to each other.

The reason your scores aren't improving is because the performance does not come from just the primary timings. Your secondary, tertiary and RTL/IOLS have more impact on performance than just the primaries.

Your scores are going backwards, because that indicates that the secondary and tertiary timings are not ideal for the set primaries. The board does not AUTO tune the timings for best performance. You need to do that manually.


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Well i just de-lidded my CPU using a razor as shown below:
> 
> Can u guys see any physical damage (i can't)
> I tried to push the blade upwards towards the IHS to avoid scratching the PCB and i think i succeded.
> (Unless anyone can see anything different from my pic).
> 
> I'm worried i may have slightly warped (bent) the PCB *very slightly". But don't see any damage.
> 
> I applied a tiny bit of tape over the bit electrics (4.dots.of metal wbich is part of PCB). I applied it as incase any liquid metal runs off.
> 
> Here's pics so far.
> 
> I am not planning to reseal the GPU yet. So i'll just:
> 1. Apply LM
> 2. Insert CPU into socket.
> 4. Place IHS ontop.
> 3. Hold onto IHS while i close retention bracket on MB to hold everything in place.
> 5. Prey to god the system boots up.
> 
> Note: slight discolpuration on one side of DIE is only the photo quality/light.
> 
> Have i missed anything?
> Thx. Nick
> 
> P.S.The razor method was.EASY. Took me less than two mins.a lot LESS painsteaking than i thought it would be lol.


The side picture of your cpu is blurry but that bend does not look good if its bent as much as the picture is showing. Because it not being straight, might cause it to not have even pressure applied when locking it down in the socket and not make contact with all the pins and then not boot.

All you can do is try it and hope it boots up. Also you need to check the top of the pcb as that is where any damage would have occurred from the blade. All it takes is the tiniest nick and the cpu will not boot.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> The side picture of your cpu is blurry but that bend does not look good if its bent as much as the picture is showing. Because it not being straight, might cause it to not have even pressure applied when locking it down in the socket and not make contact with all the pins and then not boot.
> 
> All you can do is try it and hope it boots up. Also you need to check the top of the pcb as that is where any damage would have occurred from the blade. All it takes is the tiniest nick and the cpu will not boot.


Thank goodness!!!

It worked out OKAY!

I am not as impressed with the temperature drop as I'd like to of seen. (although I did drop -- just not as far as I'd have liked to).

I used Conductonaut between DIE & IHS and Kryonaut between IHS and EK Supremacy Block.

What do you guys think of my new temps?

First of all Settings were:

CPU: 4900 Mhz
v.core: (1.35v adaptive).
(all power and LLC settings left to default/auto).

Cache: 4600 Mhz

DDR4: 4000 Mhz
18, 19, 19, 29, 2T. 1.5v
All other timings on auto.

*New delidded temps!*

Prime95 (AVX enabled):

Averages:
Core #0 - difference of: 15c
Core #1 -difference of: 11c
Core #2 -difference of: 12c
Core #3 - difference of: 18c

After a 15 min run 'core max' was 17c cooler
and 'package max' was 12c cooler

Realbench 2.56:

Average 'CPU Package Temp' at 10 mins (on 2nd successful Hash Check) was: 53c
= -18c difference

Max CPU Package Temp (reported in RealBench): 60c
= -18c difference

x264, 16 thread loop

After resetting hwinf64 at 2 mins.

Then taking a reading *at* 5 mins;

'Average CPU package' temp was: 52c (=18c cooler)
&
'Core Max': 54c (= 20c cooler)

Summary

Most insignificant improvement was prime95 core #1 only seen a 11c drop.

Most promising improvement was core #3 seen a 18c improvement.

And _best_ improvements show 18-20c improvements at best on x264 and Realbench (averages and max cores).

And finally, even large FFT (maximum Heat on AVX enabled Prime95 barely ever exceed 50c. With a maximum core average of only 47c

_Some cores even running in the *30's*!!









_

Next Step:

See if she can pass all stability tests now at 5GHz 1.4.V. (never possible before).


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*


Did you applied LM on the dye only or dye and underneath of ihs ?
And just to confirm you are using the float method ? haven't glued the ihs back yet....


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Did you applied LM on the dye only or dye and underneath of ihs ?
> And just to confirm you are using the float method ? haven't glued the ihs back yet....


Applied only on DIE

And correct' using the floating method just now (not glued IHS back on -- but its held down firmly by retention bracket so impossible for it to move anywhere).

As I think my board _*may*_ be designed to allow naked runs (which I plan to try out this week too)


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Applied only on DIE
> 
> And correct' using the floating method just now. As I think my board _*may*_ be designed to allow naked runs (which I plan to try out this week too)


I'm not aware of any boards allowing bare DIE cooling

I mean I have a bracket for my CPU as well that I could leave in
Maybe you mean something like that

Mmm
Well you'll see if it does if temps go through the roof

Which is fine for a fast boot up and have a look

I did boot up my CPU without a cooler and was able to get into they bios
Though temps were rising









It should throttle or shut off by itself if it gets too hot if it does take contact in a worst case scenario
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Did you applied LM on the dye only or dye and underneath of ihs ?
> And just to confirm you are using the float method ? haven't glued the ihs back yet....


I don't think I've seen anyone doing a "painting the IHS" with LM vs none yet

Just from my experience that the LM needs to be spread by hand on the IHS underside before good contact is being made

But does that mean one has worse contact if you don't do the IHS as well?

Man beats me

A temp drop of 15 to 20 degrees is like what we would expect I think


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*


For best performance you should apply on Dye and underneath of ihs...(I have around 5c between cores under load)

Bare dye cooling on cabbage (Kabby) is highly not recommended.. check delid thread.. and even when done properly gives close to 0 gains..
Most people doing LN2 and Dry ice put the ihs back...with floating method


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> I'm not aware of any boards allowing bare DIE cooling
> 
> I mean I have a bracket for my CPU as well that I could leave in
> Maybe you mean something like that
> 
> Mmm
> Well you'll see if it does if temps go through the roof
> 
> Which is fine for a fast boot up and have a look
> 
> I did boot up my CPU without a cooler and was able to get into they bios
> Though temps were rising
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It should throttle or shut off by itself if it gets too hot if it does take contact in a worst case scenario
> I don't think I've seen anyone doing a "painting the IHS" with LM vs none yet
> 
> Just from my experience that the LM needs to be spread by hand on the IHS underside before good contact is being made
> 
> But does that mean one has worse contact if you don't do the IHS as well?
> 
> Man beats me
> 
> A temp drop of 15 to 20 degrees is like what we would expect I think


My GPU consumes up to 4x more power (400 watts) and uses Direct DIE with water-block and never exceeds 27c. (literally stays within a MAXIMUM of 12c higher than watater temp and thats only under EXTREME load).

If it's possible on GPU I don't see why it's not possible to achieve same temp results on a CPU. Especially one consuming so much less watt.


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> My GPU consumes up to 4x more power (400 watts) and uses Direct DIE with water-block and never exceeds 27c. (literally stays within a MAXIMUM of 12c higher than watater temp and thats only under EXTREME load).
> 
> If it's possible on GPU I don't see why it's not possible to achieve same temp results on a CPU. Especially one consuming so much less watt.


Yeah but you're talking apples and bananas here

A GPU cooler is designed to make contact on the GPU DIE

A CPU cooler is designed to make contact on the IHS

If you leave the IHS it may not make contact

Also smaller compared to a GPU DIE

Also I don't see how that corresponds to anything I wrote

You mean you'd expect a bigger temp drop

Well again you might have 400 watts on the GPU, but it's DIE is what, 8 times bigger?
So heat transfer is better

Also you don't have 400 watts being used by the GPU DIE, about a third or quarter is used by the RAM


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Applied only on DIE
> 
> And correct' using the floating method just now (not glued IHS back on -- but its held down firmly by retention bracket so impossible for it to move anywhere).
> 
> As I think my board _*may*_ be designed to allow naked runs (which I plan to try out this week too)


You need to apply LM to both the die and the underside of the IHS, to form a proper bond, as explained in the quote below from Jpmboy.

Quote from Jpmboy :
LM has very poor adhesion/bonding due to high surface tension... so applying it only to the die results in poor "contact" with the IHS (just look how hard it is to paint into the surface of the IHS). When you apply a paint-thin layer to both the die and IHS the thermal bond in making the LM-toLM contact is ideal. Once-sided application is very poor in making the thermal bond. LM is not at all like paste TIM with regard to any of it physical or surface...


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> My GPU consumes up to 4x more power (400 watts) and uses Direct DIE with water-block and never exceeds 27c. (literally stays within a MAXIMUM of 12c higher than watater temp and thats only under EXTREME load).
> 
> If it's possible on GPU I don't see why it's not possible to achieve same temp results on a CPU. Especially one consuming so much less watt.


Whats your ambient temps?
Gpu under full load only 27c?
Mine stays at 40c and i was thinking its low temp wise... ambient 25c
Cpu same as yours ..60c


----------



## nrpeyton

Ambient about 18-22c.
But i run my loop hooked up an aquarium water chiller.

But due to dew point restrictions (moisture air forms droplets of water) i usually only rum the chiller at 10-14c. (Which keeps my water temp in loop at a constant 10-14c

Even with the water chiller i still wasn't able to pass every stress test at 5ghz at 1.40v (even with AVX negative offset applied).

Hoping now i can. (Using both the chiller AND my new de-lid.

Can't wait to try!


----------



## dtfkev

What would you guys recommend for a safe maximum voltage on a 7700K for daily use? Delid with liquid metal on a custom Loop setup.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> What would you guys recommend for a safe maximum voltage on a 7700K for daily use? Delid with liquid metal on a custom Loop setup.


1.35v in BIOS (which may show up to 1.424v in windows with LLC on auto at low-medium load)
At high load with LLC on Auto you'll have a healthy v.droop (meaning it may read about 1.392v - 1.409v in windows).

Or 1.40v in BIOS with LLC on auto & AC/DC load line set to 0.1 (keeps voltage closer to what you set it -- low-load & high-load voltages will remain similar).

Safe maximum for DRAM voltage is 1.5v (according to XMP specifications for DDR4).
(G.Skill actually has kits on their website rated at 1.5v).


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> 1.35v in BIOS (which may show up to 1.424v in windows with LLC on auto)
> 
> Or 1.40v in BIOS with AC/DC load line set to 0.1 (keeps voltage closer to what you set it -- even under load).


Running AC/DC at 0.01 and LLC level 5 as generally recommended from the various guides I've been reading

Thanks! Trying to get my chip stable at 5ghz. It went solid for a few days but crashed last night while gaming.

I think it might of been my memory settings.

I'm currently running p95 version 26.6 to find the lowest voltage I can use for 5ghz.

Then I'm going to game normally and see if she's stable before messing with xmp again.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Thanks! Trying to get my chip stable at 5ghz. It went solid for a few days but crashed last night while gaming.
> 
> I think it might of been my memory settings.
> 
> I'm currently running p95 version 26.6 to find the lowest voltage I can use for 5ghz.
> 
> Then I'm going to game normally and see if she's stable before messing with CAMP again


You could try up to 1.45v if you set AC/DC load line to 0.1 but only recommended for short-term benching purposes.

VCCIO - I wouldn't go higher than a value that shows more than 1.25v in Windows
VCSSA - Wouldn't go higher than 1.275v - 1.3v (1.3v being absolute maximum).
(Values in BIOS will be smaller due to LLC settings you apply to CPU also apply to VCCIO & VCSSA).


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> You could try up to 1.45v if you set AC/DC load line to 0.1 but only recommended for short-term benching purposes.


Benchmarks aren't my thing. Just looking for a solid 5ghz gaming clock.

I'll try and keep it below 1.4, if I can't get it to work with anything under 1.4 I'll just have to drop it down to 4.9ghz.

Currently 34 minutes into this p95 run:
1.36V
5ghz
LLC level 5
AC/DC 0.01
Max voltage seen 1.376
Max temp 61*

Everything else auto, no XMP yet


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Benchmarks aren't my thing. Just looking for a solid 5ghz gaming clock.
> 
> I'll try and keep it below 1.4, if I can't get it to work with anything under 1.4 I'll just have to drop it down to 4.9ghz.
> 
> Currently 34 minutes into this p95 run:
> 1.36V
> 5ghz
> LLC level 5
> AC/DC 0.01
> Max voltage seen 1.376
> Max temp 61*
> 
> Everything else auto, no XMP yet


That looks absolutely fine.
Tbink you'll manage 5GHz easy

I need water chiller AND delid to achieve 5ghz at safe 24/7 voltages.
And thats on an ASUS ROG Apex mobo. (ASUS's High end overclocking mobo class).

My 7700k is a very poor sample.

What prime95 load temps are you guys seeing with delid and custom loop, with AVX enabled and v.core of 1.35v and LLc auto)?

Also interested in peoples 'x264 16 thread' and also realbench temps at 1.35v in BIOS (llc auto).
.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> That looks absolutely fine.
> Tbink you'll manage 5GHz easy


I'm running the Asus Maximus IX Hero myself.

I don't think I can get it stable. I've run p95 twice at 1.36v and 1.38v both gave me the following error after about 55 minutes:
Quote:


> "FATAL ERROR: Rounding was 0.5, expected less than 0.4"


I also ran Asus real bench twice, both times ran into stability issues with blender but it uses AVX.

1.36-1.38V adaptive
5ghz
LLC level 5
AC/DC 0.01
Everything else auto/default
Max voltage seen 1.396
Max temp 65*


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*


I'm amazed you had the guts do it razor blade style when I offered to send everything to you









Anyhow....happy to see you didn't killed it..
Let me know how it does if and when you re-delid and apply LM with the suggested method..


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> I'm running the Asus Maximus IX Hero myself.
> 
> After 57 minutes, I received the following error on worker #3:
> I ran realbench for 17 minutes and had blender instability. But it uses AVX.
> 
> 1.36V adaptive
> 5ghz
> LLC level 5
> AC/DC 0.01
> Max voltage seen 1.376
> Max temp 61*
> 
> Going to increase to 1.38 and see what I get


some chips are sensitive to the core cache ratio , not sure if you set them manually or auto
or how high they are

but usually I would set core cache low to standard (me thinks its 44) and try to get max stable frequency with a voltage I'm comfortable with, and then try to raise the core cache


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> some chips are sensitive to the core cache ratio , not sure if you set them manually or auto
> or how high they are
> 
> but usually I would set core cache low to standard (me thinks its 44) and try to get max stable frequency with a voltage I'm comfortable with, and then try to raise the core cache


Core cache is set to auto. Along with xmp.

I don't think I can get 5Ghz staying under 1.4v

I've tried:
1.33-1.4V adaptive
5ghz
LLC level 5
AC/DC 0.01
Everything else auto/default
Max voltage seen 1.424
Max temp 67*

P95 gives me rounding errors and realbench gives blender instability errors.

Anything else I should try? Or just call it a day and step down to 4.9ghz


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*


XMP is set with stock cpu in mind...if you push cpu to the edge...and if you have weak dram dims... you might get dram errors if tested in HCI or other software...
Prime mixes Ram as well into equation...
I pass easily 6-8.....12h of RB but error in Prime ...if I don't up V for Prime profile....just trust RB for everyday use... and go with a 8H RB test and ditch Prime...


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> XMP is set with stock cpu in mind...if you push cpu to the edge...and if you have weak dram dims... you might get dram errors if tested in HCI or other software...
> Prime mixes Ram as well into equation...
> I pass easily 6-8.....12h of RB but error in Prime ...if I don't up V for Prime profile....just trust RB for everyday use... and go with a 8H RB test and ditch Prime...


Alright well I haven't been able to make it through 20~ minutes of Asus real bench with any of the following settings:

1.33-1.4V adaptive
5ghz
LLC level 5
AC/DC 0.01
Everything else auto/default
Max voltage seen 1.424
Max temp 67*

That's with stock speed / voltage ram and stock cache.

Assuming it's safe to say I won't be running 5ghz on this chip?


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Applied only on DIE
> 
> And correct' using the floating method just now (not glued IHS back on -- but its held down firmly by retention bracket so impossible for it to move anywhere).
> 
> As I think my board _*may*_ be designed to allow naked runs (which I plan to try out this week too)


You may want to look into Aquacomputer's spacer for Intel Kaby Lake and Skylake CPUs if you're planning to nekkid mount that 7700K









https://shop.aquacomputer.de/product_info.php?language=en&products_id=3378


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*


When you run RB do you pause Luxmark ? do you have your GPU oc'ed ?


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> I'm amazed you had the guts do it razor blade style when I offered to send everything to you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyhow....happy to see you didn't killed it..
> Let me know how it does if and when you re-delid and apply LM with the suggested method..


I know -- that was a fantastic offer u made. I nearly took you up on it..

But it's just I'm on 1 week's annual leave (from work) this week so I was desperate to try it so I can tinker around with finding a new max overclock


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> When you run RB do you pause Luxmark ? do you have your GPU oc'ed ?


I didn't know you could pause luxmark, so no I haven't paused it. Just always selected stress test, selected 8 hour duration, and 16gb ram then let it run.

GPU is stock clock currently. Trying to get 5ghz dialed in first


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*


Reset bios to default....and try that without XMP either and tell us if anything changes...


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Reset bios to default....and try that without XMP either and tell us if anything changes...


Are you saying to run real bench with everything set to defaults and closing luxmark when it opens?


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Thank goodness!!!
> 
> It worked out OKAY!
> 
> I am not as impressed with the temperature drop as I'd like to of seen. (although I did drop -- just not as far as I'd have liked to).
> 
> I used Conductonaut between DIE & IHS and Kryonaut between IHS and EK Supremacy Block.
> 
> What do you guys think of my new temps?
> 
> First of all Settings were:
> 
> CPU: 4900 Mhz
> v.core: (1.35v adaptive).
> (all power and LLC settings left to default/auto).
> 
> Cache: 4600 Mhz
> 
> DDR4: 4000 Mhz
> 18, 19, 19, 29, 2T. 1.5v
> All other timings on auto.
> 
> *New delidded temps!*
> 
> Prime95 (AVX enabled):
> 
> Averages:
> Core #0 - difference of: 15c
> Core #1 -difference of: 11c
> Core #2 -difference of: 12c
> Core #3 - difference of: 18c
> 
> After a 15 min run 'core max' was 17c cooler
> and 'package max' was 12c cooler
> 
> Realbench 2.56:
> 
> Average 'CPU Package Temp' at 10 mins (on 2nd successful Hash Check) was: 53c
> = -18c difference
> 
> Max CPU Package Temp (reported in RealBench): 60c
> = -18c difference
> 
> x264, 16 thread loop
> 
> After resetting hwinf64 at 2 mins.
> 
> Then taking a reading *at* 5 mins;
> 
> 'Average CPU package' temp was: 52c (=18c cooler)
> &
> 'Core Max': 54c (= 20c cooler)
> 
> Summary
> 
> Most insignificant improvement was prime95 core #1 only seen a 11c drop.
> 
> Most promising improvement was core #3 seen a 18c improvement.
> 
> And _best_ improvements show 18-20c improvements at best on x264 and Realbench (averages and max cores).
> 
> And finally, even large FFT (maximum Heat on AVX enabled Prime95 barely ever exceed 50c. With a maximum core average of only 47c
> 
> _Some cores even running in the *30's*!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> Next Step:
> 
> See if she can pass all stability tests now at 5GHz 1.4.V. (never possible before).


Keep in mind that each chip has varying levels of original TM transfer quality, so maybe your original bond was better than lackluster.
Temps seem normal for LM reduction on bare die.
I get about that amount of reduction on a laptop CPU when going from Kryonaut to Conductonaut on a 4.5 ghz 7820HK, and laptop BGA chips are already "delidded" and there's no IHS either. The punyness of the fans and the small heatsinks are what limit temps there. Your temps are fine. Don't try to get OCD to get perfect reductions unless you're trying to compete for some record.

Sometimes you can reduce temps more by using custom IHS's that have better heat transfer potential but are still safe to LM.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> My GPU consumes up to 4x more power (400 watts) and uses Direct DIE with water-block and never exceeds 27c. (literally stays within a MAXIMUM of 12c higher than watater temp and thats only under EXTREME load).
> 
> If it's possible on GPU I don't see why it's not possible to achieve same temp results on a CPU. Especially one consuming so much less watt.


You first need to make sure that you don't crush the die. This is more important than anything else in the world.
Second, you need to do the FOAM DAM METHOD of highly compressible foam around the CPU silicon housing, and apply nail polish (nitrocellulouse based) around the CPU based SMD's on the housing (I would prefer this over using either scotch33 or kapton tape; tends to give slightly better thermals from other reports). The foam dam is REQUIRED--absolutely REQUIRED to make sure no LM runs off onto the motherboard itself.

Third: you should do TRADITIONAL PASTE first to make sure that the mount is actually working and has decent attachment. Fourth: I would suggest buying the cheapest CPU you can afford and doing this experiment on a throwaway chip to make sure you don't somehow crack the die on your good chip.

This may require extensive modding to get a proper fit of the heatsink to the bare cpu die AND WILL REQUIRE LAPPING THE HEATSINK PERFECTLY FLAT. Most heatsinks are slightly concave (?) due to how the IHS is intentionally designed. Using these on bare die are a complete utter NO-NO, period.

Here is how a foam dam looks on a laptop with a desktop CPU, with a copper heatsink so LM can be applied directly on top of the IHS:
GPU pictures (SLI): http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/msi-16l13-eurocom-tornado-f5-evoc-16l-g-1080-15-6-owners-lounge.797128/page-740#post-10578315

CPU pictures: http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/questions-about-liquid-metal.803973/page-3#post-10535630

BTW apparently you also need some sort of shim, a 100% flat sanded heatsink, and to remove the CPU mounting bracket as well.

TBH, I would not bother. It's simply not worth it. As I mentioned in my last post, why not just buy a custom IHS?

Get a bitspower IHS if you can find one.

Or if you can contact this guy and see if he'll sell you one, he's selling copper IHS's from Poland:

*edit*

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Skylake-Kaby-Lake-i7-i5-copper-IHS-compatibile-7700K-7600K-6700K-6600K-7350K/192338491918?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Are you saying to run real bench with everything set to defaults and closing luxmark when it opens?


Don't close luxmark..it will just error or re-open it in the background ...just File>Pause it..or un-check the thick over your GPU


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Benchmarks aren't my thing. Just looking for a solid 5ghz gaming clock.
> 
> I'll try and keep it below 1.4, if I can't get it to work with anything under 1.4 I'll just have to drop it down to 4.9ghz.
> 
> Currently 34 minutes into this p95 run:
> 1.36V
> 5ghz
> LLC level 5
> AC/DC 0.01
> Max voltage seen 1.376
> Max temp 61*
> 
> Everything else auto, no XMP yet


Ideally you should be looking at a bit of vdroop under load, at the moment you are getting overvoltage under load. I set 1.375v in bios for 5.1ghz, LLC 4, gives me 1.360v under load. JMO.

Vcore idle is what i set in bios.


Vcore under load.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Don't close luxmark..it will just error or re-open it in the background ...just File>Pause it..or un-check the thick over your GPU


If I pause I believe it just restarts.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Ideally you should be looking at a bit of vdroop under load, at the moment you are getting overvoltage under load. I set 1.375v in bios for 5.1ghz, LLC 4, gives me 1.360v under load. JMO.
> 
> Vcore idle is what i set in bios.
> 
> 
> Vcore under load.


Thank you, for some reason I couldn't wrap my head around LLC.

So basically I need to set LLC in such a way that idle voltage is equal to bios voltage and load voltage is just under idle voltage?


----------



## nrpeyton

Any ASUS mobo owners using *"Dual Intelligent Processors 5"?* to auto-tune your overclock?

I a finding the latest version is extremely buggy. _(It's on the download section for *my* mobo on ASUS website).

_I watched this video: (but when I've followed the steps they don't work.





For example if "CPU tuning" crashes the PC:.
then re-boots it:
*D O E S* - *N O T* - *c o n t i n u e* - *f r o m* - *w h e r e* - *i t* - *l e f t* - *o f f* I.E. tuning a higher voltage/frequency automatically).

What _*should happen:*_ the multiplier would increase by +1 then repeat. (Resuming with the same frequency at a higher voltage IF or when there's a crash.

But instead, it crashes. PC reboots.
then:
'Dual Int Proc 5' restarts automatically on entering windows but *skips* onto step two (fan control) -- *completely ignoring* (and failing to return to Step 1 (CPU Frequency/voltage tuner). _Instead skipping straight to part 2 - fan control

_By the end of the auto tuning process; the max CPU turbo frequency remains at the last known good value (before the crash on step 1. (Instead of increasing voltage to stabilise the higher frequency).

Anyone else had better luck using this on ASUS boards?

P.S.
I don't necessarily plan on using this as a permanent solution. But I do want to play around with it. It also gives a better understanding of what the various Digi + Controls do. (I.E. VRM Switching Frequency which it claims higher values extends your O/C range while lower values increase system stability - to me that sounds completely contradictory)!


----------



## dtfkev

I managed to make it through 8 hours of real bench with the following settings:
Quote:


> SYNC ALL: 5Ghz
> CACHE: 42
> BIOS VCORE: 1.385
> WINDOWS IDLE:1.392
> WINDOWS LOAD: 1.392
> VCCIO: 1.2
> SA: 1.2
> IA/DC 0.01
> LLC 6
> XMP


However, as you can see I'm overshooting.

Anything under 1.376 load crashes, and anything above 1.392 passes. However, I haven't been able to get a single test in with a voltage between the two no matter what combination of voltages / LLC I try. It's always 1.376 and under or 1.392 and over. Anyone have any advice?

Here are all the settings I've tried:

Code:



Code:


1.35 BIOS
LLC 6
1.344 IDLE                      
1.344 LOAD                      FAIL
-----------------------------------------
1.36 BIOS
LLC 4
1.36 IDLE
1.328 LOAD                      UNDER - NO TEST
-----------------------------------------
1.36 BIOS
LLC 5
1.36 IDLE
1.344 LOAD                      FAIL
-----------------------------------------
1.36 BIOS
LLC 6
1.36 IDLE
1.376 LOAD                      OVER - NO TEST
-----------------------------------------
1.365 BIOS
LLC 5
1.36 IDLE
1.36 LOAD                       FAIL
------------------------------------------
1.37 BIOS
LLC 5
1.36 IDLE
1.36 LOAD                       FAIL
------------------------------------------
1.37 BIOS
LLC 6
1.376 IDLE
1.376 LOAD                      FAIL
------------------------------------------
1.38 BIOS
LLC 4
1.376 IDLE
1.344 LOAD                      UNDER - NO TEST
------------------------------------------
1.38 BIOS
LLC 5
1.376 IDLE
1.36 LOAD                       FAIL
------------------------------------------
1.38 BIOS
LLC 6
1.376 IDLE
1.392 LOAD                      OVER - NO TEST
------------------------------------------
1.385 BIOS
LLC 4                           
1.376 IDLE
1.344 LOAD                      UNDER - NO TEST
------------------------------------------
1.385 BIOS
LLC 5                           
1.376 IDLE
1.376 LOAD                      FAIL
------------------------------------------
1.385 BIOS
llc 6                           
1.392 IDLE
1.392 LOAD                      PASS
------------------------------------------
1.39 BIOS
LLC 4
1.376 IDLE
1.36 LOAD                       UNDER - NO TEST
------------------------------------------
1.39 BIOS
LLC 5
1.392 IDLE
1.376 LOAD                      UNDER - NO TEST
-------------------------------------------
1.39 BIOS
LLC 6
1.392 IDLE
1.408 LOAD                      OVER - NO TEST
--------------------------------------------
1.395 BIOS
LLC 4
1.392 IDLE
1.36 LOAD                       UNDER - NO TEST
--------------------------------------------
1.395 BIOS
LLC 5
1.392 IDLE
1.376 LOAD                      UNDER - NO TEST
--------------------------------------------
1.395 BIOS
LLC 6
1.392 IDLE
1.408 LOAD                      OVER - NO TEST
---------------------------------------------

Full specs:
7700K Delid with Liquid Metal
Asus Maximus IX Hero
Gskill DDR4 3200mhz
Asus Strix GTX 1080 Ti
Samsung 960 Evo M.2
Corsair RM750x
Custom Loop (EK 360MM RAD, EK CPU BLOCK, EK DDC)


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> I managed to make it through 8 hours of real bench with the following settings:
> However, as you can see I'm overshooting.
> 
> I would like to get a voltage between 1.38 - 1.39 to see if I can lower it a little, but no matter what combination of voltages / LLC I try I can't seem to hit the spot. Always 1.376 and under or 1.392 and over. Anyone have any advice?
> 
> Here are all the settings I've tried:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 1.35 BIOS
> LLC 6
> 1.344 IDLE
> 1.344 LOAD                      FAIL
> -----------------------------------------
> 1.36 BIOS
> LLC 4
> 1.36 IDLE
> 1.328 LOAD                      UNDER - NO TEST
> -----------------------------------------
> 1.36 BIOS
> LLC 5
> 1.36 IDLE
> 1.344 LOAD                      FAIL
> -----------------------------------------
> 1.36 BIOS
> LLC 6
> 1.36 IDLE
> 1.376 LOAD                      OVER - NO TEST
> -----------------------------------------
> 1.365 BIOS
> LLC 5
> 1.36 IDLE
> 1.36 LOAD                       FAIL
> ------------------------------------------
> 1.37 BIOS
> LLC 5
> 1.36 IDLE
> 1.36 LOAD                       FAIL
> ------------------------------------------
> 1.37 BIOS
> LLC 6
> 1.376 IDLE
> 1.376 LOAD                      FAIL
> ------------------------------------------
> 1.38 BIOS
> LLC 4
> 1.376 IDLE
> 1.344 LOAD                      UNDER - NO TEST
> ------------------------------------------
> 1.38 BIOS
> LLC 5
> 1.376 IDLE
> 1.36 LOAD                       FAIL
> ------------------------------------------
> 1.38 BIOS
> LLC 6
> 1.376 IDLE
> 1.392 LOAD                      OVER - NO TEST
> ------------------------------------------
> 1.385 BIOS
> LLC 4
> 1.376 IDLE
> 1.344 LOAD                      UNDER - NO TEST
> ------------------------------------------
> 1.385 BIOS
> LLC 5
> 1.376 IDLE
> 1.376 LOAD                      FAIL
> ------------------------------------------
> 1.385 BIOS
> llc 6
> 1.392 IDLE
> 1.392 LOAD                      PASS
> ------------------------------------------
> 1.39 BIOS
> LLC 4
> 1.376 IDLE
> 1.36 LOAD                       UNDER - NO TEST
> ------------------------------------------
> 1.39 BIOS
> LLC 5
> 1.392 IDLE
> 1.376 LOAD                      UNDER - NO TEST
> -------------------------------------------
> 1.39 BIOS
> LLC 6
> 1.392 IDLE
> 1.408 LOAD                      OVER - NO TEST
> --------------------------------------------
> 1.395 BIOS
> LLC 4
> 1.392 IDLE
> 1.36 LOAD                       UNDER - NO TEST
> --------------------------------------------
> 1.395 BIOS
> LLC 5
> 1.392 IDLE
> 1.376 LOAD                      UNDER - NO TEST
> --------------------------------------------
> 1.395 BIOS
> LLC 6
> 1.392 IDLE
> 1.408 LOAD                      OVER - NO TEST
> ---------------------------------------------
> 
> [


Are you de-lidded?

Also it's a long-shot *but*:


Increasing the "VRM Switching Frequency" to maximum will increase o/c range. (says so in my BIOS).
You could also try switching "CPU Power Duty Control" from T.Probe to "Extreme". Which will balance power over the VRM phases based on current rather than temp. (my theory is that could also increase performance at the expense of power efficiency _(and hotter VRM)._
Lastly you could also try changing "CPU Power Phase Control" to "extreme". (Again this increases performance at the expense of VRM temps. My VRM temps never go above roughly 55c (rated at over 100c). So while I'd recommend monitoring the VRM temp I think you will be fine.


----------



## nrpeyton

deleted - sorry - double post


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Are you de-lidded?


Yes.

Full specs:
7700K Delid with Liquid Metal
Asus Maximus IX Hero
Gskill DDR4 3200mhz
Asus Strix GTX 1080 Ti
Samsung 960 Evo M.2
Corsair RM750x
Custom Loop (EK 360MM RAD, EK CPU BLOCK, EK DDC)

Anything under 1.376 load crashes, anything over 1.392 load passes.

However, I haven't been able to get a single test with a voltage between the two to see if its stable between 1.376 - 1.392.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Full specs:
> 7700K Delid with Liquid Metal
> Asus Maximus IX Hero
> Gskill DDR4 3200mhz
> Asus Strix GTX 1080 Ti
> Samsung 960 Evo M.2
> Corsair RM750x
> Custom Loop (EK 360MM RAD, EK CPU BLOCK, EK DDC)
> 
> Anything under 1.376 load crashes, anything over 1.392 load passes.
> 
> However, I haven't been able to get a single test with a voltage between the two to see if its stable between 1.376 - 1.392.


Then you could try setting 1.40v in BIOS and setting AC/DC load line to 0.1 for both. (That forces to keep voltages at what you set them at, regardless of load).

Only other option (once you've tried everything above -- would be increasing voltage. Or setting for a lower overclock.

What temp drops did you get with de-lid? Did you apply LM to the DIE _only_, *or* the DIE *and* the underside of the IHS too*?*


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Full specs:
> 7700K Delid with Liquid Metal
> Asus Maximus IX Hero
> Gskill DDR4 3200mhz
> Asus Strix GTX 1080 Ti
> Samsung 960 Evo M.2
> Corsair RM750x
> Custom Loop (EK 360MM RAD, EK CPU BLOCK, EK DDC)
> 
> Anything under 1.376 load crashes, anything over 1.392 load passes.
> 
> However, I haven't been able to get a single test with a voltage between the two to see if its stable between 1.376 - 1.392.


You are targeting 1.38+?

Try ia/dc on auto


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*


Thanks for the reply!

What is the VRM labeled as in hardware info so I can start to monitor that as well?

I've had AC/DC set to 0.01 for each test.

Temp drops with delid were AMAZING. I applied LM to the die and the IHS. Highest peak temp I've seen was 68* at 1.4V.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> You are targeting 1.38+?
> 
> Try ia/dc on auto


Yes, I would like to try to test realbench using a voltage between 1.38 - 1.39.

I pass realbench with anything over 1.392V
I fail realbench with anything under 1.376V

I haven't been able to get a load voltage between 1.376 and 1.392 to see if its stable between the two.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Thanks for the reply!
> 
> What is the VRM labeled as in hardware info so I can start to monitor that as well?
> 
> I've had AC/DC set to 0.01 for each test.
> 
> Temp drops with delid were AMAZING. I applied LM to the die and the IHS. Highest peak temp I've seen was 68* at 1.4V.
> Yes, I would like to try to test realbench using a voltage between 1.38 - 1.39.
> 
> I pass realbench with anything over 1.392V
> I fail realbench with anything under 1.376V
> 
> I haven't been able to get a load voltage between 1.376 and 1.392 to see if its stable between the two.


Apparently we own almost identical cpu in oc range
But mine will pass with and with anything more than 1.376

My setting are 1.38 in bios
Under load its 1.36-1.376


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> You are targeting 1.38+?
> 
> Try ia/dc on auto


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Apparently we own almost identical cpu in oc range
> But mine will pass with and with anything more than 1.376
> 
> My setting are 1.38 in bios
> Under load its 1.36-1.376


I just tried auto AC/DC with various voltages and LLC combinations.

Still wasn't able to dial in a voltage between 1.38-1.39

Always 1.376 and lower or 1.392 and higher

Am I safe just staying with my 1.85 bios vcore and 1.392 windows overshoot? Or should I do 1.4 bios with 1.392 windows undershoot?
Quote:


> SYNC ALL: 5Ghz
> CACHE: 42
> BIOS VCORE: 1.385
> WINDOWS IDLE:1.392
> WINDOWS LOAD: 1.392
> VCCIO: 1.2
> SA: 1.2
> IA/DC 0.01
> LLC 6
> XMP


Quote:


> SYNC ALL: 5Ghz
> CACHE: 42
> BIOS VCORE: 1.4
> WINDOWS IDLE:1.392
> WINDOWS LOAD: 1.392
> VCCIO: 1.2
> SA: 1.2
> IA/DC 0.01
> LLC 3
> XMP


----------



## MaKeN

Its basically the same thing... as with no load that 1.4v do not hurt...
in your situation if if 100% stable in both cases, i would go with the 1.385 in bios


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> I just tried auto AC/DC with various voltages and LLC combinations.
> 
> Still wasn't able to dial in a voltage between 1.38-1.39
> 
> Always 1.376 and lower or 1.392 and higher
> 
> Am I safe just staying with my 1.85 bios vcore and 1.392 windows overshoot? Or should I do 1.4 bios with 1.392 windows undershoot?


Yes


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Its basically the same thing... as with no load that 1.4v do not hurt...
> in your situation if if 100% stable in both cases, i would go with the 1.385 in bios


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Yes


Fantastic!!!! Just wasn't sure if there was a major difference between the two being how windows voltage is the same between them

Definitely appreciate all the help in this thread!

This processor has been a bit more tedious then my last overclock endeavor.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Fantastic!!!! Just wasn't sure if there was a major difference between the two being how windows voltage is the same between them
> 
> Definitely appreciate all the help in this thread!
> 
> This processor has been a bit more tedious then my last overclock endeavor.


Now its time to oc the uncore


----------



## nrpeyton

Read a post the other day; someone said I should of applied Conductonaut to the underside of the IHS as well as the DIE.

What are others experience of this? Is there actually a temp drop to be had here?

Can't decide whether to re-do it now. (I never glued the IHS back on so it wouldn't be too timely).

Is it worth it though? Is thee anyone whose tested both methods?

Thanks.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Read a post the other day; someone said I should of applied Conductonaut to the underside of the IHS as well as the DIE.
> 
> What are others experience of this? Is there actually a temp drop to be had here?
> 
> Can't decide whether to re-do it now. (I never glued the IHS back on so it wouldn't be too timely).
> 
> Is it worth it though? Is thee anyone whose tested both methods?
> 
> Thanks.


Considering you didn't see a 20c drop, it's probably worth the trouble. I personally just followed Rockit 88's instructions in which I used a very thin layer on both IHS and die...and I dropped 20. I think it's safe to assume that the Rockit 88 crew knows what they are doing.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Considering you didn't see a 20c drop, it's probably worth the trouble. I personally just followed Rockit 88's instructions in which I used a very thin layer on both IHS and die...and I dropped 20. I think it's safe to assume that the Rockit 88 crew knows what they are doing.


De-lid Temp Drops

x264, 16 thread

*'Core Max': -20c cooler*








'Average CPU package' was: -18c









Prime95 (27.9 with AVX)

Temp drops for *each core* _(averages)_ were:
#0: - 15c








#1: - 11c








#2: - 12c








#3: - 18c









*"At"* 15 mins 'core average' was: -17c








and 'package max' was -12c









Realbench 2.56

Average 'CPU Package Temp' was -18c









'Max CPU Package Temp' was -18c









x264, 16 thread

'Core Max': -20c cooler








'Average CPU package' was: -18c









Note: I'm also using a Water Chiller - which drops roughly 15-18c off my water temp _too_. Is it possible de-lid drops would be more significant if I didn't have an Aquarium Chiller hooked up to my loop?

At 5.1Ghz I also passed 1 of 2 Realbench 8GB (15 min) tests @ 1.375v (LCC auto) being 1.440v in Windows. _(This was NEVER possible before -- even with Chiller)._ _Albeit it *did* take 2 attempts. (at same settings) Indicating I'm still on the bleeding edge of stability here!_

Even at 1.40v I couldn't pass 5 Ghz at decent voltages., So de-lid was well worth it"

Due to the extra variables I've talked about now (like chiller running at 11-13c water temp. *Do you still think it's necessary to do the underside of the IHS?* If YES - then I will get onto it immediately!
Thanks








*
Also recommendations for doing LM between IHS and block, too?* _(EK Supremacy Evo - Copper base)._


----------



## moorhen2

Its the old adage, no two pieces of silicon will be the same, just because one chip dropped 20c does not mean another will do the same, i have delided 2 7700k's, and neither have had a 20c temp drop. Just luck of the draw IMO.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> even with Chiller


I happened to compared pre and post delid results while subjecting my entire PC to cold winter air that got temps close to or at freezing. Though this was brief, delidding did raise my max benchable clock to 5400. I was able to do a full CB run that wasn't possible before delidding.

For all practical reasons, keeping your hands off the chip ensures it doesnt get damaged.

No to using liquid metal between ihs and heatsink. Nobody is doing that without regret.

Ya every chip is different, but 20c drop has been commonly reported and though there is no guarantee redoing relid properly will achieve this, it's reason to suspect a high probability.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> I see. Thanks,
> 
> G.Skill actually have some fairly new modules that run at 1.5v by *default* in their XMP profile. (which I was quite surprised to see -- but you can check that out on the product page on their site).
> 
> As soon as I seen that -- 1.5v became my new 24/7 daily safe maximum for DDR4. Although I actually run at 1.475v as the small jump to 1.5v doesn't gain me any extra mhz or lower primary timings.
> _
> I have a fan that sits directly ontop of my modules (blowing down) and some of that airflow also hits my boards VRM._
> 
> *
> I'm about to delid my i7 7700k using this:*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(which was removed from the blue one in this pic below):*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *I've been desperate to do it for ages -- I just hope the blade isn't too thick.*
> 
> *The blade on the orange one is actually a bit thinner -- but also too sharp I think....*


don't use those meat cleavers to delid your CPU. could be tragic.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> I tried that...
> 
> But it begs the question. *Why do the XMP profiles of the modules on the G.SKILL website never follow that rule*?


we answered this question years ago in in this forum. there is no downside for them to advertise a lower ras value, especially if people purchase on advertised timings. G.Skill absolutely knows the JEDEC standard and timing window arithmetic.









BTW - THe DRAm voltage recommendation or limit is really from the cpu side of the problem.. the sticks can handle pretty high voltage for a long time (>1.5V), but your cpu IMC really can't. It is really intel that sets the limit for VDIMM on their CPUs.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Considering you didn't see a 20c drop, it's probably worth the trouble. I personally just followed Rockit 88's instructions in which I used a very thin layer on both IHS and die...and I dropped 20. I think it's safe to assume that the Rockit 88 crew knows what they are doing.


Drops were:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I happened to compared pre and post delid results while subjecting my entire PC to cold winter air that got temps close to or at freezing. Though this was brief, delidding did raise my max benchable clock to 5400. I was able to do a full CB run that wasn't possible before delidding.
> 
> For all practical reasons, keeping your hands off the chip ensures it doesnt get damaged.
> 
> No to using liquid metal between ihs and heatsink. Nobody is doing that without regret.
> 
> Ya every chip is different, but 20c drop has been commonly reported and though there is no guarantee redoing relid properly will achieve this, it's reason to suspect a high probability.


I don't have a lot of Conductonaut left. It's only been on there for 2 days. I could re-do the job without removing whats already there. (If there's any patches needing filled in on top of DIE after removing IHS I can always add a bit extra and re-spread it. Then do the underside of the IHS as I should have to start with.

I've just emailed EK with regard to compatibility with my block and liquid metal. (To help me decide what to do between IHS & block.. _*Since delidding I feel there's a bottleneck there).*_

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> don't use those meat cleavers to delid your CPU. could be tragic.


Done already. And luckily was a success.









My temp drops are on last page. (11c on one core and 18c on another). As 'CPU package temp' reports by highest core -- I've pretty much gained 18c

I'm now stress testing 5.1 Ghz / 4.8 cache at 1.40 v.core _(LLC auto so 1.440v in windows during RealBench).
_Before de-lid I couldn't even test 5.0 Ghz at that voltage!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> we answered this question years ago in in this forum. there is no downside for them to advertise a lower ras value, especially if people purchase on advertised timings. G.Skill absolutely knows the JEDEC standard and timing window arithmetic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW - THe DRAm voltage recommendation or limit is really from the cpu side of the problem.. the sticks can handle pretty high voltage for a long time (>1.5V), but your cpu IMC really can't. It is really intel that sets the limit for VDIMM on their CPUs.


How is there no downside to it? If they are setting up XMP profiles that doesn't follow the arithmetic for the timing standards -- then isn't that potentially hurting performance of their modules?

I've taken notes every-time you've mentioned anything about timings rules. But it would be amazing if I had a complete list of every and ALL rules so I could manually set my DDR4 overclock (and timings) to the bleeding edge of their capability. (I.E. _*so fast*_ they're _just_ inside the window of stability).

My best benchmark is when I overclock my 3600 kit to 4000mhz (copying primary timings off G.Skills site for their 4000 kit). (And leaving secondary/tertiary timings to auto).

I tried lowering primary timings. Got as low as 16, 16, 16, 36, keeping 4000mhz O/C (@ 1.6450v) but performance was NO better than at 18, 19, 19, 39, 4000 (1.5v).

Someone said this was due to the mobo training the secondary timings by DDR4 frequency (without taking into account my lower primary timings).

Not sure where to start when lowering secondary timings when at a 4000mhz DDR4 O/C.

I did try changing the command rate to CR-1 but this almost halved performance.







Despite even trying 1.65v.

Also at 4000 Mhz it doesn't seem to like CR-1 at ANY timings.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Drops were:
> I don't have a lot of Conductonaut left. It's only been on there for 2 days. I could re-do the job without removing whats already there. (If there's any patches needing filled in on top of DIE after removing IHS I can always add a bit extra and re-spread it. Then do the underside of the IHS as I should have to start with.
> 
> I've just emailed EK with regard to compatibility with my block and liquid metal. (To help me decide what to do between IHS & block.. _*Since delidding I feel there's a bottleneck there).*_
> 
> Done already. And luckily was a success.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My temp drops are on last page. (11c on one core and 18c on another). As 'CPU package temp' reports by highest core -- I've pretty much gained 18c
> 
> I'm now stress testing 5.1 Ghz / 4.8 cache at 1.40 v.core _(LLC auto so 1.440v in windows during RealBench).
> _Before de-lid I couldn't even test 5.0 Ghz at that voltage!
> How is there no downside to it? If they are setting up XMP profiles that doesn't follow the arithmetic for the timing standards -- then isn't that potentially hurting performance of their modules?
> 
> I've taken notes every-time you've mentioned anything about timings rules. But it would be amazing if I had a complete list of every and ALL rules so I could manually set my DDR4 overclock (and timings) to the bleeding edge of their capability. (I.E. _*so fast*_ they're _just_ inside the window of stability).
> 
> My best benchmark is when I overclock my 3600 kit to 4000mhz (copying primary timings off G.Skills site for their 4000 kit). (And leaving secondary/tertiary timings to auto).
> 
> I tried lowering primary timings. Got as low as 16, 16, 16, 36, keeping 4000mhz O/C (@ 1.6450v) but performance was NO better than at 18, 19, 19, 39, 4000 (1.5v).
> 
> Someone said this was due to the mobo training the secondary timings by DDR4 frequency (without taking into account my lower primary timings).
> 
> Not sure where to start when lowering secondary timings when at a 4000mhz DDR4 O/C.
> 
> I did try changing the command rate to CR-1 but this almost halved performance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite even trying 1.65v.
> 
> Also at 4000 Mhz it doesn't seem to like CR-1 at ANY timings.


you have the APEX. Go into bios and on the dram timing page nav to the pre-loaded ram settings. Load Raja's Samsung b-die settings, then return to you primary timings and restore them to your settings. Set the freq and voltage as you had them before loading the preset. May need +25mV vdimm.. may not depending on your sticks. Use that preset base to build from... AND be sure to thoroughly test the stability with a real program llike MCi memtest or GSAT (use windows BASH if you don't want to make a Linux OS drive).

It's not that a low ras will always degrade performance or more importantly stability, a proper RAS lets you tune other timings... the majority of timings are very linked to eachother. Eg.. drive RTL settings with write latency, etc.

also - using LM on the IHS-to-block interface is not going to help much if the re-lid LM application is poor. LM needs to be painted onto both surfaces to make a good flux contyact. You can easily see how LM poorly adheres to the IHS.. paint, no blobs.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you have the APEX. Go into bios and on the dram timing page nav to the pre-loaded ram settings. Load Raja's Samsung b-die settings, then return to you primary timings and restore them to your settings. Set the freq and voltage as you had them before loading the preset. May need +25mV vdimm.. may not depending on your sticks. Use that preset base to build from... AND be sure to thoroughly test the stability with a real program llike MCi memtest or GSAT (use windows BASH if you don't want to make a Linux OS drive).
> 
> It's not that a low ras will always degrade performance or more importantly stability, a proper RAS lets you tune other timings... the majority of timings are very linked to eachother. Eg.. drive RTL settings with write latency, etc.
> 
> also - using LM on the IHS-to-block interface is not going to help much if the re-lid LM application is poor. LM needs to be painted onto both surfaces to make a good flux contyact. You can easily see how LM poorly adheres to the IHS.. paint, no blobs.


Okay thank you.

I will re-do the LM between DIE and IHS today (applying it to underside of IHS too this time).

And I will try raja's settings as suggested. Thanks. Rep+

==================================================================================

Look what I just found! lol (_I never even knew ASUS had their own app for reading timings until today)._
*Does anyone else use it?* (I've never seen screenshots of it posted anywhere....only of the ASROCK utility have I seen anyone talk about).

Funny thing is though one of the timings is showing a variance between Asrock's utility and ASUS's.



All other timings _*DO*_ match up. It's only the one I have pointed out that doesn't.

The ASUS utility also shows some timings that the ASROCK utility doesn't. And vice-versa.
So here's the file -- might be of any use to someone: *ASUS MemTweakIt*


----------



## Jpmboy

that tREFI is too long... probably getting signal decay or something else. some dual channel boards do show different values on occasion. Use the one that matches the bios setting.


----------



## becks

Now...this is a freaking big step ahead for us DRAM nobs!! will definitely give it a try this weekend..

Note!: Read the small notes well...its designed for AMD! so use with care.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *1usmus*
> 
> *Ryzen DRAM Calculator 0.9.6 v6 fix*
> 
> 
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Byx_5So-FNsdSjNqVmp3YkVZc3c/view?usp=sharing


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *1usmus*
> 
> works on any АМ4 motherboard
> 
> I apologize for errors, I hope now everything works correctly
> 
> *Ryzen DRAM Calculator 0.9.6 v7*
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Byx_5So-FNsdVkRKRl9CN1lQVXc/view?usp=sharing
> 
> *adaptation to any language


Huge thanks to @1usmus + Rep


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that tREFI is too long... probably getting signal decay or something else. some dual channel boards do show different values on occasion. Use the one that matches the bios setting.


It's been "common practice" on the memory megathread to set tREFI to maximum (and by this they seem to mean 65536, which is apparently the highest most BIOSes go) because apparently these new ddr4 modules are super efficient at storing electric charge and system stability will be unaffected... go figure.

I've set mine own memory tREFI at 32768 (powers of two, why not), which on my configuration roughly corresponds to 20 microseconds or thereabouts.


----------



## davidjo

Does anyone here play pubg and getting memory related bsod?

I run stress tests and comp is fine. Pubg was fine up until today and ive had about 5 bsod in span of an hour playing pubg.

By way of background, i have the following:
I5 7600k @ 5ghz
corsair vengeance 16gb
Asus z270g

Ive run check disks, memory tests, drive verifications etc. Still no good


----------



## MaKeN

Can someone suggest a good 16gb set of rgb ram from trident that can handle 4000+ oc?


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Can someone suggest a good 16gb set of rgb ram from trident that can handle 4000+ oc?


The 2 x 8GB Trident Z 3600 CS 16 is what I have. I just found out it overclocks to 4133 -- _even_ *with* pretty tight timings (17, 18, 18) etc.

I'll admit it needs 1.5v to boot 4133 at such tight timings. But 1.5v is fine. G.skill do actually have kits with XMP ratings at 1.5v (which is also the maximum allowed voltage for DDR4 XMP certification).

_I also have the APEX mobo (which does give me a slight advantage; as it only has two DIMM slots) so trace to CPU is shorter which means less signal degredation or interference._

I wouldn't recommend anything over 3600 Mhz _(unless money isn't an issue to you)_. So a 3600MHZ Samsung B DIE kit would be excellent. If there's two kits with same high frequency (3200+)*?* frequency on G.Skill's page. The kit with the tighter primary timings will most likely be Samsung B DIE.

If you want a decent chance at O/C'ing to 4000 I wouldn't look at anything _EXCEPT_ Samsung B DIE.

What motherboard do you have?


----------



## NIK1

For 1.5v and 4133 oc,what kind of SA and IO volts are you using for the 3600 kit.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> The 2 x 8GB Trident Z 3600 CS 16 is what I have. I just found out it overclocks to 4133 -- _even_ *with* pretty tight timings (17, 18, 18) etc.
> 
> I'll admit it needs 1.5v to boot 4133 at such tight timings. But 1.5v is fine. G.skill do actually have kits with XMP ratings at 1.5v (which is also the maximum allowed voltage for DDR4 XMP certification).
> 
> _I also have the APEX mobo (which does give me a slight advantage; as it only has two DIMM slots) so trace to CPU is shorter which means less signal degredation or interference._
> 
> I wouldn't recommend anything over 3600 Mhz _(unless money isn't an issue to you)_. So a 3600MHZ Samsung B DIE kit would be excellent. If there's two kits with same high frequency (3200+)*?* frequency on G.Skill's page. The kit with the tighter primary timings will most likely be Samsung B DIE.
> 
> If you want a decent chance at O/C'ing to 4000 I wouldn't look at anything _EXCEPT_ Samsung B DIE.
> 
> What motherboard do you have?


Its asus code...
So you say nothing over 3600 worth it?


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NIK1*
> 
> For 1.5v and 4133 oc,what kind of SA and IO volts are you using for the 3600 kit.


SET IN BIOS:
VCCSA: 1.23750
VCCIO:1.21250

Shows in Windows as (hwinfo64):
VCCSA: 1.264
VCCIO:1.248

I haven't finished stress testing / tinkering yet.

But it *is* booting fine & training fine. I also just got the highest DRAM read/write & copy values _(in MB/s)_ I have ever personally seen. _(Aida64 DRAM & cache benchmark)._

Although my copy results do seem to be fluctuating a bit so I am planning on probably adding a *little* more to VCCIO & VCCSA.

After I've got less variation between benchmarks I'll begin stress testing.

According to a guide at tweaktown.com the max safe 24/7 VCCSA & VCCIO voltages are 1.35v. (although I'd _*definitely*_ prefer to keep them under 1.30v). But _*ideally*_ no higher than what they are already showing in Windows.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Its asus code...
> So you say nothing over 3600 worth it?


Depends on how good your mobo is at DRAM and how much money your willing to part with. But most importantly if you're willing to put the time in tinkering with it.

You don't get much "real world" gains from memory. You could game at 2266MHZ quite happily and probably not notice the difference in FPS even with a 4000MHZ + kit. (bar maybe 1 or 2 FPS).

Prices seem to rise exponentially after 3600MHZ for all kits. (So think price/performance ratio).

Added to all that -- the fact I own a 3600 MHZ kit and have it overclocked to 4113 MHZ (17, 18, 18, 38).

How much more money would it of cost to actually buy the kit rated at 4133. Instead of my kit rated at 3600? _(I.E Some Corsair kits probably 100-200 $/£ more expensive)!!_

I effectively got a free upgrade. But at the expense of my own time.

Moreover. Even G.skills best 4133 kit doesn't have timings as tight as I am running at. So my 3600 kit is actually outperforming a 4133 kit running at it's stock 4133 XMP profile. lol

EK have released a mono-block for my ASUS ROG IX MAXIMUS APEX motherboard. (Extending cooling to the VRM).

However as an APEX owner I really do not see the benefit to this, at all.

Even on a prolonged Prime95 (AVX enabled & small FFT for max power consumption) _and_ O/C'd to 5Ghz my VRM temps never exceed 52c (and while rated to operate at over 100c the VRM heatsink is also never too hot to touch).

Moreover - I don't even have a fan pointing directly at the VRM. (I do however have a fan sitting right atop the DDR4 modules) at low RPM. I an feel a very light breeze of air hitting the iGPU heatsink (attached to VRM heatsink via a heatpipe). But I'd even go as far to say there's probably less airflow over my VRM than most people probably have with case fans.

Also no one's running prime95 24/7

I'm actually a big fan of EK. Love their stuff. My CPU is cooled by their Supremacy Evo CPU block. But while it's good news to hear my board is getting so much attention -- I really am struggling to see any point to this new mono-block at all. This one just seems completely useless?

Anyone have a different opinion. I really would love to have an excuse to justify purchasing it lol. But for the life of me - this time-- I cannot !


----------



## MaKeN

There is a 40$ price difference between 3600 and 4200....
I dont know about timings between them...
My mobo is some sort of good with oc for memory ...

I think my mem kit has some sort of problems or idkn ...
When ever i start changing timing it fails to post.... max i get is 3600 16-18-38


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> There is a 40$ price difference between 3600 and 4200....
> I dont know about timings between them...
> My mobo is some sort of good with oc for memory ...
> 
> I think my mem kit has some sort of problems or idkn ...
> When ever i start changing timing it fails to post.... max i get is 3600 16-18-38


You could try increasing from 38. tRAS=CAS+tRCD+tRTP, or Increasing DRAM voltage (up to a max of 1.5v) or try increasing VCCSA and/or VCCIO. (up to a max of 1.35v) The BIOS setting for SA and IO will likely be less than the "actual" voltage. As LLC can affect them too. (I use hwinfo64 to check in Windows). For example when I set VCCIO to 1.21250v in BIOS it actually results in a 1.248v _(higher)_ operating voltage. Could also try lowering cache frequency. Or even stickiing a fan directly ontop the modules.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> You could try increasing from 38. tRAS=CAS+tRCD+tRTP, or Increasing DRAM voltage (up to a max of 1.5v) or try increasing VCCSA and/or VCCIO. (up to a max of 1.35v) The BIOS setting for SA and IO will likely be less than the "actual" voltage. As LLC can affect them too. (I use hwinfo64 to check in Windows). For example when I set VCCIO to 1.21250v in BIOS it actually results in a 1.248v _(higher)_ operating voltage. Could also try lowering cache frequency. Or even stickiing a fan directly ontop the modules.


So i can set this at tras at 52?


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> So i can set this at tras at 52?


What memory kit do you have? And what are you aiming for?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> What memory kit do you have? And what are you aiming for?


F4-3400c16d-d16gtz

Feel like I really dont know how to oc memory, and also cant fin a good guide for it


----------



## Bubblewhale

I feel like I need to get a better cooler/thermal paste for my delidded 7700K...using H100i with some random Cryorig stock paste and getting around 90C load.
Currently at 5.1GHZ with 1.385V Lvl 8 LLC and 3200 CL15 XMP RAM.
I'll go mess with my RAM timings/speed at a later date.

Current Specs:
I7-7700K 5.1GHZ 1.385V lvl8 LLC
Asus Z170 Deluxe
Corsair H100i
G.Skill TridentZ 3200 15-15-15-35 2x8GB
MSI GTX 980 Ti Lightning
EVGA G2 850W
Corsair 750D


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> There is a 40$ price difference between 3600 and 4200....
> I dont know about timings between them...
> My mobo is some sort of good with oc for memory ...
> 
> I think my mem kit has some sort of problems or idkn ...
> When ever i start changing timing it fails to post.... max i get is 3600 16-18-38


$40 is worth it imo, you are getting better binned chips with the 4200 (at least for frequency, latency is a complete crapshoot).


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> It's been "common practice" on the memory megathread to set tREFI to maximum (and by this they seem to mean 65536, which is apparently the highest most BIOSes go) because apparently these new ddr4 modules are super efficient at storing electric charge and system stability will be unaffected... go figure.
> 
> I've set mine own memory tREFI at 32768 (powers of two, why not), which on my configuration roughly corresponds to 20 microseconds or thereabouts.


yeah, i kn ow the 65K chipset limitation.








Most of the settings you read in ramaddict are bench timings. The thing with a long tREFI is it only helps in certain measures of performance, but more importantly it is very difficuly to determine stability... one possible way is to use Suspend_to_Ram and restore after various times examining fidelity of the suspend. As I've posted here several times, running 2x-3x the Auto tREFI is fine.

BTW guys, the AMD ram calculator is ONLY for Ryzen boards. If you had one you'd know why. Ryzen is really bad with RAM - even simple XMP timings can be a problem. THere is an AMD ram thread here started by Silent_Scone


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


As mentioned when I posted ...its designed for AMD...
But was worth a try in the name of science


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Depends on how good your mobo is at DRAM and how much money your willing to part with. But most importantly if you're willing to put the time in tinkering with it.
> 
> You don't get much "real world" gains from memory. You could game at 2266MHZ quite happily and probably not notice the difference in FPS even with a 4000MHZ + kit. (bar maybe 1 or 2 FPS).
> 
> Prices seem to rise exponentially after 3600MHZ for all kits. (So think price/performance ratio).
> 
> Added to all that -- the fact I own a 3600 MHZ kit and have it overclocked to 4113 MHZ (17, 18, 18, 38).
> 
> How much more money would it of cost to actually buy the kit rated at 4133. Instead of my kit rated at 3600? _(I.E Some Corsair kits probably 100-200 $/£ more expensive)!!_
> 
> I effectively got a free upgrade. But at the expense of my own time.
> 
> Moreover. Even G.skills best 4133 kit doesn't have timings as tight as I am running at. So my 3600 kit is actually outperforming a 4133 kit running at it's stock 4133 XMP profile. lol
> 
> EK have released a mono-block for my ASUS ROG IX MAXIMUS APEX motherboard. (Extending cooling to the VRM).
> 
> However as an APEX owner I really do not see the benefit to this, at all.
> 
> Even on a prolonged Prime95 (AVX enabled & small FFT for max power consumption) _and_ O/C'd to 5Ghz my VRM temps never exceed 52c (and while rated to operate at over 100c the VRM heatsink is also never too hot to touch).
> 
> Moreover - I don't even have a fan pointing directly at the VRM. (I do however have a fan sitting right atop the DDR4 modules) at low RPM. I an feel a very light breeze of air hitting the iGPU heatsink (attached to VRM heatsink via a heatpipe). But I'd even go as far to say there's probably less airflow over my VRM than most people probably have with case fans.
> 
> Also no one's running prime95 24/7
> 
> I'm actually a big fan of EK. Love their stuff. My CPU is cooled by their Supremacy Evo CPU block. But while it's good news to hear my board is getting so much attention -- I really am struggling to see any point to this new mono-block at all. This one just seems completely useless?
> 
> Anyone have a different opinion. I really would love to have an excuse to justify purchasing it lol. But for the life of me - this time-- I cannot !


I have a very good set of Trident Z, 3200 cl14 runs a dream at 4133 @16-17-17-38-1t 1.465v.


----------



## NIK1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> I have a very good set of Trident Z, 3200 cl14 runs a dream at 4133 @16-17-17-38-1t 1.465v.
> I have the same memory and am having a tough time to get it to oc past 3876 15 15 15 34 CR1,could you post your secondary timings so I can try them and see if I can get 4133 like yours if you can.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NIK1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> I have a very good set of Trident Z, 3200 cl14 runs a dream at 4133 @16-17-17-38-1t 1.465v.
> I have the same memory and am having a tough time to get it to oc past 3876 15 15 15 34 CR1,could you post your secondary timings so I can try them and see if I can get 4133 like yours if you can.
> 
> 
> 
> Secondary timings not great i must admit, but here you go.
Click to expand...


----------



## NIK1

Thanks for your secondaries.I see you only have one 8 gig stick,I have two 8 gig sticks in my Z270 Apex.Maybe that's why I can no hit 4133 or my 7700k cpu has a weak memory controller.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NIK1*
> 
> Thanks for your secondaries.I see you only have one 8 gig stick,I have two 8 gig sticks in my Z270 Apex.Maybe that's why I can no hit 4133 or my 7700k cpu has a weak memory controller.


I am using 2 x 8 gig sticks, see capture below.


----------



## nrpeyton

Are you guys validating memory overclocks with a benchmark?

Sometimes if my secondary timings are off a bit I see a huge decrease in performance for write MB/s and copy MB/s. (I've seen that decrease as much as half.) I.E. 33,000 MB/S vs. 59,000 MB/s when the're right.

It will still pass the memory stability test too. (even with decreased performance). Board must compensate by adjustment somehow to save stability but at a performance cost.

Aida64 'memory and cache bench' is great.

Very interesting watch: (is the *7800X* actually a *downgrade* for *gamers*)?

7700k beats 7800x in ALL games tested!






Also alleviates that nit picking thought about the 'need to upgrade' (downgrade), or fear that you're 7700k is aging.








Here -- it clearly isn't.


----------



## Jpmboy

really need to compare to the 8700K


----------



## nrpeyton

Aye - probably wise.

I''ve checked a few -- benchmarks _are_ showing gains, but seems to be minimal.

Just not sure there are many games out there utilising the extra 2 cores. I mean -- before Coffee Lake; wasn't 6 cores even less common than 8? _(in general)?_


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Aye - probably wise.
> 
> I''ve checked a few -- benchmarks _are_ showing gains, but seems to be minimal.
> 
> Just not sure there are many games out there utilising the extra 2 cores. I mean -- before Coffee Lake; wasn't 6 cores even less common than 8? _(in general)?_


erm actually, 6 was more common. 3960x, 4930K, 4960x, etc, all 6 cores.


----------



## MaKeN

Idkn whats with this cpu.... really , it wont boot again till i put the voltage on 1.45v and 4200, also need memory voltage not less than 1.42v.
This time on Apex board...
Funny thing is , what ever voltage i put in bios , in windows i get max of 1.2v

All was working fine until one restart....


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Idkn whats with this cpu.... really , it wont boot again till i put the voltage on 1.45v and 4200, also need memory voltage not less than 1.42v.
> This time on Apex board...
> Funny thing is , what ever voltage i put in bios , in windows i get max of 1.2v
> 
> All was working fine until one restart....


I assume you have done a clr cmos?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I assume you have done a clr cmos?


Yes , and tried battery out also...
I dont know what else to do...
For now ill try to install fresh windows on ssd not on m.2

Yhe kit ive just bought is in qvl list so its not it.... i was thinking its the memory fault since it wasnt in a qvl.

How can i make my board think that new cpu is installed? You know... that screen that says it at boot? " new cpu or memory installed"


----------



## MaKeN

Voltage is set to 1.4 otherwise it wont boot... but running cinabench max is 1.12v... i dont get it


----------



## nrpeyton

Weird issue I'm having:

*Overclocking* memory to 4133 MHZ @ 17, 18, 18, 38. _(stock XMP profile for my G.SKILL kit is 3600 MHZ at 16, 16, 16, 36)._

I can pass MemTest with 250% coverage with no errors. Once it boots it's absolutely fine.

BUT -- there is a consistent pattern where it _always_ _*fails*_ to boot *1st time,* until I hit the "retry" button on motherboard. After which it will cycle through memory initialization. Shut down (momentarily), restart, then repeat. After repeating this cycle it then successfully boots into Windows and passes memTest *and* scores nicely on Aida64 memory benchmark.

Here's what I've tried:
-Waiting for a successful boot then entering the BIOS and copying all primary, secondary, tertiary & RTL/IO-L timings from auto to the values displayed by system on succesful boot.
Only thing I've not touched is the SKEW settings (which I have no idea what they are).

I assume the board must be trying different settings during boot cycle for something that is still on AUTO. But I can't work out what that is. If I can figure out what it is -- and change it from AUTO to whatever the value is on a successful boot; then in theory it should then boot 1st time every time?


VCCIO & VCCSA are also on manual. _(Just for the record; I found VCCIO very helpful in stopping memTest errors -- the chip seems to eat VCCIO for dinner lol)._
DRAM voltage = 1.5v, VCCIO = 1.275, VCCSA = 1.25
All other settings (including cache & core I have left on auto just now, only _*until*_ I fix this issue).

Any ideas?

I have the IX MAXIMUS APEX.

Thanks in advance ;-)


----------



## tknight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Weird issue I'm having:
> 
> *Overclocking* memory to 4133 MHZ @ 17, 18, 18, 38. _(stock XMP profile for my G.SKILL kit is 3600 MHZ at 16, 16, 16, 36)._
> 
> I can pass MemTest with 250% coverage with no errors. Once it boots it's absolutely fine.
> 
> BUT -- there is a consistent pattern where it _always_ _*fails*_ to boot *1st time,* until I hit the "retry" button on motherboard. After which it will cycle through memory initialization. Shut down (momentarily), restart, then repeat. After repeating this cycle it then successfully boots into Windows and passes memTest *and* scores nicely on Aida64 memory benchmark.
> 
> Here's what I've tried:
> -Waiting for a successful boot then entering the BIOS and copying all primary, secondary, tertiary & RTL/IO-L timings from auto to the values displayed by system on succesful boot.
> Only thing I've not touched is the SKEW settings (which I have no idea what they are).
> 
> I assume the board must be trying different settings during boot cycle for something that is still on AUTO. But I can't work out what that is. If I can figure out what it is -- and change it from AUTO to whatever the value is on a successful boot; then in theory it should then boot 1st time every time?
> 
> 
> VCCIO & VCCSA are also on manual. _(Just for the record; I found VCCIO very helpful in stopping memTest errors -- the chip seems to eat VCCIO for dinner lol)._
> DRAM voltage = 1.5v, VCCIO = 1.275, VCCSA = 1.25
> All other settings (including cache & core I have left on auto just now, only _*until*_ I fix this issue).
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> I have the IX MAXIMUS APEX.
> 
> Thanks in advance ;-)


What error code does the led display when it fails to boot up ?


----------



## becks

@nrpeyton only 250% coverage is just the tip of the iceberg for 16gb of ram.. pass 1000% than you'r good second..I had a similar thing ..where my PC would start boot..show the Windows logo for a sec than shut down on its own and on the next power and boot it would go normally. I had to disable fast boot in BIOS and OS to fix this.

Also on a different instance I passed 3h Gsat and was having problems with training ram on cold boot. It took only 280% Memtest pro to figure out I was nowhere near stable with my OC on the RAM


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Weird issue I'm having:
> 
> *Overclocking* memory to 4133 MHZ @ 17, 18, 18, 38. _(stock XMP profile for my G.SKILL kit is 3600 MHZ at 16, 16, 16, 36)._
> 
> I can pass MemTest with 250% coverage with no errors. Once it boots it's absolutely fine.
> 
> BUT -- there is a consistent pattern where it _always_ _*fails*_ to boot *1st time,* until I hit the "retry" button on motherboard. After which it will cycle through memory initialization. Shut down (momentarily), restart, then repeat. After repeating this cycle it then successfully boots into Windows and passes memTest *and* scores nicely on Aida64 memory benchmark.
> 
> Here's what I've tried:
> -Waiting for a successful boot then entering the BIOS and copying all primary, secondary, tertiary & RTL/IO-L timings from auto to the values displayed by system on succesful boot.
> Only thing I've not touched is the SKEW settings (which I have no idea what they are).
> 
> I assume the board must be trying different settings during boot cycle for something that is still on AUTO. But I can't work out what that is. If I can figure out what it is -- and change it from AUTO to whatever the value is on a successful boot; then in theory it should then boot 1st time every time?
> 
> 
> VCCIO & VCCSA are also on manual. _(Just for the record; I found VCCIO very helpful in stopping memTest errors -- the chip seems to eat VCCIO for dinner lol)._
> DRAM voltage = 1.5v, VCCIO = 1.275, VCCSA = 1.25
> All other settings (including cache & core I have left on auto just now, only _*until*_ I fix this issue).
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> I have the IX MAXIMUS APEX.
> 
> Thanks in advance ;-)


What have you got your "training or boot voltage" at. ?


----------



## moorhen2

Lets see where we get with my super 3200mhz sticks.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tknight*
> 
> What error code does the led display when it fails to boot up ?


It cycles through different codes then pauses for a long time on 55. With "MCH Full Check" _disabled_ it will hang on 55 and won't move. (And I have to manually hit the retry button after which it will successfully boot).

With "MCH Full Check" _enabled_ it will hang on 55, but then after 20 seconds or so it will *automatically restart it's self*. Cycle through different codes again then always boot on 2nd cycle. _(But I feel like I'm cheating using this method).
_

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> What have you got your "training or boot voltage" at. ?


My DRAM voltages are set as follows:

"DRAM Voltage" -> 1.5v

"Eventual DRAM Voltage" -> auto

"DRAM REF Voltage Control" _(this opens up a whole new window showing voltages for individual banks/channels). --> everything is on auto
_
"DRAM VTT voltage" -> auto

Thanks;

P.S

Main thing that's puzzling me -- is how it's booting on 2nd cycle but usually never the 1st cycle. Or that by using retry button _always_ does eventually result in a successful boot. _There must be some BIOS setting i am missing?_


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> It cycles through different codes then pauses for a long time on 55. With "MCH Full Check" _disabled_ it will hang on 55 and won't move. (And I have to manually hit the retry button after which it will successfully boot).
> 
> With "MCH Full Check" _enabled_ it will hang on 55, but then after 20 seconds or so it will *automatically restart it's self*. Cycle through different codes again then always boot on 2nd cycle. _(But I feel like I'm cheating using this method).
> _
> My DRAM voltages are set as follows:
> 
> "DRAM Voltage" -> 1.5v
> 
> "Eventual DRAM Voltage" -> auto
> 
> "DRAM REF Voltage Control" _(this opens up a whole new window showing voltages for individual banks/channels). --> everything is on auto
> _
> "DRAM VTT voltage" -> auto
> 
> Thanks;
> 
> P.S
> 
> Main thing that's puzzling me -- is how it's booting on 2nd cycle but usually never the 1st cycle. Or that by using retry button _always_ does eventually result in a successful boot. _There must be some BIOS setting i am missing?_
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


What's your SA/IO voltage? Try setting your eventual voltage to what makes it into windows. Then bump up your dram voltage a notch or two to give it a boost during post. Once it makes it into Windows, it'll settle down to your eventual voltage.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> What's your SA/IO voltage? Try setting your eventual voltage to what makes it into windows. Then bump up your dram voltage a notch or two to give it a boost during post. Once it makes it into Windows, it'll settle down to your eventual voltage.


VCCIO is 1.272v (in HWINFO64 / windows)
VCSSA is 1.240v (in HWINFO64 / windows)

In BIOS both are set 0.0375v lower _(As I'm aiming for 1.275 & 1.25)_. So in BIOS:
VCCIO is 1.2375
VCCSA is 1.2125

(They always seem to run approximately 0.0375 higher than whats actually set). <- _not too concerned about that though, lol._


----------



## chibi

I've had good results tuning memory by upping the SA voltage slightly when encountering the 55 qcode. Give it a try and see if you can get some more consistency. Your ram at 1.5V seems high enough for 4133.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> I've had good results tuning memory by upping the SA voltage slightly when encountering the 55 qcode. Give it a try and see if you can get some more consistency. Your ram at 1.5V seems high enough for 4133.


If I leave them on AUTO at that DRAM frequency my board goes absolutely crazy and throws 1.35v++ at both of them lol. ASUS claimed via email this was safe









Having them on AUTO didn't seem to improve anything : -(

Thanks for ur help though - I might try setting a higher boot voltage for DRAM. (It is highly overclocked afterall - and I did notice that I needed 1.5V on DRAM and 1.275v VCCIO to stop any memTest errors.

Unless? Can going _too_ high on SA damage stability? Maybe on AUTO the board going crazy is actually detrimental and manually tuning it (like you say) could work?

hmm... still doens't explain how it always successfully boots on the 2nd cycle though. _(be it with retry button *or* by cheating with the "FULL MCH Check" setting)._

What SA voltage did you need to stabilse from debug code 55 on your system?


----------



## chibi

I was on the HW-E/BW-E platform at the time. Right now my rig is in shambles as I'm rebuilding. Just throwing out ideas to try and help. Have not yet got to tuning!


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chibi*
> 
> I was on the HW-E/BW-E platform at the time. Right now my rig is in shambles as I'm rebuilding. Just throwing out ideas to try and help. Have not yet got to tuning!


Any idea what DRAM VTT voltage does or what the DRAM REF Voltage Control Menu is for?


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> If I leave them on AUTO at that DRAM frequency my board goes absolutely crazy and throws 1.35v++ at both of them lol. ASUS claimed via email this was safe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Having them on AUTO didn't seem to improve anything : -(
> 
> Thanks for ur help though - I might try setting a higher boot voltage for DRAM. (It is highly overclocked afterall - and I did notice that I needed 1.5V on DRAM and 1.275v VCCIO to stop any memTest errors.
> 
> Unless? Can going _too_ high on SA damage stability? Maybe on AUTO the board going crazy is actually detrimental and manually tuning it (like you say) could work?
> 
> hmm... still doens't explain how it always successfully boots on the 2nd cycle though. _(be it with retry button *or* by cheating with the "FULL MCH Check" setting)._
> 
> What SA voltage did you need to stabilse from debug code 55 on your system?


Your SA and IO voltages will be affected by your LLC setting as well.


----------



## dtfkev

Hey guys, having an issue.

I took down my loop to redo a few bends and give the case a good cleaning.

I accidentally knocked my mobo to the floor and stepped on the south bridge cracking the board.

Picked up a replacement but wasn't able to replicate my overclock. After a few days stress testing I decided to just set everything to stock for ****s and giggles and it failed realbench after 15 minutes.

So I figured new board was bad.

I picked up a second replacement board and decided to run stock settings again still crashes after 15-20 mins of realbench.

Think my chips damaged to?


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Hey guys, having an issue.
> 
> I took down my loop to redo a few bends and give the case a good cleaning.
> 
> I accidentally knocked my mobo to the floor and stepped on the south bridge cracking the board.
> 
> Picked up a replacement but wasn't able to replicate my overclock. After a few days stress testing I decided to just set everything to stock for ****s and giggles and it failed realbench after 15 minutes.
> 
> So I figured new board was bad.
> 
> I picked up a second replacement board and decided to run stock settings again still crashes after 15-20 mins of realbench.
> 
> Think my chips damaged to?


I had a water accident with my board when it was brand new. I put the entire thing in the oven at lowest setting (100c i think) for 15 minutes. Was good as new afterwards. Although I've always kind of felt disappointed with the overclocking capability of my Kaby Lake Setup. I've always wondered if things could have been different - had it not been for that little accident. Doubt it though. I think if it was broken it wouldn't work at all. Or would be severely handicapped in some form (not just in a stress test scenario).

Maybe some boards are just binned better than others?


----------



## dtfkev

Dunno, think I should try a 3rd board?

Realbench crashes after 15 minutes with all bios settings to defaults. ☹


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Dunno, think I should try a 3rd board?
> 
> Realbench crashes after 15 minutes with all bios settings to defaults. ☹


Are they sending brand new board or refurbished?

Only way to find out I guess is to try another one.. at least then you'll know for sure.....

Only other thing I can think of is let a friend try your chip in their board and see what happens.

Edit:
You could try reseting BIOS using jumper and removing battery and leaving it for a few hours without battery to let it completely and utterly drain out. Then try again at default.?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Are they sending brand new board or refurbished?
> 
> Only way to find out I guess is to try another one.. at least then you'll know for sure.....
> 
> Only other thing I can think of is let a friend try your chip in their board and see what happens.


Nah I went to microcenter and bought a brand new board ☹


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Nah I went to microcenter and bought a brand new board ☹


Power supply?


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Power supply?


If you've got an old PSU laying around somewhere you could jump start it (by shorting). Then with just 8 pin CPU connector connected -- and see if anything changes?

Edit: Sorry -- was meant to be an edit; not a new post!


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Power supply?


What's a good way to test PSU?


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> What's a good way to test PSU?


If you don't have a multi-meter you could jump start an older spare one that is maybe gathering dust? (connect only the 8 pin CPU connector) to save loads of hassle connecting/disconnecting everything?

how to jump start PSU
https://youtu.be/u0OKmIuNtmI


----------



## dtfkev

I'll go swap this board and pickup another PSU


----------



## MaKeN

Anyone had a problem of not being able to boot at manual mode instead of adaptive?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> If you don't have a multi-meter you could jump start an older spare one that is maybe gathering dust? (connect only the 8 pin CPU connector) to save loads of hassle connecting/disconnecting everything?
> 
> how to jump start PSU
> https://youtu.be/u0OKmIuNtmI


Picked up new mobo and PSU still crashes realbench at stock bios settings.

Looking at hwifno, it seems vcore never goes above 1.2v.

I even set 1.4v in bios still stays hovering around 1.2v


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Picked up new mobo and PSU still crashes realbench at stock bios settings


Apart from the CPU being in the board when you dropped it -- has it been "through the wars" in any other way?

I'm in the middle of a stress test myself just now, so can't reboot the machine. But I do remember there being a setting in my BIOS that I can enable to prevent the CPU talking directly to the voltage controller.

Do you have a similar setting on your BIOS? Try enabling/disabling it if you have a similar setting? (just a suggestion/idea -- sorry I can't think of a definitive answer. This is a weird one.)

Which board and CPU do you have exactly, anyway? And what is the ratings of your PSU? Is it new?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> If you don't have a multi-meter you could jump start an older spare one that is maybe gathering dust? (connect only the 8 pin CPU connector) to save loads of hassle connecting/disconnecting everything?
> 
> how to jump start PSU
> https://youtu.be/u0OKmIuNtmI
> 
> 
> 
> Picked up new mobo and PSU still crashes realbench at stock bios settings.
> 
> Looking at hwifno, it seems vcore never goes above 1.2v.
> 
> I even set 1.4v in bios still stays hovering around 1.2v
Click to expand...

First try I would of RMA the CPU when the PC failed at stock settings.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> First try I would of RMA the CPU when the PC failed at stock settings.


RMA doesn't cover physical damage. (I.E. dropping & damaging equipment).?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Apart from the CPU being in the board when you dropped it -- has it been "through the wars" in any other way?
> 
> I'm in the middle of a stress test myself just now, so can't reboot the machine. But I do remember there being a setting in my BIOS that I can enable to prevent the CPU talking directly to the voltage controller.
> 
> Do you have a similar setting on your BIOS? Try enabling/disabling it if you have a similar setting? (just a suggestion/idea -- sorry I can't think of a definitive answer. This is a weird one.)
> 
> Which board and CPU do you have exactly, anyway? And what is the ratings of your PSU? Is it new?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> First try I would of RMA the CPU when the PC failed at stock settings.


Asus IX Hero
7700K Delid
Corsair RM750x


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Asus IX Hero
> 7700K Delid
> Corsair RM750x


Is it possible some LM has leaked off onto the PCB of your chip and causing a small short somewhere on your CPU? _(if you dropped it and the CPU has been delidded it's possible liquid metal has moved where it shouldn't)._

If I were you -- I'd remove the IHS from your CPU, clean all traces of liquid metal off thoroughly. Re-apply on DIE only, re-lid. Then try again.

Even just a very small trace of liquid metal in the wrong place on your CPU's PCB could be responsible for instability. You might even be lucky because a larger trace could destroy it completely especially under load. ?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Is it possible some LM has leaked off onto the PCB of your chip and causing a small short somewhere on your CPU? _(if you dropped it and the CPU has been delidded it's possible liquid metal has moved where it shouldn't)._
> 
> If I were you -- I'd remove the IHS from your CPU, clean all traces of liquid metal off thoroughly. Re-apply on DIE only, re-lid. Then try again.


Didn't think about that. I'll give that a try!


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Didn't think about that. I'll give that a try!


Let us know how you get on. ;-)

Good luck.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Picked up new mobo and PSU still crashes realbench at stock bios settings.
> 
> Looking at hwifno, it seems vcore never goes above 1.2v.
> 
> I even set 1.4v in bios still stays hovering around 1.2v


Bro the aame same exact thing i have now ... and if set to manual then blues screen


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Bro the aame same exact thing i have now ... and if set to manual then blues screen


Yeah I'm at a loss. Probably have to buy a new chip


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Let us know how you get on. ;-)
> 
> Good luck.


Looks like you were right.

LM has spilled halfway across the PCB on one side.

Any chance of recovery or should I just replace?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Yeah I'm at a loss. Probably have to buy a new chip


This thing happened for the 4th time now to my chip.... it self fixes some time, but i really want to find what causes this to happen.....
It may work fine for 1-2 months and then a sudden restart and no more stable....

Also now i occasionally see post code 40 on asus bord... trying to find what it is


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Looks like you were right.
> 
> LM has spilled halfway across the PCB on one side.
> 
> Any chance of recovery or should I just replace?


I think you might be lucky.

I would just clean off all traces of liquid metal.

Then re-apply a very thin layer of liquid metal to the DIE

Then also apply a very thin layer of liquid metal to the underside of the IHS (being careful to only apply it on where the DIE makes contact).

Liquid metal is attracted to it's self. So by spreading a very thin layer on both IHS & DIE it creates more tension between the two surfaces. And also makes it harder for it to move anywhere else. _(As well as helping heat transfer).
_
Less is more ;-) It shouldn't look like a puddle. When I done mine it literally took me 30 minutes to spread it as I used such a small amount. I had to keep brushing over spreading it around without pulling too much off so as to leave any bits bare.

Honest - I think once you've cleaned it up -- you will be lucky.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> I think you might be lucky.
> 
> I would just clean off all traces of liquid metal.
> 
> Then re-apply a very thin layer of liquid metal to the DIE
> 
> Then also apply a very thin layer of liquid metal to the underside of the IHS (being careful to only apply it on where the DIE makes contact).
> 
> Liquid metal is attracted to it's self. So by spreading a very thin layer on both IHS & DIE it creates more tension between the two surfaces. And also makes it harder for it to move anywhere else. _(As well as helping heat transfer).
> _
> Less is more ;-) It shouldn't look like a puddle. When I done mine it literally took me 30 minutes to spread it as I used such a small amount. I had to keep brushing over spreading it around without pulling too much off so as to leave any bits bare.
> 
> Honest - I think once you've cleaned it up -- you will be lucky.


We'll see.

It's drying out now.

However, I only applied LM to the die itself.

Last application, I did the die and the ihs.

Should I break it back open and do both before it sets?


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> We'll see.
> 
> It's drying out now.
> 
> However, I only applied LM to the die itself.
> 
> Last application, I did the die and the ihs.
> 
> Should I break it back open and do both before it sets?


To be fair, the difference in temperature is no more than 3c. (I have tested myself).

It's entirely up to you. I just thought it might be safer to apply to DIE only. But then when I got thinking I realised if you're careful enough -- it would actually benefit in the long-term to also do the underside of the IHS.

If I were you (and I was scared my chip was dead) I might just do the DIE only just now (just to make sure it's definitely working and passing stress test). _(Reason: you got liquid metal where it shouldn't of been -- so you want to be 110% sure there is no LM in the wrong place)!_

If the clean-up works and you are lucky -- you can always go back to it later. 3c isn't that important just now.. If were me, i'd be more anxious just finding out if my chip is okay ;-)

My fingers are crossed for you. I can almost feel your anxiousness. I can imagine. I have had a water accident and also bent pins before too (and needed a magnifying glass and two pairs of glasses simultanously to fix it) I looked like the mad scientist at the desk trying to bend them back lol. But the anxsiousness and sweat coming off of me was unreal, lol. _In the end, I was lucky on both occasions ;-)_

Maybe your chip detected something wasn't right -- and went into some kind of "safe mode" and blocked you from giving it more than 1.2v to save it's self ;-) These things are a lot more resiliant than people think.

I also delidded using a razor, no tool









I really hope your chip is okay


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> To be fair, the difference in temperature is no more than 3c. (I have tested myself).
> 
> It's entirely up to you. I just thought it might be safer to apply to DIE only. But then when I got thinking I realised if you're careful enough -- it would actually benefit in the long-term to also do the underside of the IHS.
> 
> If I were you (and I was scared my chip was dead) I might just do the DIE only just now (just to make sure it's definitely working and passing stress test). _(Reason: you got liquid metal where it shouldn't of been -- so you want to be 110% sure there is no LM in the wrong place)!_
> 
> If the clean-up works and you are lucky -- you can always go back to it later. 3c isn't that important just now.. If were me, i'd be more anxious just finding out if my chip is okay ;-)
> 
> My fingers are crossed for you. I can almost feel your anxiousness. I can imagine. I have had a water accident and also bent pins before too (and needed a magnifying glass and two pairs of glasses simultanously to fix it) I looked like the mad scientist at the desk trying to bend them back lol. But the anxsiousness and sweat coming off of me was unreal, lol. _In the end, I was lucky on both occasions ;-)_
> 
> Maybe your chip detected something wasn't right -- and went into some kind of "safe mode" and blocked you from giving it more than 1.2v to save it's self ;-) These things are a lot more resiliant than people think.
> 
> I also delidded using a razor, no tool
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really hope your chip is okay


Much appreciate the advice and confidence boost!

I went ahead, for the sake of my sanity and took it back apart, cleaned and reapplied LM to both die & ihs. I then did a test fit, and pulled it back apart to make sure nothing dripped. Looked spot on.

It's drying again now.

I actually sold my delid / relid tool a week or two ago. Luckily I only applied a small dab of glue to keep it together and it was easy to clean off and take apart. Lining it back up though has been a challenge lol


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Much appreciate the advice and confidence boost!
> 
> I went ahead, for the sake of my sanity and took it back apart, cleaned and reapplied LM to both die & ihs. I then did a test fit, and pulled it back apart to make sure nothing dripped. Looked spot on.
> 
> It's drying again now.
> 
> I actually sold my delid / relid tool a week or two ago. Luckily I only applied a small dab of glue to keep it together and it was easy to clean off and take apart. Lining it back up though has been a challenge lol


I can imagine lol.

I never bothered gluing mine. I just delidded with razor. Stuck the LM on DIE & IHS then placed it back together. The motherboards retention bracket on the socket is all that's holding it together lol.

Mind you, my board is also sitting on my desk (out it's case) horizontally so I suppose that makes it a little safer.

I am working on my memory overclock just now. Can't believe it. I made it to 450% coverage before getting 1 silly error. The recommended is 500% coverage. So close. So damn close!!!

I know I can get this overclocked to 4133 stable, at CS 17. I am sooo close*!* I can feel it in my bones*!* Soo close!!! _(the kit is a G.Skill 3600 CS 16 kit).
_


Every day I tweak it a little more.. or change this.. -- or change that.. and gradually it's got a little more stable every day. I am soo soo close!

Edit: _I left it running while I typed this up. It's now at 600% (on 7 instances of 2000 MB) and still only 1 error that happened on one instance at 450%._ Maybe I can live with that?*?*? It still only boots on it's own if I have "MCH Full Check" enabled. And on 2nd automatic restart/cycle.

I'm not doing science or banking -- so does 1 error at full memory stress in 3hrs really matter?


----------



## dtfkev

So looking like it's shot.

Still crashing realbench at stock speeds ☹


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> So looking like it's shot.
> 
> Still crashing realbench at stock speeds ☹


aww unlucky mate. sorry to hear that.

so the LM must have shorted something out permenantly then?

are you still not able to change v.core voltage?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> aww unlucky mate. sorry to hear that.
> 
> so the LM must have shorted something out permenantly then?
> 
> are you still not able to change v.core voltage?


I didn't try to adjust anything in the BIOS this time.

Just default out of the box auto settings.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> I didn't try to adjust anything in the BIOS this time.
> 
> Just default out of the box auto settings.


What about memory? you tried swapping sticks or only running with one stick or only running with two? maybe a module was damaged in the fall?

My ROG board has a jumper that lets me disable/enable memory slots. Not sure if yours also has that feature?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> What about memory? you tried swapping sticks or only running with one stick or only running with two? maybe a module was damaged in the fall?


I haven't swapped sticks or anything.

I did run windows 10 memory test and had no errors, along with memtest64 for 30 minutes with no errors.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> I haven't swapped sticks or anything.
> 
> I did run windows 10 memory test and had no errors, along with memtest64 for 30 minutes with no errors.


How are your temps?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> How are your temps?


Temps on everything looking great. 28* idle 48-50* for the few minutes realbench will run


----------



## nrpeyton

What about a BIOS update (as your board is new)?

_(Just brainstorming now)._


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> What about a BIOS update (as your board is new)?
> 
> _(Just brainstorming now)._


Yeah it was brand new. I updated bios, did fresh os and driver install


----------



## Falkentyne

When you delid, ALWAYS either use super 33+ or kapton tape around the SMD things around the CPU, or use nail polish to insulate them.
Most likely the LM ate away at the solder and caused something small to fall off.

read this:
https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3068-how-to-delid-intel-i9-cpu-and-apply-liquid-metal


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> When you delid, ALWAYS either use super 33+ or kapton tape around the SMD things around the CPU, or use nail polish to insulate them.
> Most likely the LM ate away at the solder and caused something small to fall off.
> 
> read this:
> https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3068-how-to-delid-intel-i9-cpu-and-apply-liquid-metal


I used tape.

There isn't much on the 7700k, so I'm not sure what it did.

Used two brand new PSU & two brand new mobos.

Still can't adjust voltage. Just hovers around 1.2v no matter what I set in bios.

Gonna pickup a new chip and ram today after work I suppose ☹


----------



## nrpeyton

This is 1st time on this thread; I've heard of a CPU actually dieing on someone

Sorry to hear this.

At least you can afford to rush straight out for a new one after work -- (if mine died today, I'd be screwed).

Hard to look at the bright side; but, maybe your new CPU will be a fantastic over-clocker.. I'd still be excited waiting to find out ;-)


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> This is 1st time on this thread; I've heard of a CPU actually dieing on someone
> 
> Sorry to hear this.
> 
> At least you can afford to rush straight out for a new one after work -- (if mine died today, I'd be screwed).
> 
> Hard to look at the bright side; but, maybe your new CPU will be a fantastic over-clocker.. I'd still be excited waiting to find out ;-)


Believe me it's making me sick dropping all this cash rebuying parts but having a broken rig also makes me sick loool

I was saving up for better audio and an 8700k just have to hold off until next year on that


----------



## MaKeN

Im really interested to see if a new cpu will change something...


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Im really interested to see if a new cpu will change something...


Hope so.

I just spent $980 on new mobo, PSU, CPU & ram lol

I'll be home in a few hours will post results.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Hope so.
> 
> I just spent $980 on new mobo, PSU, CPU & ram lol
> 
> I'll be home in a few hours will post results.


Good luck mate, keep us updated on your progress, look forward to hearing from you.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Hope so.
> 
> I just spent $980 on new mobo, PSU, CPU & ram lol
> 
> I'll be home in a few hours will post results.


If you get home and all the new hardware works like a charm..
I wonder if you have the "courage" to cross try the old hardware....

New CPU in old MB
Old CPU in new MB....
same with ram and Power supply... and give us what it might be some "bug" we all need to be aware and know what to change/buy if it happens to us.....


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> If you get home and all the new hardware works like a charm..
> I wonder if you have the "courage" to cross try the old hardware....
> 
> New CPU in old MB
> Old CPU in new MB....
> same with ram and Power supply... and give us what it might be some "bug" we all need to be aware and know what to change/buy if it happens to us.....


I can definitely do that.


----------



## nrpeyton

Dreaming of the quantum computer:

It's not actually as far away, as one would think.

DDR4 speeds increase every year -- soon DDR4 5000 mhz will be a reality.

When that happens the completely 5GHZ quantum machine will be here.

Core - *5*000 mhz
Cache - *5*000 mhz

DRAM - *5*000 mhz

-With Core, Cache & Memory all perfectly syrchronised at 5GHZ -- nothing has to wait on anything.
-Calculations that normally take 10 minutes are finished instantly.
-Graphics cards are no longer required as CPU now instantly produces any level of detail at any framerate _(pictures so realistic we can't differentiate between room and screen).
_-And even cooler no longer required -- (due to new *instant* quantum nature -- virtually no heat is produced).

Scientists say we are only 24 months away.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Hope so.
> 
> I just spent $980 on new mobo, PSU, CPU & ram lol
> 
> I'll be home in a few hours will post results.


I know what you say







i did the same ...
tried all mobos psu rams








One thing i regret is that i used old wires with new pau.... but as i read somewhere, that a bad psu cable may be a problem... so keep it in mind
One more thing i read today, i will try it when i get home, is a fan conected in cpu alt header may be a problem if you have nothing connected in cpu header itself ( my situation)


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I know what you say
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i did the same ...
> tried all mobos psu rams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One thing i regret is that i used old wires with new pau.... but as i read somewhere, that a bad psu cable may be a problem... so keep it in mind
> One more thing i read today, i will try it when i get home, is a fan conected in cpu alt header may be a problem if you have nothing connected in cpu header itself ( my situation)


I've swapped cables, both new Corsair PSU came with cables, also bought a set of basic cablemod cables.

I do have two fans plugged into CPU fan header.


----------



## nrpeyton

I hope you get back up and running easily. + hopefully with a faster overclock than your old chip.


----------



## MaKeN

I am now trying to install different windows 10 to see if it helps.... its not possible that chnages in bios not change in windows also... i guess its about the os....
ill try windows 8 and 8.1 also if 10 wont work


----------



## dtfkev

Edit:just crashed. Swapping parts meow.


----------



## MaKeN

Ive installed new windows 10 different one ... big progress. It will no longer crash at stock settings , it will no longer crash at manual vcore volta up to 1.4z..
only thing remains is it will never go more than 4200.
Even memory boots at 4100


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Edit:just crashed. Swapping parts meow.


Your new Processor crashed?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Your new Processor crashed?


Nah, I decided to give the old setup one last look over.

Flashed bios, reinstalled OS and drivers.

Made it 40~ mins in realbench stock settings,crashed then started throwing q code 55 on restart.

Swapped in new ram, crashed after 10 minutes.

I have the new mobo, CPU, and ram setup now. Running realbench with stock settings and will report back. 84* right now with mx4 on a 360 rad ☹☹☹


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Your new Processor crashed?
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, I decided to give the old setup one last look over.
> 
> Flashed bios, reinstalled OS and drivers.
> 
> Made it 40~ mins in realbench stock settings,crashed then started throwing q code 55 on restart.
> 
> Swapped in new ram, crashed after 10 minutes.
> 
> I have the new mobo, CPU, and ram setup now. Running realbench with stock settings and will report back. 84* right now with mx4 on a 360 rad ☹☹☹
Click to expand...

When are you going to replace the Processor?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When are you going to replace the Processor?


Already done.

Have new mobo, cpu, ram, psu & SSD running realbench right now going to make sure it passes at least an hour.

It's up to 88* on my 360 rad with mx4.

Anyone want a bricked processor? ?

Where can I look up BSOD error codes?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When are you going to replace the Processor?
> 
> 
> 
> Already done.
> 
> Have new mobo, cpu, ram, psu & SSD running realbench right now going to make sure it passes at least an hour.
> 
> It's up to 88* on my 360 rad with mx4.
> 
> Anyone want a bricked processor? ?
Click to expand...

Glad you have it Fixed. I will take the processor.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Glad you have it Fixed. I will take the processor.


Bleh, new everything crashed 50 minutes in ☹

Auto everything with xmp enabled.

Upped SA/VCCIO to 1.2

Rerunning now. Crashed an hour and 5 minutes in ☹


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Glad you have it Fixed. I will take the processor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleh, new everything crashed 50 minutes in ☹
> 
> Auto everything with xmp enabled.
> 
> Upped SA/VCCIO to 1.2
> 
> Rerunning now. Crashed an hour and 5 minutes in ☹
Click to expand...

What program is crashing, also have you tried running the memory stock speed without XMP?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What program is crashing, also have you tried running the memory stock speed without XMP?


Realbench.

Completely stock bios crashed 18 minutes in ☹


----------



## Falkentyne

If this is a new motherboard and new CPU and you're still crashing. the problem is clearly a motherboard Bios issue or RAM issues.
Did you buy a completely different brand of motherboard?


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Realbench.
> 
> Completely stock bios crashed 18 minutes in ☹


By any chance are you running any monitoring programs along with Realbench? For example MSI Afterburner has been reported to conflict with Realbench causing crashing or bluescreens. (at least this was still the case half a year ago; ditto if any updates have come on either side to prevent this)

Would recommend running Realbench without any monitoring software in the background at least once, if it still crashes then you at least know it's not some obscure software conflict.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What program is crashing, also have you tried running the memory stock speed without XMP?
> 
> 
> 
> Realbench.
> 
> Completely stock bios crashed 18 minutes in ☹
Click to expand...

What version of RealBench are you using and have you checked your video card also drivers?


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Bleh, new everything crashed 50 minutes in ☹
> 
> Auto everything with xmp enabled.
> 
> Upped SA/VCCIO to 1.2
> 
> Rerunning now. Crashed an hour and 5 minutes in ☹


Don't use XMP, as this also adjusts a lot of other settings, put frequency and timings in manually for now. Also cpu frequency and uncore set these manually as well with the required voltages, setting auto is never a good idea. Cant remember what board you have, is it an Asus. ?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Realbench.
> 
> Completely stock bios crashed 18 minutes in ☹


So the vcore voltage is now adjustable? Or it stays 1.2 nammater what as before?


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> By any chance are you running any monitoring programs along with Realbench? For example MSI Afterburner has been reported to conflict with Realbench causing crashing or bluescreens. (at least this was still the case half a year ago; ditto if any updates have come on either side to prevent this)
> 
> Would recommend running Realbench without any monitoring software in the background at least once, if it still crashes then you at least know it's not some obscure software conflict.


Good point too.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> If this is a new motherboard and new CPU and you're still crashing. the problem is clearly a motherboard Bios issue or RAM issues.
> Did you buy a completely different brand of motherboard?


It's completely new setup. I bought BNIB:
7700K
Asus IX Hero
Gskill DDR4 3200Mhz
960 Evo M.2
Corsair RM750x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> By any chance are you running any monitoring programs along with Realbench? For example MSI Afterburner has been reported to conflict with Realbench causing crashing or bluescreens. (at least this was still the case half a year ago; ditto if any updates have come on either side to prevent this)
> 
> Would recommend running Realbench without any monitoring software in the background at least once, if it still crashes then you at least know it's not some obscure software conflict.


Yes, actually I do have afterburner.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What version of RealBench are you using and have you checked your video card also drivers?


Realbench 2.56 latest nvidia driver 388.13

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Don't use XMP, as this also adjusts a lot of other settings, put frequency and timings in manually for now. Also cpu frequency and uncore set these manually as well with the required voltages, setting auto is never a good idea. Cant remember what board you have, is it an Asus. ?


Could you recomend stock settings to try?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> So the vcore voltage is now adjustable? Or it stays 1.2 nammater what as before?


I have everything set to auto right now, it's going to 1.232 vcore (we'll see after I manually adjust)


----------



## dtfkev

Alright, disabled afterburner.

There was also an IME update I downloaded.

Stable 72 minutes of realbench auto settings no xmp.

Still having voltage issues.

1.3 Adaptive Bios
1.18 idle
1.2 load

1.25 adaptive bios
1.18 idle
1.2 load


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> It's completely new setup. I bought BNIB:
> 7700K
> Asus IX Hero
> Gskill DDR4 3200Mhz
> 960 Evo M.2
> Corsair RM750x
> Yes, actually I do have afterburner.
> Realbench 2.56 latest nvidia driver 388.13
> Could you recomend stock settings to try?
> I have everything set to auto right now, it's going to 1.232 vcore (we'll see after I manually adjust)


On Realbench are you selecting your maximum memory capacity? (I.E if you have 16GB are you selecting the 16GB test)? That crashes for me every time regardless of anything else (including having everything set to system defaults)

To prevent it I have to only use 8GB test or 4GB test.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> On Realbench are you selecting your maximum memory capacity? (I.E if you have 16GB are you selecting the 16GB test)? That crashes for me every time regardless of anything else (including having everything set to system defaults)
> 
> To prevent it I have to only use 8GB test or 4GB test.


Yes I was selecting 16GB.

I disabled afterburner and downloaded an ime update.

It ran 72 minutes of realbench with auto settings no xmp with 16GB selected.

However, I'm still having a voltage problem.

I can set up to 1.4v adaptive voltage and it still shows less than 1.2v in Windows under load.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Alright, disabled afterburner.
> 
> There was also an IME update I downloaded.
> 
> Stable 72 minutes of realbench auto settings no xmp.
> 
> Still having voltage issues.
> 
> 1.3 Adaptive Bios
> 1.18 idle
> 1.2 load
> 
> 1.25 adaptive bios
> 1.18 idle
> 1.2 load


Try to put 1.4v and see if voltage changes ( mine doesnt if its not on manual)

Also anything above 4.2 wont boot into windows. Turbo also not working . See if yours does the same?

Im starting to think its a hard drive related thing


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Alright, disabled afterburner.
> 
> There was also an IME update I downloaded.
> 
> Stable 72 minutes of realbench auto settings no xmp.
> 
> Tried setting 1.25 adaptive voltage. It's idling at 1.18v and only 1.2v under load ☹


Things are starting to look better then, try 4.5ghz core and 4.2ghz uncore at 1.2v set manually in bios, with LLC at level 4, these are default frequencies for a 7700k with turbo boost. Auto will overvolt so set v's manually.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Try to put 1.4v and see if voltage changes ( mine doesnt if its not on manual)
> 
> Also anything above 4.2 wont boot into windows. Turbo also not working . See if yours does the same?
> 
> Im starting to think its a hard drive related thing


Not sure, I bought a new hard drive just to rule it out still same issue.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Things are starting to look better then, try 4.5ghz core and 4.2ghz uncore at 1.2v set manually in bios, with LLC at level 4, these are default frequencies for a 7700k with turbo boost. Auto will overvolt so set v's manually.


So I've got
Manual mode
45 sync all cores
Multicore enhancement disabled
100 blk
45 sync all cores
42 cache
IA/DC 0.01
LLC 4
1.2V manual

Showing:
1.2v windows idle
1.168v windows load


----------



## moorhen2

What board do you have, ?


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Not sure, I bought a new hard drive just to rule it out still same issue.
> I'll give that a try, thanks!


I have been tinkering with my setup, seing what the lowest vcore for 4.5ghz I can use, this is with 1.80v set in bios, using LLC 4, under load vcore goes to 1.168, a nice bit of droop under load, which is what you want.


Under load


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> What board do you have, ?


Asus IX Hero.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Asus IX Hero.


Good board. I am old school overclocker, so it's manual settings and voltages for me, I also disable all c states and speedstep.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Good board. I am old school overclocker, so it's manual settings and voltages for me, I also disable all c states and speedstep.


So looks like adaptive voltage setting is broken?

While using adaptive I can set it all the way up to 1.4v in bios and it still only shows 1.2v in windows under load.

Manual mode seems to be working though.

I've always used adaptive, never liked having constant max voltage applied at idle.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> So looks like adaptive voltage setting is broken?
> 
> While using adaptive I can set it all the way up to 1.4v in bios and it still only shows 1.2v in windows under load.
> 
> Manual mode seems to be working though.
> 
> I've always used adaptive, never liked having constant max voltage applied at idle.


Have a read of this, explains adaptive and offset in basic terms. Might help.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Have a read of this, explains adaptive and offset in basic terms. Might help.


That actually just confused me more lol

I've never had a problem with adaptive mode before.

Something is wrong, last week I could set 1.4v adaptive and it would be 1.408 in windows under load.

Now I set 1.4v adaptive and it stays at 1.2v in windows under load.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> That actually just confused me more lol
> 
> I've never had a problem with adaptive mode before.
> 
> Something is wrong, last week I could set 1.4v adaptive and it would be 1.408 in windows under load.
> 
> Now I set 1.4v adaptive and it stays at 1.2v in windows under load.


You need to play with LLC levels


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> You need to play with LLC levels


I've set 1.4v adaptive in bios.

Tried LLC 1 - 7

1.2v windows idle
1.168 windows load

For every LLC setting


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> I've set 1.4v adaptive in bios.
> 
> Tried LLC 1 - 7
> 
> 1.2v windows idle
> 1.168 windows load
> 
> For every LLC setting










exactly the same thing here hah i cant beleve it .

I hope one of us will find a solution and help another one








Your situation is a bit better, your cpu as i understand goes more than 4200 , mine doesnt

Can you install win 7 if you have it? To see if it changes something?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> exactly the same thing here hah i cant beleve it .
> 
> I hope one of us will find a solution and help another one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your situation is a bit better, your cpu as i understand goes more than 4200 , mine doesnt
> 
> Can you install win 7 if you have it? To see if it changes something?


I'm giving myself until next Friday to figure it out before I abandon this platform and go z370/8700k.

I have 2 PSU, 3 CPU, 2 Mobo, 2 SSD & two full sets of ram trying to figure this out.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> I'm giving myself until next Friday to figure it out before I abandon this platform and go z370/8700k.
> 
> I have 2 PSU, 3 CPU, 2 Mobo, 2 SSD & two full sets of ram trying to figure this out.


Have you guys got SVID enabled, adaptive wont work without it. ?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Have you guys got SVID enabled, adaptive wont work without it. ?


Pretty sure it's set to Auto.

I'll flip to to enabled and see what happens.

30mins into realbench with the manual settings you provided going to let this finish up first.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Pretty sure it's set to Auto.
> 
> I'll flip to to enabled and see what happens.
> 
> 30mins into realbench with the manual settings you provided going to let this finish up first.


Like I have said before, don't use auto.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Like I have said before, don't use auto.


Right right. Just haven't had issues before with it, so it's strange it's not working now .


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Right right. Just haven't had issues before with it, so it's strange it's not working now .


Wasn't being funny, just auto may not set it to enabled, also you need to set an "offset voltage" for adaptive as well I believe.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Wasn't being funny, just auto may not set it to enabled, also you need to set an "offset voltage for adaptive as well I believe.


It's all good man, definitely appreciate the help this far.

I was reading the picture you posted earlier about that, I've honestly never used the offset feature with adaptive mode. I'm just a novice though, this is only my 3rd build.

I enabled svid, still no change in voltage


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Pretty sure it's set to Auto.
> 
> I'll flip to to enabled and see what happens.
> 
> 30mins into realbench with the manual settings you provided going to let this finish up first.


I spent 3 evening trying all sort of stuff, today is a test evening again... im sure ill find the way out this weekend.
Very helpful to see from you that its not a cpu issue , i was thinking to go microcenter to take one for test only, but i wont now.
Btw for me it happened 2 days after new windows update...

Can you plz try to set your cpu to 4600 and see if windows boots?


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> It's all good man, definitely appreciate the help this far.
> 
> I was reading the picture you posted earlier about that, I've honestly never used the offset feature with adaptive mode.


What is your windows power plan set to at the moment, ?


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I spent 3 evening trying all sort of stuff, today is a test evening again... im sure ill find the way out this weekend.
> Very helpful to see from you that its not a cpu issue , i was thinking to go microcenter to take one for test only, but i wont now.
> Btw for me it happened 2 days after new windows update...
> 
> Can you plz try to set your cpu to 4600 and see if windows boots?


Yeah, I'm pretty sure my issues started after the update as well. But I also dropped my mobo doing maintenance.

I'll try 4.6Ghz after this realbench run for you.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> What is your windows power plan set to at the moment, ?


High Performance.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Yeah, I'm pretty sure my issues started after the update as well. But I also dropped my mobo doing maintenance.
> 
> I'll try 4.6Ghz after this realbench run for you.
> High Performance.


Ok, are you still running realbench with the manual settings i sugested.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Ok, are you still running realbench with the manual settings i sugested.


It passed 1 hour with the settings you provided!

I input my memory settings manually.
3200mhz
1.35v
16
18
38

Rerunning with your CPU settings and my ram settings.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> On Realbench are you selecting your maximum memory capacity? (I.E if you have 16GB are you selecting the 16GB test)? That crashes for me every time regardless of anything else (including having everything set to system defaults)
> 
> To prevent it I have to only use 8GB test or 4GB test.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I was selecting 16GB.
> 
> I disabled afterburner and downloaded an ime update.
> 
> It ran 72 minutes of realbench with auto settings no xmp with 16GB selected.
> 
> However, I'm still having a voltage problem.
> 
> I can set up to 1.4v adaptive voltage and it still shows less than 1.2v in Windows under load.
Click to expand...

Adaptive works dynamically with CPU load. Less load on the CPU less voltage.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Adaptive works dynamically with CPU load. Less load on the CPU less voltage.


Right. It's just not working how it was a week ago.

Last week if I set adaptive voltage to 1.4 with LLC of 4 it would show 1.408v during realbench load.

Now, if I set 1.4 adaptive it shows 1.2v during realbench load with any LLC selected


----------



## becks

Guys... my CPU sucks 1.328V with everything in BIOS default (Except a beefy RAM OC)...and at the same time does 5.1 at 1.424... so dunno what to say bout you 1.2...


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Right. It's just not working how it was a week ago.
> 
> Last week if I set adaptive voltage to 1.4 with LLC of 4 it would show 1.408v during realbench load.
> 
> Now, if I set 1.4 adaptive it shows 1.2v during realbench load with any LLC selected


Do you change power plan to "balanced" ? C-states and EIST enabled.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Guys... my CPU sucks 1.328V with everything in BIOS default (Except a beefy RAM OC)...and at the same time does 5.1 at 1.424... so dunno what to say bout you 1.2...


My silicon does 5.1ghz @1.375v set in bios, 1.360v under load with LLC 4, a nice healthy bit of vdroop, so a descent chip, good IMC as well, can run my 3200mhz cl14 sticks at 4133mhz, then they are highly binned b-dies.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Guys... my CPU sucks 1.328V with everything in BIOS default (Except a beefy RAM OC)...and at the same time does 5.1 at 1.424... so dunno what to say bout you 1.2...


Well I've got 3 CPU and two Mobo here and it's doing it on all combinations of them.

My first chip which is delided ran the following settings before I derped the Mobo and started having issues.

SYNC ALL: 5Ghz
CACHE: 42
BIOS VCORE: 1.4
WINDOWS IDLE:1.392
WINDOWS LOAD: 1.392
VCCIO: 1.2
SA: 1.2
IA/DC 0.01
LLC 3
XMP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Do you change power plan to "balanced" ? C-states and EIST enabled.


I haven't.

I've always ran adaptive bios voltage with high performance power plan.

What will balanced plan with cstates and eist enabled do?


----------



## moorhen2

The whole idea of adaptive and offset is to downclock and use less less voltage when the cpu is idle I believe. So using a balanced power plan is needed by Windows, and the c-states aid this.


----------



## moorhen2

This is my 24/7 overclock.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> The whole idea of adaptive and offset is to downclock and use less less voltage when the cpu is idle I believe. So using a balanced power plan is needed by Windows, and the c-states aid this.


What voltage setting and power plan are you using?

1 hour realbench passed with your CPU settings and ram settings input manually!


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I spent 3 evening trying all sort of stuff, today is a test evening again... im sure ill find the way out this weekend.
> Very helpful to see from you that its not a cpu issue , i was thinking to go microcenter to take one for test only, but i wont now.
> Btw for me it happened 2 days after new windows update...
> 
> Can you plz try to set your cpu to 4600 and see if windows boots?


I was just able to boot at 4.6Ghz


----------



## dtfkev

Also, I feel like an idiot.

Adaptive voltage only works if your clock speed is set higher then the stock speed of 4.5Ghz on a 7700K.

Being how I was just testing the the chip was stable at stock speeds, adaptive voltage never enabled. That's why setting it to 1.4 did absolutely nothing, the clock speeds weren't high enough.

I now understand what Wingman99 said.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Like I have said before, don't use auto.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right right. Just haven't had issues before with it, so it's strange it's not working now .
Click to expand...

I use Auto everything for overclocking to 4.8GHz, so you should not have a problem.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> That actually just confused me more lol
> 
> I've never had a problem with adaptive mode before.
> 
> Something is wrong, last week I could set 1.4v adaptive and it would be 1.408 in windows under load.
> 
> Now I set 1.4v adaptive and it stays at 1.2v in windows under load.


Set IA AC/DC Loadline to 1 or 0.01 (0.01 mohms) or whatever the lowest value is that is not ZERO (or Auto = 0). This depends on your bios setting for what 0.01 ohms is. For some Bioses it is 1, with 100 being 1 mohm.
For other Bioses it is 0.01, with 1 being 1 mohm. Try to avoid the 0 setting unless you want your VID to be boosted all over the place.

Then set your vcore manually and then set your "Loadline Calibration (LLC)"--not to be confused with IA AC/DC loadline.

If you do use adaptive vcore with IA AC/DC=0.01 , you will probably have to use a POSITIVE offset if the target vid is too low for stability. The target VID that is shown when you use MANUAL Vcore with IA AC/DC=0.01, should be very close to the VID when you use adaptive vcore with IA AC/DC=0.01. But first you need to know what manual vcore you need for stability at a given overclock mhz.

Then adjust "Loadline Calibration (LLC) to a medium level.

what is the difference between IA AC/DC loadline and Loadline calibration?
Loadline calibration functions on the VCORE and helps remove vdroop on the vcore under load, but too aggressive of a setting can cause vcore to rise under load.

IA AC/DC loadline increases the VID under load (which gets difficult to work with, causes mis-readings with adaptive vcore if IA="Auto", and vcore will still have vdroop, at target VID). I believe this setting also puts more load on the VRMs as well.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Also, I feel like an idiot.
> 
> Adaptive voltage only works if your clock speed is set higher then the stock speed of 4.5Ghz on a 7700K.
> 
> Being how I was just testing the the chip was stable at stock speeds, adaptive voltage never enabled. That's why setting it to 1.4 did absolutely nothing, the clock speeds weren't high enough.
> 
> I now understand what Wingman99 said.


Glad it's working fine.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Yes I was selecting 16GB.
> 
> I disabled afterburner and downloaded an ime update.
> 
> It ran 72 minutes of realbench with auto settings no xmp with 16GB selected.
> 
> However, I'm still having a voltage problem.
> 
> I can set up to 1.4v adaptive voltage and it still shows less than 1.2v in Windows under load.


I'm absolutely baffled... you had the exact same problem on the other machine? _(couldn't get above 1.2v)._

What program are you using to monitor the voltage? Have you tried HWINFO64? _(I know for a fact that definitely works -- as I use it)._


----------



## MaKeN

I
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> I was just able to boot at 4.6Ghz


I see well means we have different issues with cpu then.
Mine wont like anything more than 4.2.


----------



## Falkentyne

dtfkev did you see my last message?

Also how far can you overclock that 7700k?

On my BGA Turdbook, I can get 4.7 ghz at 1235mv (with IA AC/DC loadline = 10 (0.1 mohms), it can run prime small FFT (AVX/FMA3 disabled), but AVX is ggwpnore. And that's without any access to "Loadline Calibration". No way in hell you can do worse than a BGA 7820HK turdbook.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> This is my 24/7 overclock.


Wow, that is a very impressive DRAM overclock for a DDR4 3200 kit.

4133MHZ at CS 16. Only 1.465v... nice.

I have the same g.skill kit (except it's the 3600 CS 16 Trident Version). And i can get 4133MHZ but it's _barely_ fully stable at 17, 18, 18, 38.

Sometimes it'll do 600% (x7 instances).. and other times I'll maybe get 1 error. I also need 1.275v VCCIO & nearly 1.3V SA. And 1.5v on DRAM it's self to get the best chance at passing 7*600% on MemTest.

_I also have the Apex mobo. (only 2 RAM slots)._


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> I'm absolutely baffled... you had the exact same problem on the other machine? _(couldn't get above 1.2v)._
> 
> What program are you using to monitor the voltage? Have you tried HWINFO64? _(I know for a fact that definitely works -- as I use it)._


It was because adaptive voltage doesn't work unless you have a frequency above 4.5Ghz. And I was testing at stock speeds, therefore my voltages weren't being applied.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> It was because adaptive voltage doesn't work unless you have a frequency above 4.5Ghz. And I was testing at stock speeds, therefore my voltages weren't being applied.


ahh okay good -- glad you got it fixed then ;-)


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> I
> 
> I see well means we have different issues with cpu then.
> Mine wont like anything more than 4.2.


Are you using manual or adaptive voltage? Adaptive voltage won't work with anything under 4.6ghz
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> dtfkev did you see my last message?
> 
> Also how far can you overclock that 7700k?
> 
> On my BGA Turdbook, I can get 4.7 ghz at 1235mv (with IA AC/DC loadline = 10 (0.1 mohms), it can run prime small FFT (AVX/FMA3 disabled), but AVX is ggwpnore. And that's without any access to "Loadline Calibration". No way in hell you can do worse than a BGA 7820HK turdbook.


I did, thank you! I'll do a little more benching tonight. She's hitting 88* tho so not much headroom.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> ahh okay good -- glad you got it fixed then ;-)


Me too, was stressful. Definitely appreciate all the assistance!

Edit: New chip is running 4.8Ghz @ 1.232v. It's hitting 89* so, no room left without delid.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> Wow, that is a very impressive DRAM overclock for a DDR4 3200 kit.
> 
> 4133MHZ at CS 16. Only 1.465v... nice.
> 
> I have the same g.skill kit (except it's the 3600 CS 16 Trident Version). And i can get 4133MHZ but it's _barely_ fully stable at 17, 18, 18, 38.
> 
> Sometimes it'll do 600% (x7 instances).. and other times I'll maybe get 1 error. I also need 1.275v VCCIO & nearly 1.3V SA. And 1.5v on DRAM it's self to get the best chance at passing 7*600% on MemTest.
> 
> _I also have the Apex mobo. (only 2 RAM slots)._


This kit will top out at 4234mhz stable, not bad for a 3200mhz kit.


----------



## ducegt

I dont have adaptive voltage option on my asrock board but manual works fine. The last 6+ months I ran 5.1 @ 1.328 but I just got a Vega 64 Liquid AIO and have no good place for the radiator except next to my mobos VRMs. 500USD open box deal from NewEgg that I couldn't pass up.

I now have two case fan not high static pressure 1000rpms on the 280mm h115i as to not steal too much from Vega fan that's right next to it. Just finished realbench 5ghz 4.6 cache at 1.264 LLC2 which peaks at 1.28v at idle. Realbench 2.56. Chip still peaked at 70c with the delidid.


----------



## woodyfly

Did I get a god chip?
7600k

4.9ghz @ 1.165v (confirmed stable)
5.0ghz @ 1.225 (has been stable for 2 hrs of gaming and 30 mins of stress test, not 100% confirmed stable but I have a feeling it will be)

Edit: Confirmed stable 5.0ghz @ 1.23 (bios) / 1.225 (cpu-z)


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> I dont have adaptive voltage option on my asrock board but manual works fine. The last 6+ months I ran 5.1 @ 1.328 but I just got a Vega 64 Liquid AIO and have no good place for the radiator except next to my mobos VRMs. 500USD open box deal from NewEgg that I couldn't pass up.
> 
> I now have two case fan not high static pressure 1000rpms on the 280mm h115i as to not steal too much from Vega fan that's right next to it. Just finished realbench 5ghz 4.6 cache at 1.264 LLC2 which peaks at 1.28v at idle. Realbench 2.56. Chip still peaked at 70c with the delidid.


You need to play with LLC, normally best to get some healthy v-droop under load, with yours you are getting over-voltage under load, so you don't really know if the voltage you are setting is actually stable for the overclock.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> You need to play with LLC, normally best to get some healthy v-droop under load, with yours you are getting over-voltage under load, so you don't really know if the voltage you are setting is actually stable for the overclock.


Either you got things backwards, or perhaps I do. It's my understanding that overshoot would be when the voltage being supplied is higher than when it's set to be. With manual vcore set to 1.29 and LLC1, I get 1.28 under load. With LLC2 I get 1.264... setting 3 or more will keep lessening voltage under load. The idle volts do not change. Also note Asrock LLC1 is Asus LLC7.

You do realize that was 8 hours of RealBench? This chip was stable at same 5ghz 1.29 LLC2 1.28v under load before I delidded it. I'm not expecting any surprises


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woodyfly*
> 
> Did I get a god chip?
> 7600k
> 
> 4.9ghz @ 1.165v (confirmed stable)
> 5.0ghz @ 1.225 (has been stable for 2 hrs of gaming and 30 mins of stress test, not 100% confirmed stable but I have a feeling it will be)


That is an excellent chip, right in the same ballpark as mine. If it is truly stable at 1.225V 5ghz. You should find that 5.1ghz is comfortably within reach at 1.3V and 5.2ghz is possible with a delid at 1.35V (mine needed 1.375V to stabilize a 5ghz AVX clock in addition to the regular 5.2ghz).


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Either you got things backwards, or perhaps I do. It's my understanding that overshoot would be when the voltage being supplied is higher than when it's set to be. With manual vcore set to 1.29 and LLC1, I get 1.28 under load. With LLC2 I get 1.264... setting 3 or more will keep lessening voltage under load. The idle volts do not change. Also note Asrock LLC1 is Asus LLC7.
> 
> You do realize that was 8 hours of RealBench? This chip was stable at same 5ghz 1.29 LLC2 1.28v under load before I delidded it. I'm not expecting any surprises


What I am saying is if I set 1.375v in the bios, that is what I get when my chip is idle, under load it drops to 1.360v, which is better than getting an over-voltage at load.


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> What I am saying is if I set 1.375v in the bios, that is what I get when my chip is idle, under load it drops to 1.360v, which is better than getting an over-voltage at load.


That's exactly how mine works as well.


----------



## Exxlir

Anyone with the GA-Z270X-Gaming 7 (rev. 1.0) tried using the bios option of actually just picking 5ghz and it being stable?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> You need to play with LLC, normally best to get some healthy v-droop under load, with yours you are getting over-voltage under load, so you don't really know if the voltage you are setting is actually stable for the overclock.
> 
> 
> 
> Either you got things backwards, or perhaps I do. It's my understanding that overshoot would be when the voltage being supplied is higher than when it's set to be. With manual vcore set to 1.29 and LLC1, I get 1.28 under load. With LLC2 I get 1.264... setting 3 or more will keep lessening voltage under load. The idle volts do not change. Also note Asrock LLC1 is Asus LLC7.
> 
> You do realize that was 8 hours of RealBench? This chip was stable at same 5ghz 1.29 LLC2 1.28v under load before I delidded it. I'm not expecting any surprises
Click to expand...

I think you did just fine.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woodyfly*
> 
> Did I get a god chip?
> 7600k
> 
> 4.9ghz @ 1.165v (confirmed stable)
> 5.0ghz @ 1.225 (has been stable for 2 hrs of gaming and 30 mins of stress test, not 100% confirmed stable but I have a feeling it will be)


Where did you download the Benchmark?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exxlir*
> 
> Anyone with the GA-Z270X-Gaming 7 (rev. 1.0) tried using the bios option of actually just picking 5ghz and it being stable?


I tired the 4.8GHz option and it is stable with RealBench. Have you tried the 5GHz option?


----------



## woodyfly

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Where did you download the Benchmark?


x264 benchmark, googled it


----------



## woodyfly

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> That is an excellent chip, right in the same ballpark as mine. If it is truly stable at 1.225V 5ghz. You should find that 5.1ghz is comfortably within reach at 1.3V and 5.2ghz is possible with a delid at 1.35V (mine needed 1.375V to stabilize a 5ghz AVX clock in addition to the regular 5.2ghz).


Yep I've been stress testing it all day on x264, cinebench passed and I've been gaming for hours with no issues!

5.0ghz stable at 1.225v in cpu-z, 1.23 on bios


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woodyfly*
> 
> Yep I've been stress testing it all day on x264, cinebench passed and I've been gaming for hours with no issues!
> 
> 5.0ghz stable at 1.225v in cpu-z, 1.23 on bios


wow, very lucky.

nice chip indeed.

Is that even a delid?

be interesting to see how strong the memory controller is on that chip too.. what kind of memory overclocks are you getting at decent timings?


----------



## MaKeN

Just gave my cpu a bath in alcohol , redeliding.
I always had a question in my mind , i hope someone knows the answer, does the ihs have to touch that little piece of metal or what ever it is one the pcb?


In the picture you can see it .. reflecting light a little dot on the pcb in the corner. Also seen by the old glue/silicone path that ihs was on top of that little dot ...


----------



## nrpeyton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Just gave my cpu a bath in alcohol , redeliding.
> I always had a question in my mind , i hope someone knows the answer, does the ihs have to touch that little piece of metal or what ever it is one the pcb?
> 
> 
> In the picture you can see it .. reflecting light a little dot on the pcb in the corner. Also seen by the old glue/silicone path that ihs was on top of that little dot ...


In mine.. the bit of metal helps clamp the IHS down on both sides (i believe).


----------



## Exxlir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I tired the 4.8GHz option and it is stable with RealBench. Have you tried the 5GHz option?


I haven't tried any options yet I might try the 5ghz later on should be cool enough with a h115i on it


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> In mine.. the bit of metal helps clamp the IHS down on both sides (i believe).


No no im about the other stuff , by the corner of ihs you can see a little dot on the pcb made from coper as i think


----------



## ducegt

My guess is those 2 points are for testing


----------



## MaKeN

Im talking about this


----------



## fato22

Can you guys help me OC my cpu? I am a little bit of a noob and I just don't want to do any disaster. I have a 7700k cooled by a corsair H105. As of right now I set the core to 4500 from the bios without touching voltage. Temps are fine since it's a really minor oc.
I would like to push it to 4.8 and I wonder if you guys can guide me through it.
As a mobo I have a Asus Maximus Hero IX.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Im talking about this


To me that looks more like damage than feature. But I really wouldn't know. Perhaps someone who has actually delidded one of these CPUs would know?


----------



## woodyfly

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nrpeyton*
> 
> wow, very lucky.
> 
> nice chip indeed.
> 
> Is that even a delid?
> 
> be interesting to see how strong the memory controller is on that chip too.. what kind of memory overclocks are you getting at decent timings?


My ram:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0123ZBPDA/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

3000mhz
15-17-17-35

It is not delid. Over my years of gaming this is the best chip I've had. It seems to be the golden of the golden lol. I don't even need such a golden cpu, I'm not a super overclocking enthusiast or anything. Bought it off of amazon


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Im talking about this


Mine doesn't have those dots...

Honestly looks like damage to me...

EDIT: Is your delid glued back or just floating cause if its the later I might know why that happened...


----------



## Agalpaf

That is definitely damage ..


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Mine doesn't have those dots...
> 
> Honestly looks like damage to me...
> 
> EDIT: Is your delid glued back or just floating cause if its the later I might know why that happened...


Floating ... this dot appeared when i was scraping old silicon...


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Floating ... this dot appeared when i was scraping old silicon...


You either scrapped to deep









or

Its damage caused by IHS while moving when you glide down the retention (lateral movement)...it's possible that your IHS edges are not smooth..


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Floating ... this dot appeared when i was scraping old silicon...


scraping, how?

that is damage all over, not just the "hole"



mine after delidding it again (wanted to have a look after a few months)


with some silicone still left in that shot


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*
> 
> scraping, how?
> 
> that is damage all over, not just the "hole"
> 
> 
> 
> mine after delidding it again (wanted to have a look after a few months)
> 
> 
> with some silicone still left in that shot


With a credit card... no its not all over its the ailicon ... left over , but from the visible metal only one dot there thats it ..

Mmmm so that may explain why i have isues with my cpu ...
Strange but both dellided cpu have that dot there


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> damage caused by IHS while moving when you glide down the retention (lateral movement)...it's possible that your IHS edges are not smooth..


guess that's possible
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> With a credit card... no its not all over its the ailicon ... left over , but from the visible metal only one dot there thats it ..
> 
> Mmmm so that may explain why i have isues with my cpu ...
> Strange but both dellided cpu have that dot there


k

but the 2 lines next to the dot seem to be cracks
tough to say from that pic

still, there shouldn't be 2 or 3 dots showing in that area

both CPU`s have it?

then its a systematic failure somewhere?
how likely is it that you scraped too deep (actually not possible with a credit card I`d say) on the same spot on 2 CPU`s?

mmm

something on the latch holding down the cpu?

the moving IHS would be a good guess, but on 2 CPU`s?


----------



## MaKeN

Thats whan im saying







same dot in same spot both cpus , i imideatly saw it after scraping the silicon , even befor first time istalling in to the mobo, so its not from the ihs movement.
Mmm if you guys dont have em , means i did something wrong than , next time i dont delid myself again

That explains all , thats why i got problems... first chip had a problem of not seeing all 4 memory slots , just 2 , and this one ( 2nd) one month works good and the other works bad , and it repeats that behavior itself


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *peter2k*


Some people keep the IHS and swap it to the new working CPU...I know I did this, I have my old CPU IHS (Which dyed) on the new CPU....just emotional involved with that batch


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*


If you don't glue it back..just GENTLY scrap the silicon on surface don't take it down to the PCB... the socket retention force should be enough to squeeze it flat..


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *woodyfly*
> 
> My ram:
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0123ZBPDA/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
> 
> 3000mhz
> 15-17-17-35
> 
> It is not delid. Over my years of gaming this is the best chip I've had. It seems to be the golden of the golden lol. I don't even need such a golden cpu, I'm not a super overclocking enthusiast or anything. Bought it off of amazon


Golden ones appear when you least expect. Like I got mine cuz my friend's Mobo VRMs fried and I bought him a new 7700k system. He then told me I could keep the 7700k if it was a good one. Lo and behold, 5.2 ghz @1.36V so I gave him my previous one which was a crappy 5ghz @ 1.375V.


----------



## ducegt

@maken Maybe try covering that spot. Perhaps its picking up some electrical interference/noise.


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ducegt*
> 
> @maken Maybe try covering that spot. Perhaps its picking up some electrical interference/noise.


Thx , will do
Something like liquid nails paint?


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Thx , will do
> Something like liquid nails paint?


Ya. Worth a shot in the dark.


----------



## dtfkev

What windows power plan and voltage setting are you guys running for daily use?

I'm currently stable with:
4.9Ghz
1.25v Bios - Manual Mode
1.25v Windows Idle Vcore
1.248v Windows Load Vcore
LLC Level 5
.01 IA/DC


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exxlir*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I tired the 4.8GHz option and it is stable with RealBench. Have you tried the 5GHz option?
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't tried any options yet I might try the 5ghz later on should be cool enough with a h115i on it
Click to expand...

Post back how it works out. The only thing I did in BIOS was select 4.8GHz option.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> What windows power plan and voltage setting are you guys running for daily use?
> 
> I'm currently stable with:
> 4.9Ghz
> 1.25v Bios - Manual Mode
> 1.25v Windows Idle Vcore
> 1.248v Windows Load Vcore
> LLC Level 5
> .01 IA/DC


Try LLC 4, see what load voltage you get.


----------



## cech12

hi guys i have encountered a strange behavior of my 7700k.
7700k
1.25 Vc 4.8Ghz (not delidd)
Antec kuhler 1250 in the enthoo pro.

Idle temps 50/55 spiking to 60 kinda often.
Under IBT extreme/max it runs no hotter than 70*C
Prime95 max 80*

The thermal paste is an mx5, any clue why the cpu has this high idle temp?
to me seems strange since the load temps are ok. LLC 5 mobo asus z270 strix


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cech12*
> 
> hi guys i have encountered a strange behavior of my 7700k.
> 7700k
> 1.25 Vc 4.8Ghz (not delidd)
> Antec kuhler 1250 in the enthoo pro.
> 
> Idle temps 50/55 spiking to 60 kinda often.
> Under IBT extreme/max it runs no hotter than 70*C
> Prime95 max 80*
> 
> The thermal paste is an mx5, any clue why the cpu has this high idle temp?
> to me seems strange since the load temps are ok. LLC 5 mobo asus z270 strix


Hey there,

By any chance did you "played" with Pll voltage ?


----------



## cech12

didnt touch it


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> Try LLC 4, see what load voltage you get.


LLC 4 brings me to 1.248 windows idle and 1.232 windows load which is unstable.

I've been running manual mode since getting the chip running, haven't been able to find a decent adaptive voltage setting.

Do I need to worry about the relationship of the Vcore & VID voltages?

Under manual mode Vcore & VID stay more or less the same. When I switch to Adaptive mode, VID usually drops significantly.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> LLC 4 brings me to 1.248 windows idle and 1.232 windows load which is unstable.
> 
> I've been running manual mode since getting the chip running, haven't been able to find a decent adaptive voltage setting.
> 
> Do I need to worry about the relationship of the Vcore & VID voltages?
> 
> Under manual mode Vcore & VID stay more or less the same. When I switch to Adaptive mode, VID usually drops significantly.


If the L4 drops your voltage, just increase the Vcore offset proportionately to the point it's loading at the Voltage you want. I mean sure you idle at a higher voltage but that's irrelevant because CPUs don't use meaningful power when idle and voltage alone isn't what degrades chips.

But having the L4 will make your CPU thank you later.


----------



## becks

Hey guys ...

Experiencing something weird with my PC...

While doing my RAM OC I was running full manual on the CPU v wise...
Now I switched to some "economic" preset...and while my CPU indeed drops at 800 hz / 0.799v on Idle...I have noticed 2 things...
First in AIDA OSD cache never really goes up to 4.8 (what is set in BIOS) as before when it was full Auto and stays more between 4.6-4.7 (while stress testing with Memtest)
And Second...before (all manual V - 1.430 all the time) when I use to hit start on the memtest launcher it would launch instantly all 8 instances....now with the new preset where CPU and V go up and down...it takes a good 8-10 second for the 8 windows to launch...

Haven't had the chance to test this "latency" with any other program...have you encountered something similar before ? any suggestion ? (C-step or whatever is called is disabled, only speedstep and turbo enable...IA AC & DC are 0.01 and Long Package Power Limit and Short Package Power Limit are on Max - wanted to be able to supply max possible "juice" to the CPU and VRM)


----------



## dtfkev

Is there a way to adjust my VID voltages independently from my Vcore voltage? When I switch my voltage mode from manual to adaptive my VID voltage drops.

My current OC has both Vcore and VID voltage at 1.248 under load, but when I switch from manual mode to adaptive mode my Vcore stays at 1.248 but my vid voltage drops to 1.232.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Is there a way to adjust my VID voltages independently from my Vcore voltage? When I switch my voltage mode from manual to adaptive my VID voltage drops.
> 
> My current OC has both Vcore and VID voltage at 1.248 under load, but when I switch from manual mode to adaptive mode my Vcore stays at 1.248 but my vid voltage drops to 1.232.


VID is not a real, measured voltage. It is just a 'voltage supply request' from the CPU to the motherboard. Also it's hardcoded in a lookup table on the CPU chip, and is practically impossible to tamper with (okay yes, I think you could edit the BIOS of your motherboard to read and interpret the VID tables differently, but that is generally speaking pretty advanced stuff)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> Is there a way to adjust my VID voltages independently from my Vcore voltage? When I switch my voltage mode from manual to adaptive my VID voltage drops.
> 
> My current OC has both Vcore and VID voltage at 1.248 under load, but when I switch from manual mode to adaptive mode my Vcore stays at 1.248 but my vid voltage drops to 1.232.
> 
> 
> 
> VID is not a real, measured voltage. It is just a 'voltage supply request' from the CPU to the motherboard. Also it's hardcoded in a lookup table on the CPU chip, and is practically impossible to tamper with (okay yes, I think you could edit the BIOS of your motherboard to read and interpret the VID tables differently, but that is generally speaking pretty advanced stuff)
Click to expand...

Every thing you said is exactly correct. The only thing that changed my VID was when Gigabyte made a Bios update to recalibrate VID output lower, so when using Dynamic VID the Vcore was lower.


----------



## dtfkev

So is that something I need to worry about?

I know my OC is stable with a 1.248 vcore and 1.25 vid.

Was worried when I saw vid drop to 1.232 because I know I'm not stable at that voltage on vcore.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dtfkev*
> 
> So is that something I need to worry about?
> 
> I know my OC is stable with a 1.248 vcore and 1.25 vid.
> 
> Was worried when I saw vid drop to 1.232 because I know I'm not stable at that voltage on vcore.


You can pretty much just ignore VID, yes. It doesn't matter what the VID column in your monitoring software says, it's just a virtual number, if you will. It has no physical meaning.

VCore on the other hand is the cpu core voltage as measured by motherboard sensors, and what's actually being delivered to the CPU.


----------



## dtfkev

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> You can pretty much just ignore VID, yes. It doesn't matter what the VID column in your monitoring software says, it's just a virtual number, if you will. It has no physical meaning.
> 
> VCore on the other hand is the cpu core voltage as measured by motherboard sensors, and what's actually being delivered to the CPU.


Awesome thanks for clearing that up!


----------



## becks

Hey guys,

Anyone has any link for me to have a read ...

Difference in performance/bench 5.0 vs 5.1 7700k
Difference in performance/bench stock Cache vs 4.7/5.0...7700k

Thank you









Nvm.. did my own testing and i get roughly 21 more points in CB multi thread for each 100 ghz I go up in freq..


----------



## AA junkie

I want to undervolt my 7700k and I gave this guide a read, especially the stress testing part.

My cpu is now stock and the default(auto) vcore on my Gigabyte K3 gaming is 1,240v.
My plan is to drop the voltage in 0,005v(1,235/1,230...) steps and run an 1 hour session of the custom X264 I found on this guide after every voltage drop.
When my pc crash, I 'll start raising the voltage in 0,005v steps and run an overnight session of X264 after each increment.

What do you think about this strategy ?
Is there any other from vcore bios option that could help me undervolting my cpu ?


----------



## becks

How much should one be concerned if ..

On same Prime95 version (28.10) I can pass hours and hours of non-AVX... but fail in couple of mins under AVX....

If one would use a lot of programs 24/7 like programming, encoding, video & photo editing, streaming and gaming....

Is it worth getting that "AVX" certified or is it overrated ? (To be able to pass AVX I need a huge bump in V )

Nvm....AVX offset

BTW @AA junkie I think that's the method we all use..

I personally go down 0.050 at a time (Starting from 1.395) and do a quick 15 min test till I fail...than I slowly go up 0.05 at a time until stable.


----------



## AA junkie

Thank you becks.

Do you think that I should change any other bios setting(ex. loadline calibration)
or the vcore is the one and only parameter in a simple undervolting situation in stock clocks like the one I intend to do.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AA junkie*
> 
> Thank you becks.
> 
> Do you think that I should change any other bios setting(ex. loadline calibration)
> or the vcore is the one and only parameter in a simple undervolting situation in stock clocks like the one I intend to do.


Never did under V-ing on any component in any pc I had so far..
And I know that when you do so...some rules work differently like adaptive and such..
But just to get a rough figure of how low can you go before you start "optimising" it...Yes..just V for begging.

You on Gigabit board aren't you... Gigabit use different terminology for various things than Asus..

I always been an Asus guy


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AA junkie*
> 
> Thank you becks.
> 
> Do you think that I should change any other bios setting(ex. loadline calibration)
> or the vcore is the one and only parameter in a simple undervolting situation in stock clocks like the one I intend to do.


You might want to experiment with LLC. I found out I get the lowest stable voltage under load with a big (about 80mV) Vdroop, using LLC option 'standard'. If memory serves, the core voltage I've set in BIOS is 1.260V, idle voltage as reported by monitoring software fluctuates between 1.248...1.260V but under load it drops to 1.176...1.188V. Running my 7700K at 4600MHz with AVX offset of 2, so basicly we could think of this configuration as 'slightly undervolted stock, with extra boost for non-AVX workload'

With the other two LLC settings (auto, high) I never managed to get this configuration stable with a Vcore below 1.20V under load.


----------



## enigma7820

Count me in on this chart please!!

Username: enigma7820

CPU Model: 7700k

Base Clock: 100

Core multiplier: 50

Core Frequency: 5000mhz

Cache Frequency: 4500mhz

Vcore in UEFI: 1.35v

Vcore: 1.328v

FLCK: 1000

Cooling Solution: Kraken X61 280mm AIO and delidded

Stability Test: 8 hours of realbench version 2.56

Batch Number: L709C782

Ram Speed: 2400mhz 15-15-15-37 2t

Ram Voltage: 1.2v

VCCIO:

VCCSA:

Motherboard: z170 ASRock OC formula

LLC Setting: Level 2 (slight vdroop)

Misc Comments. No AVX offset used 5ghz at all times


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Mine doesn't have those dots...
> 
> Honestly looks like damage to me...
> 
> EDIT: Is your delid glued back or just floating cause if its the later I might know why that happened...


Just picked up a new cpu just for test , to see if mine is bad or the board is ...


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Just picked up a new cpu just for test , to see if mine is bad or the board is ...


did you delided both yourself ? with same delid tool ?

Maybe your delid tool has a defect ...


----------



## MaKeN

No, no i did it with a razor... but this one that ive piked up is going back... im not gonna dellid it , its just for test.
See im stuck at 4200 an no mather what i do it wont go up. So mb the chip as you say is damaged.
Ill put new untuched one there to see if it goes more than 4200


----------



## enigma7820

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AA junkie*
> 
> I want to undervolt my 7700k and I gave this guide a read, especially the stress testing part.
> 
> My cpu is now stock and the default(auto) vcore on my Gigabyte K3 gaming is 1,240v.
> My plan is to drop the voltage in 0,005v(1,235/1,230...) steps and run an 1 hour session of the custom X264 I found on this guide after every voltage drop.
> When my pc crash, I 'll start raising the voltage in 0,005v steps and run an overnight session of X264 after each increment.
> 
> What do you think about this strategy ?
> Is there any other from vcore bios option that could help me undervolting my cpu ?


honestly i just picked up my 7700k, i ran 5 hours of prime95, 5 hours of occt and an hour of ibt, ran a bunch of cinebench runs and gamed and was stable. But when i ran the 8 hour test of realbench for this chart i had to increase my vcore to remain stable. I went from what i thought to be stable which was 1.312 to 1.328 for 5ghz. So honestly I guess based on that run realbench for 2 hours minimum, if it passes 2 hours I would lower vcore, rinse and repeat like you said than run the 8 hour stress test with realbench with max ram selected and call it stable if it finishes, also be sure to check your event log for whea errors these chips still report errors in event log of instability like ivy did.


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enigma7820*


What version of Prime 95 ? with or without AVX ?...

What setting for Prime ? Blend ? custom ?


----------



## enigma7820

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> What version of Prime 95 ? with or without AVX ?...
> 
> What setting for Prime ? Blend ? custom ?


For prime i used 26.6 because i wanted to test without avx, since i did ibt, occt, realbench and x264 which all use avx. Prime i leave everything at default except set ram to 90% of what i have on custom tab


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enigma7820*


Strange..usually I do 1 hour 26.6 non avx small ftt 1344-1344 than 1 hour 28.10 avx small ftt 1344-1344 and never had problems failing passing rb.


----------



## DanielF50

In Prime 95, what should I set the min/max FFT to, if I wanted to be added to the chart? Just did a run at 8FFT min & max but then realised that probably proves nothing


----------



## enigma7820

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DanielF50*
> 
> In Prime 95, what should I set the min/max FFT to, if I wanted to be added to the chart? Just did a run at 8FFT min & max but then realised that probably proves nothing


I would leave it as in and if you are really strict about stability let it run for 24 hours.


----------



## DanielF50

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *enigma7820*
> 
> I would leave it as in and if you are really strict about stability let it run for 24 hours.


Thanks, I'm not too worried about 24/7 stability though; I've been running this OC for a month or so now and it's has been rock stable - I just want to be added to the OC list which requires 1hr of Prime 95 as per post #1 & I'm just wondering what configuration is required to be added? Obviously custom (as none of the other options utilise all installed RAM) but should it be 8FFT to 4096 FFT, or something else?


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> No, no i did it with a razor... but this one that ive piked up is going back... im not gonna dellid it , its just for test.
> See im stuck at 4200 an no mather what i do it wont go up. So mb the chip as you say is damaged.
> Ill put new untuched one there to see if it goes more than 4200


So yea ... my cpu with that dot is damaged.

The test cpu does 5.1 at 1.35v easy max temp in rb 80c.

Now i dont know if its worth to keep it or not. Another 300$?

How long will 7700k last/ be good for gaming?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*


7700k si still King in Gaming..

beats all the new i7's...

But if future Games receive support for more cores and multi threading we're in trouble...


----------



## MaKeN

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> 7700k si still King in Gaming..
> 
> beats all the new i7's...
> 
> But if future Games receive support for more cores and multi threading we're in trouble...


Thats after like 2 years?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Thats after like 2 years?


hard to tell really...

Even current games could receive a "patch" and support new cpu's better...

Like the new Nvidia patch for Destiny 2...increased performance by 51%


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> Thats after like 2 years?
> 
> 
> 
> hard to tell really...
> 
> Even current games could receive a "patch" and support new cpu's better...
> 
> Like the new Nvidia patch for Destiny 2...increased performance by 51%
Click to expand...

Was it a DirectX 12 patch?


----------



## becks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Was it a DirectX 12 patch?


Can't find the original link where I read it.. and now looking trough google found this link from PC Gamer saying their testing showed 30% increase in FPS..

Happy reading: here

EDIT: Don't really have time to go trough it and see what or how as my pc is not working at the moment..still trying to finish my RAM OC...


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *becks*
> 
> But if future Games receive support for more cores and multi threading we're in trouble...


Please, by the time games scale well in general we need a new system anyway









And if anything this all assumes we have an absolute top of the line graphics card every year, or were always rather gpu limited

And of course displays that are fast enough to make use of 100+fps


----------



## peter2k

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Was it a DirectX 12 patch?


It's a new driver actually and usually Nvidia benefits way less with dx12/vulkan anyway

Haven't seen anything why there is a good bump in performance

I don't think Nvidia usually issues a reason how they improved fps
Aside from "optimization"


----------



## becks

I was purely speculating...It might be next year or in 5 years...who knows when new "Crisis" comes out to choke our puny 4 cores...


----------



## LostParticle

To whom it may concern...


----------



## AA junkie

I keep trying to undervolt this 7700k on a gigabyte gaming k3 mobo.
The default vcore is 1,245v.
I passed the X264 custom test of this guide with 1,195v, but I needed 1,200v to pass the 8h full ram Realbench test.

So I consider the system stable at 1,2v.

I just plan to run an overnight prime session, and I want you tell me which version and what settings I should use.

I also want to know if now that I found my stable vcore(1,2v), I should revert the core voltage setting in bios to Auto(with 1,2v next to it). ?
The available settings are Auto, Normal, Manual.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AA junkie*
> 
> I keep trying to undervolt this 7700k on a gigabyte gaming k3 mobo.
> The default vcore is 1,245v.
> I passed the X264 custom test of this guide with 1,195v, but I needed 1,200v to pass the 8h full ram Realbench test.
> 
> So I consider the system stable at 1,2v.
> 
> I just plan to run an overnight prime session, and I want you tell me which version and what settings I should use.
> 
> I also want to know if now that I found my stable vcore(1,2v), I should revert the core voltage setting in bios to Auto(with 1,2v next to it). ?
> The available settings are Auto, Normal, Manual.


Why do you want to under volt?


----------



## AA junkie

To have the lower possible temps.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AA junkie*
> 
> To have the lower possible temps.


I would not worry, the processor will live past it's useful life stock.


----------



## AA junkie

I am sure it will,
but I am trying to drop the temps(not having any kind of problems) in my case and I want the less heat emission from every component.

Gigabyte issued an o/cing guide for z270 chipset.
https://view.joomag.com/gigabyte-z270-overclocking-guide-gigabyte-200-series-overclocking-guide/0767815001483933769

In that guide suggests to use prime95 version 27,9 build 1,
choose custom test,
set '*Min FFT size (in K)*' to *1344* and '*Max FFT size (in K)*' to *1344*,
and check '*Run FFTs in place*'.

With the above settings my pc cannot even start the test and crashes instantly with 1,210v.
I had to rise vcore to 1,220 just to start the test and run it for 1 minute as I hadn't the time for more.

Just for reference,
with 1,2v I finished the 8h ful ram Realbench test.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

AA junkie, you talk @5GHz?
So far, I have submitted 5GHz operation (8H real bench)@1.2V or less to this thread.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> Username: pyounpy-2
> CPU Model: 7700k
> Base Clock: 200
> Core Multiplier: 25
> Core Frequency: 5000
> Cache Frequency: 4400
> Vcore in UEFI: adaptic mode:1.185+0.005=1.190
> Vcore: 1.200
> FCLK: Reminder: 1600(800X2??)
> Cooling Solution: Delidded, Custum water cooling
> Stability Test: 8 hours realbench ver. 2.54
> 
> Batch Number: Malaysia L642G086
> Ram Speed: (4200 17-17-17-35-1T)
> VCCIO: 1.344
> VCCSA: 1.368
> Ram Voltage: 1.4
> Motherboard: Asus maximus IX Apex (UEFI:1010)
> LLC Setting: level 5
> Misc Comments: I tried to operate CPU at 5GHz under the Vcore of less than 1.2V. Addtionally, I set the Blck at 200MHz. Therfore, the response is very well even I use the C1 state, New version UEFI 1010 is good for me.


----------



## AA junkie

@Pyounpy
your numbers seems incredible to me.
I don't try to overclock.
I simply try to undervolt my cpu.
So all the tests are made with stock clocks.
So yes,
with 1,195 I cannot conclude the Realbench test,
and with less of 1,220 I cannot even start prime at default clocks.
Am I doing something wrong or I simply got a banana in the silicon lottery ?


----------



## Pyounpy-2

I understang and I am also interested in your try.
If goal of your try (decreasing operation voltage) is decrasing the pwer consumption of CPU,
Try to use minus voltage off set at adiabatic mode. Addtionally, to get the stability, LLC se to higher.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AA junkie*
> 
> I am sure it will,
> but I am trying to drop the temps(not having any kind of problems) in my case and I want the less heat emission from every component.
> 
> Gigabyte issued an o/cing guide for z270 chipset.
> https://view.joomag.com/gigabyte-z270-overclocking-guide-gigabyte-200-series-overclocking-guide/0767815001483933769
> 
> In that guide suggests to use prime95 version 27,9 build 1,
> choose custom test,
> set '*Min FFT size (in K)*' to *1344* and '*Max FFT size (in K)*' to *1344*,
> and check '*Run FFTs in place*'.
> 
> With the above settings my pc cannot even start the test and crashes instantly with 1,210v.
> I had to rise vcore to 1,220 just to start the test and run it for 1 minute as I hadn't the time for more.
> 
> Just for reference,
> with 1,2v I finished the 8h ful ram Realbench test.


What is the CPU speed of your 7700k when you fail this test? 4.2 ghz? you fail it at 1.210v at 4.2 ghz??


----------



## AA junkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> What is the CPU speed of your 7700k when you fail this test? 4.2 ghz? you fail it at 1.210v at 4.2 ghz??


4,5ghz as I have turbo boost enabled.

Today it crashed after five minutes at 1,220v!
Tomorrow I' ll try at 1,230 just because I am curious.

I also wonder if you guys can run prime version 27,9 build 1 with the settings I posted above.


----------



## Falkentyne

Do you have AVX and FMA3 enabled or disabled?
Does your prime do "type 0 FFT" or "Core 2 FFT" or does it show AVX, AVX2 or FMA3"?

Any chance you can take a screenshot?

Can you add CPUSupportsAVX=0 and CPUSupportsFMA3=0 to the local.txt file and try again please?

I can pass that 1344 FFT test with no problem on a BGA trash chip 7820HK @ 4.5 ghz (1175mv override, AC/DC loadline=1 (lowest that is not auto) in the Bios, no problems, but not AVX or FMA3). I'm probably getting massive vdroop too as there is no LLC control on laptops.


----------



## AA junkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Do you have AVX and FMA3 enabled or disabled?


Enabled
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Does your prime do "type 0 FFT" or "Core 2 FFT" or does it show AVX, AVX2 or FMA3"?


Not sure where to find this information
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Any chance you can take a screenshot?


Here you go
https://imgur.com/a/SiGRE
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Can you add CPUSupportsAVX=0 and CPUSupportsFMA3=0 to the local.txt file and try again please?


I will do it, but first I want to try if and at what voltage I can pass this test as it is.


----------



## Falkentyne

Um, start up prime95 first, then take the screenshot :/ taking it before is useless.


----------



## AA junkie

https://imgur.com/a/oqhAT


----------



## Falkentyne

Why are you trying to get AVX 1344K stable? That's the most stressful test known to man.
Are you using your computer for gaming? or are you trying to go for world records or stress test?

Disable AVX and FMA3 and then do that in place FFT's at 1344K.
If you can pass that for a few hours without crashing, then you're stable. Enjoy gaming.

Just fyi: my 7820HK @ 4.5 ghz @ 1175mv is rock solid at 1344K in place FFT with AVX disabled in local.txt.
But it won't have anything to do with AVX and FMA3.
FMA3 requires stepping down to 4.3 ghz (small FFT stress test). AVX is ok at 4.4 ghz.


----------



## Kalpa

As usual I'd advise against not testing AVX stability. It may be fine right now for most applications but sooner or later you'll run into mysterious crashes with a new piece of software you can't seem to figure out until you remember that damn "unnecessarily hard" AVX you skimped on.

Otherwise Falkentyne is spot on - overkill stress testing doesn't accomplish much (except maybe bragging rights), stability is subject to use scenario and one should tailor their stress testing to their own needs.


----------



## AA junkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Why are you trying to get AVX 1344K stable? That's the most stressful test known to man.
> Are you using your computer for gaming? or are you trying to go for world records or stress test?


Yes I use my pc for gaming, and I know what you want to say.
That in real life scenarios my cpu will never face that stress.
In other hand, stable is stable.
I mean you can't say I am stable in games, but not stable in stress tests.
or I am stable in games and stress tests but not the ones with AVX.
Don't forget also that you are an overclocker and you speak from the overclockers point of view.
That i guess they can 'sacrifice' the AVX stability in their way to 5ghz.
I am trying a different thing.
Run my cpu stable with the less possible voltage.
I am not trying to reach an extreme frequency, I don't face heat issues and I will not care so much if I don't achieve an undervolting.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Disable AVX and FMA3 and then do that in place FFT's at 1344K.
> If you can pass that for a few hours without crashing, then you're stable. Enjoy gaming.


You are saying that it's better do it that way(disabled it in local.txt), or download a non AVX version of prime ?
If yes, what version ?


----------



## Batboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AA junkie*
> 
> Yes I use my pc for gaming, and I know what you want to say.
> That in real life scenarios my cpu will never face that stress.
> In other hand, stable is stable.
> I mean you can't say I am stable in games, but not stable in stress tests.
> or I am stable in games and stress tests but not the ones with AVX.
> Don't forget also that you are an overclocker and you speak from the overclockers point of view.
> That i guess they can 'sacrifice' the AVX stability in their way to 5ghz.
> I am trying a different thing.
> Run my cpu stable with the less possible voltage.
> I am not trying to reach an extreme frequency, I don't face heat issues and I will not care so much if I don't achieve an undervolting.
> You are saying that it's better do it that way(disabled it in local.txt), or download a non AVX version of prime ?
> If yes, what version ?


Probaly hotttt at 5ghz. man.....d14 with 2500rpm case fans on it and liquid pro, right at about 1.35-36v...doing great man a lot harder to break 80c...mx4 was not cutting it man....evo spear kit at 2600mhz, we are just misssing the lightning nvme.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AA junkie*
> 
> Yes I use my pc for gaming, and I know what you want to say.
> That in real life scenarios my cpu will never face that stress.
> In other hand, stable is stable.
> I mean you can't say I am stable in games, but not stable in stress tests.
> or I am stable in games and stress tests but not the ones with AVX.
> Don't forget also that you are an overclocker and you speak from the overclockers point of view.
> That i guess they can 'sacrifice' the AVX stability in their way to 5ghz.
> I am trying a different thing.
> Run my cpu stable with the less possible voltage.
> I am not trying to reach an extreme frequency, I don't face heat issues and I will not care so much if I don't achieve an undervolting.
> You are saying that it's better do it that way(disabled it in local.txt), or download a non AVX version of prime ?
> If yes, what version ?


Downloading a non AVX version of prime is no different than using local.txt and disabling AVX and FMA3.
(the instructions are in undoc.txt).

It's still nice to have the latest version because of bug fixes, too.
As far as needing to test AVX to be stable: don't bother.
I have encountered ZERO situations on my laptop where I was unstable when non AVX prime ran for hours. And AVX torture tests can degrade hardware. Non AVX won't.

Remember also that AVX (and even more, FMA3) uses a LOT more current and far more heat, raises the internal VID slightly (however, this VID boost is countered by a LOT more vdroop due to the much higher current draw!), so it's really not a good idea. And my laptop's VRMs will simply shut down if FMA3 current and heat get too high. This doesn't happen if FMA/AVX is disabled. And I'm rock stable (already did 1 hour of torture test with OCCT's "Power supply test" at 4.5 ghz, (furmark + linpack), no problems. I'm stable. But enable small FFT AVX, I need to use 4.4 ghz. FMA3, 4.3 ghz.

Remember, you're trying to test SMALL FFT or 1344K 8 thread testing here. No game in the world is going to do that, and if it tried, there wouldn't be any CPU power available to push the video card. Saying 'you want to do the worst of the worst' to make sure you're stable is OCD taking over your life. Why not disable the manual fans too and try using auto fans and see if you are stable at 98C? You get the point?

Take people's advice for a change. The 1344K 8 thread FFT in place test with AVX/FMA3 disabled is good enough. Make sure you can pass that. Once you're done with that, try OCCT power supply test. (the furmark code is not as stressful as actual furmark, plus the video drivers will purposefully throttle this test anyway).

Fun fact:
did you know that official furmark (ozone3d) is throttled in the video card drivers for many years now? Most people who say they are furmark stable don't even realize they are not furmark stable. To be truly furmark stable, you need to rename furmark.exe to quake3.exe, but don't complain if your video card blows up afterwards! (you did not hear this from me).


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AA junkie*
> 
> Yes I use my pc for gaming, and I know what you want to say.
> That in real life scenarios my cpu will never face that stress.
> In other hand, stable is stable.
> I mean you can't say I am stable in games, but not stable in stress tests.
> *or I am stable in games and stress tests but not the ones with AVX.*


Not testing for AVX might cause just that. Case and point: Witcher 3 - which so far seems to be the only quite popular game that utilizes AVX instruction set with enough CPU drain to have caused a lot of crashing and bluescreens for people... who incidentally had only made sure their overclocked systems are "non-AVX stable". Feel free to go and browse the steam forums for the game, there're plenty of complaints, and even today more are coming in...








Quote:


> Don't forget also that you are an overclocker and you speak from the overclockers point of view.
> That i guess they can 'sacrifice' the AVX stability in their way to 5ghz.
> I am trying a different thing.
> *Run my cpu stable with the less possible voltage.*


This is practically what I'm doing with my 7700k and gigabyte board (gaming Z170 k3-eu) - note that I do have the earlier chipset, Z170. I manage to run my rig at 4600MHz with AVX offset of 2 (giving AVX freq of 4400MHz), with a voltage setting of 'manual', I think 1.260V, with LLC setting of 'standard', which gives a huge Vdroop of some 80mV under stress, putting my VCore during load in the 1.17...1.18 range. With the obvious cool&quiet benefits. Of course when idling my VCore hovers around 1.25V, spiking downwards during CPU activity.
Quote:


> I am not trying to reach an extreme frequency, I don't face heat issues and I will not care so much if I don't achieve an undervolting.
> You are saying that it's better do it that way(disabled it in local.txt), or download a non AVX version of prime ?
> If yes, what version ?


I'd use the latest version of Prime95 and just add the CpuSupportsAVX=0 line in local.txt if you really feel you don't want to test for AVX at all.

However, for quick & dirty stability testing I nowadays use an often overlooked feature of Prime95 - the benchmark. Instead of doing a continuous crunch of a very specific workload (like stress test / torture does), it varies the workload and gives both active and idle cycles to the CPU as it does a bunch of different benchmarks in rapid succession. It takes something like 15 minutes to complete. So anyway, nowadays I set up Prime95 to run benchmark and on second monitor start watching youtube (hardware acceleration: ON, so this activates GPU, while not really stressing it out). This has proven for me to be very effective in detecting obviously low VCore settings very quickly (ofttimes causing a crash even when an "1hour stress test" would have passed. It's interesting behavior really.)

If I manage to pass the benchmark I'll proceed with further stress testing, such as Realbench or handbrake or whatever seems to be the current fad. For maximum system heat test I usually do one hour of Prime95 combined with some GPU stress tester alongside it, but I wouldn't suggest running Prime95 for extended periods. It generally does not yield any further insight on the stability of the system (unless you are planning to join GIMPS and actually run Prime95 24/7, then you absolutely *need to* make sure the system can function properly with Prime95 for, eh, I'd say 48 hours minimum. But that's pretty much the only use case I can think of.)

Eventually, you will have to assume "this system is now stable" and start using it as you would normally. There is _no_ way to guarantee long-term stability without actually using the system long-term, and counting days it has remained stable.

For example, my system was nice and stable, collecting a nice 50 days of uptime, crunching [email protected] overnights, and having me sitting&gaming&watching netflix during the day. But then one day, after I came home from work, I found the machine bluescreened and restarted during the day. Bluescreen info pointed at memory. While I knew my memory was set up very tightly, as this was still an once per 50 days event I was ready to chalk it up as anomaly. So I continued using the system without adjusting settings. But, after the system hanged up only 11 days afterwards, I took the hint, lowered memory from 3200MHz to 3100MHz (without touching timings) and lowered tREFI to have just slightly shorter memory refresh interval than before.

I've been stable for a few weeks now. Uptime shows 19 days, so at least that much. I think I've rebooted once after the settings change, though, because Windows Update was so very persisting about wanting to update this OS. But there's no guarantee it won't crash another 50 days in, no amount of Prime95 crunching could guarantee that (except of course, crunching for 50 days)


----------



## Falkentyne

There's a big difference between being AVX stable in games, and being AVX Stable at 90C with 8 threads of small FFT prime 95.
If you actually feel you need to be stable at 90C in prime small FFT AVX/FMA3 to not make witcher 3 crash at **65C**, then I'm done with this thread.
I've left Witcher 3 running OVERNIGHT at 4.5 ghz with zero crashes, and that's with a hardware TDP modded LAPTOP GTX 1070 @ 185W (stock TDP is 115W).
Yet I can't pass prime at 4.5 ghz with AVX enabled without jacking up the voltage so much that I either reach 100C, or the VRM's shut down from overcurrent. AVX disabled? My system laughs at that. I can even run at 4.7 ghz but I need to keep temps below 85C.

So am I stable or not?

Eventually common sense has to get into the head of overclockers.
Otherwise people will start trying to claim you won't be stable unless you can run prime with passive cooling at 98C without BSOD'ing :/


----------



## AA junkie

I think that even Project Cars 2 uses AVX, and I am sure that it will be more used in the future.
Off course Falkentyne has a point here.
Running a game that uses AVX gives by far less stress on the cpu than a stress test that uses AVX.

I am actually out of this, as the last cpu I o/ced was a c2d(s775).
I don't also have the knowledge that you guys have.
But I want to add to the discussion that a non stable system doesn't mean only crashes.
A non stable system is a system that is not operating as it should.
Calculations and operations that take longer, little errors in the background etc.
Maybe someone with better english and computing knowledge can express what I say in a more apropriate way.

I can't forget that I once had a heavy o/ced system that I considered rock stable.
Hours of stress tests and days of real life use without a single crash.
Then, I don't remember why, I raised my ram voltage by 0,1v.
What happened was impressive.
My loading times in games decreased by 30%!
What I want to say is that in that system something was not going well.
It wasn't so serious to cause crashes or strange behavior, but it definitily caused a malfunction.

Another example is the memory on a gpu.
Who overclocks it's gpu knows that if you exceed a certain value in memory frequency, the gpu will not crash but give lowest benchmark scores/lowest fps/lowest performance.

That's why, appart my OCD, piece of mind etc, I want to be sure that my system is stable at 100% of the cases.
If anybody can ever be sure.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> There's a big difference between being AVX stable in games, and being AVX Stable at 90C with 8 threads of small FFT prime 95.


I wholeheartedly agree. The point is to get at least some testing done with AVX-utilizing tests (heck, x264 works just fine for that), so you're not completely omitting the instruction set from your testing routine.
Quote:


> So am I stable or not?


Your system is stable when you feel it is stable. I think this is the point I'd mostly like to make. Not to listen to us forumites arguing about semantics on which kind of stability is the best stability, but rather mess around with one's own system and once feeling satisfied, go ahead and start using it as normal. If crashes occur too often to one's liking -> adjust settings.


----------



## Dry Bonez

Why doesnt anyone stress their cpu with emulators? We all know emulators revolve around higher cpu usage. I have a 7700k paired with a swiftech h220x2 prestige on a Gigabyte Aorus Z270X Gaming 7 @5.0 1.35v, and let me tell you guys, i have had one hell of a ride with this mobo and its settings. Anyway, i dont really stresstest cuz i simply dont have the time to do so. Instead,i play games for a long time to see if i emcounter any bsod and indeed i have and i go according to that. So out of many gmes i have, the hottest game i have is COD WW2 that reaches 68c. So now to the emulation, I was playing on Cemu and my oh my, my cores never passed 73c.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AA junkie*
> 
> I think that even Project Cars 2 uses AVX, and I am sure that it will be more used in the future.
> Off course Falkentyne has a point here.
> Running a game that uses AVX gives by far less stress on the cpu than a stress test that uses AVX.


Heck yeah, even Windows background processes seem to utilize AVX instructions nowadays. Those processes use barely any CPU cycles, and as such draw barely any power.
Quote:


> That's why, appart my OCD, piece of mind etc, I want to be sure that my system is stable at 100% of the cases.
> If anybody can ever be sure.


Well, no, no one really can. Except by actually using the system and finding out that hey, it actually worked! I mean, it really is up to you to decide which tests to run and how many synthetic tests the system needs to pass before you declare your system stable and start using it for real.

Prime95 is pretty much the ultimate in heat/power consumption testing. Better used to test your cooling solution, rather than overall system stability (apart from the benchmark I mentioned earlier - I think it's a really great way to check for "initial stability") - the x264 stress test and Realbench are some of the local favourites for a "longer duration" (say, overnight) stability test.


----------



## ducegt

My current settings is 5ghz @ 1.264v under load and 1.28 idle is not stable in Prime95 with AVX. Doesn't last a second. However, no issues with Windows, Project Cars 2, CEMU, COD WWII, Wolfenstein 2, Overwatch, ROTR, and everything else







Realbench 8 hours has proven to be enough for me.


----------



## Batboy

Guess you need to give me a cookie or something man Lol


----------



## MaKeN

After 1010 Bios flash, 5.2 stable at 1.37v bios and 1.392 in windows. Wasnt stable even at 1.4v before...

Now i wonder what to do leave 1.37v /1.392 windows or 1.41 bios / 1.392 windows
I know 1.41 no load isnt dangerous, but that number scares me


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaKeN*
> 
> After 1010 Bios flash, 5.2 stable at 1.37v bios and 1.392 in windows. Wasnt stable even at 1.4v before...
> 
> Now i wonder what to do leave 1.37v /1.392 windows or 1.41 bios / 1.392 windows
> I know 1.41 no load isnt dangerous, but that number scares me


1.41 shouldn't be. Just know at the back of your mind that ANY load has so much room to breathe on the overshoot that you are not killing your CPU silently with 1.5V+ spikes whenever it drops to 1.392 under load where it matters.


----------



## lebrongoat

Hi All. I posted this in a separate thread, but I think I should actually post it here!

I'm having some trouble wrapping my head around a 'minor' 4.7ghz OC on my 7700k, and I'm hoping you can help.

Specs:

i7 7700k
Gigabyte Aorus Gaming K5 Z270 motherboard
Corsair H100i V2 AIO cooler
EVGA GTX 1080ti
16gb EVGA DDR4 3000 memory

Current relevant (I think) BIOS settings:

https://imgur.com/a/PnCpe

Additionally IEST is on, and the other C-states are set to 'auto'

I started by using Gigabyte's baked in OC's, and while they work, it was pumping 1.42v through the CPU at 4.7ghz! This caused relatively high temps (high 80s-mid 90s on blend tests. small FTT would peg 100deg almost instantly).

I was able to achieve a stable 4.7ghz with a *manual* vcore setting of 1.26v and LLC on Auto. Of course, these settings do not allow the voltage to drop during low load or idle, so I went back to the config to try dynamic/offset.

This board doesn't have a dynamic mode, so I have to set the vcore to 'Normal' to unlock the dynamic vcore offset option as shown in the image. I stepped the offset down until I was showing 1.26-1.27 in cpu-z during a quick test. temps are good (low-mid 70's on blend test and mid 60's-low 70's in games) and it seems stable at full load. This is with 'high' LLC setting.

This gets me to the issue at hand...stability at low voltage. I've had two hardlocks (with no BSOD) while doing low load activities like web browsing. I'm also seeing very sporadic entries in event viewer from WHEA-Logger (event 19). This entry seems to pop up when waking up from sleep or after a reboot, but there are a couple that fall during regular use.

_A corrected hardware error has occurred.

Reported by component: Processor Core
Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
Processor APIC ID: 0_

Is the best way to address this to keep adjusting the offset until the WHEA-Logger errors and crashes go away? I guess my concern is the higher the vcore, the higher the temps. If I was stable at a solid 1.26, does it just make more sense to set it manually and forget about dynamic voltage? Should I be toying more with LLC?

Thanks!


----------



## Batboy

Idk man might of killed that 7700k and that Evo spear kit on the Strix, liquid pro spilt everywhere/ and mounting the cooler...went from no boot yellow led to red..and I boogered up a few pins because some fell in there...Idk put it back in the package/mobo box and sent it to them...Idk waiting to here from them or just wait send some working stuff back. Or if it's the Board...They attempt to fix it and just send it back out, my understanding. Sucks man, Literally just about the same thing that happened to the rampage Lol


----------



## pcixopatt

What i must change in bios on gygabyte z270x gaming 5?I want achieve 4.9 ghz.I change v core and llc or maybe something else?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcixopatt*
> 
> What i must change in bios on gygabyte z270x gaming 5?I want achieve 4.9 ghz.I change v core and llc or maybe something else?


Try this http://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcixopatt*
> 
> What i must change in bios on gygabyte z270x gaming 5?I want achieve 4.9 ghz.I change v core and llc or maybe something else?


I have that motherboard in one of my rigs and I OC'd a 7600k and a 7700k with it before. My 7600k just wouldn't go past 4.6ghz with the Voltage being under 1.40v. The 7700k couldn't be messed with at all without deliding it but 5.0 was achievable at 1.363v

I used this guide:

https://view.joomag.com/gigabyte-z270-overclocking-guide-gigabyte-200-series-overclocking-guide/0767815001483933769

Which was actually published by Gigabyte using a Z270 motherboard and i7-7700k with the intention of OC'ing to 5.0ghz and beyond doesn't get any better than that if you have a Gigabyte mobo.

Follow those steps exactly and begin the task of finding out what your chip is capable of, every CPU is different


----------



## pcixopatt

I have corsair h110i.I want 4.9 ghz and pass aida 64 fpu test.What voltage for 4.9 ghz i must didn't exceed?


----------



## pcixopatt

I have stable games and many benchmarks on 4.8 ghz on 12.65 voltage


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcixopatt*
> 
> I have stable games and many benchmarks on 4.8 ghz on 12.65 voltage


What CPU chip do you have?


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lebrongoat*
> 
> Hi All. I posted this in a separate thread, but I think I should actually post it here!
> 
> I'm having some trouble wrapping my head around a 'minor' 4.7ghz OC on my 7700k, and I'm hoping you can help.
> 
> Specs:
> 
> i7 7700k
> Gigabyte Aorus Gaming K5 Z270 motherboard
> Corsair H100i V2 AIO cooler
> EVGA GTX 1080ti
> 16gb EVGA DDR4 3000 memory
> 
> Current relevant (I think) BIOS settings:
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/PnCpe
> 
> Additionally IEST is on, and the other C-states are set to 'auto'
> 
> I started by using Gigabyte's baked in OC's, and while they work, it was pumping 1.42v through the CPU at 4.7ghz! This caused relatively high temps (high 80s-mid 90s on blend tests. small FTT would peg 100deg almost instantly).
> 
> I was able to achieve a stable 4.7ghz with a *manual* vcore setting of 1.26v and LLC on Auto. Of course, these settings do not allow the voltage to drop during low load or idle, so I went back to the config to try dynamic/offset.
> 
> This board doesn't have a dynamic mode, so I have to set the vcore to 'Normal' to unlock the dynamic vcore offset option as shown in the image. I stepped the offset down until I was showing 1.26-1.27 in cpu-z during a quick test. temps are good (low-mid 70's on blend test and mid 60's-low 70's in games) and it seems stable at full load. This is with 'high' LLC setting.
> 
> This gets me to the issue at hand...stability at low voltage. I've had two hardlocks (with no BSOD) while doing low load activities like web browsing. I'm also seeing very sporadic entries in event viewer from WHEA-Logger (event 19). This entry seems to pop up when waking up from sleep or after a reboot, but there are a couple that fall during regular use.
> 
> _A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Reported by component: Processor Core
> Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
> Error Type: Cache Hierarchy Error
> Processor APIC ID: 0_
> 
> Is the best way to address this to keep adjusting the offset until the WHEA-Logger errors and crashes go away? I guess my concern is the higher the vcore, the higher the temps. If I was stable at a solid 1.26, does it just make more sense to set it manually and forget about dynamic voltage? Should I be toying more with LLC?
> 
> Thanks!


I've had a 7700K OC'd to 5ghz for a year now with the voltage dialed in at a constant 1.363v on my MSI Z270 Gaming 7 with LLC set at 2. All Intel power tampering settings turned off. That means whenever it's turned on its running at 5.0ghz and the voltage at 1.363v. This might cost me $50 more in a year in electricity but its under 1.40v (long term 1.4v+ will kill a chip) and my temps are 70c or less (80c+ will kill a chip) I delided it however... so my CPU will be okay far beyond the 2 -3 years I will ever be using it. Technically it should be good for years beyond that. Temps 70c or less really open up overclocking potential as microelectronics tend to operate much smoother at those temps. Hence water cooling and all that special stuff. Having pure control over whats happening in your chip means a lot more than adaptive voltage and core clock speeds in idle. Also don't worry about RAM overclocking until after you find a stable CPU overclock... my tests with Cinebench OC RAM hasn't yielded much anything. Leave XMP off until you figure out the CPU overclock.

LLC is all about getting rid of the Voltage Droop. Vdroop is when your chip is under load and the voltage dips under what you want it to be set at and you get a crash. A lower LLC number equates to a more solid voltage to what you set the Vcore in your Bios. I sent this link to someone else with your Mobo, but you should check it out as it was published by Gigabyte:

https://view.joomag.com/gigabyte-z270-overclocking-guide-gigabyte-200-series-overclocking-guide/0767815001483933769

Look at the advanced overclock settings. The thing is my friend your CPU was not stable at 1.26v with all those stock settings turned on because the adaptive voltage jumped around so much and then crashed.

Overclocking is all about finding exactly what your chip is capable of which means changing the settings in UEFI/BIOS to where the voltage is constant along with the core clock speed and then passing stress tests. If your going to be using your PC for rendering things for your job or something maybe 24 hours with Realbench is a good test, but for finding stability for a CPU OC for gaming 1 hour of Prime95 or Aida64 is good dude no need to burn in your chip past that. Even if you have 2 1080ti's in SLI it will never hit 60% CPU use.


----------



## pcixopatt

Core i7 7700k


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcixopatt*
> 
> Core i7 7700k


Disable X.M.P. for now

All the following power management settings need to be turned off, go to MIT settings, then advanced power control or whatever they called it. Disable:
Intel Speed Shift
C1E
C3
C6/C7
C8

Go to Chipset and then integrated graphics or whatever they called it
Turn the on board graphics and off / vt-d off

Go to advanced voltage settings
Dial 50 in the CPU Clock Ratio
Dial 46 in the Uncore Ratio
Dial 1.35v in the voltage settings for the CPU

Go to advanced power settings
Since your feeling froggy use PgUp and set the Load Line Calibration to Turbo

Use Core Temp and CPU Z and stress test. If it fails up the voltage by .05V or 0.10v and test again until stable. If you see that the voltage drooping is causing the crash then up the LLC to Extreme. Watch the Voltage though its better the have it droop 0.010v than it to go up 0.020v

Once you find a stable spot you can even set the VCCPLL OC to 1.20 or 1.15 in the advanced voltage settings to lower temps

There is no easy way to do this right without actually stress testing it and watching CPU Z and a temp monitor of some sort and then changing things in BIOS / UEFI to accommodate what you've witnessed

The 7700K runs really hot, like I said mine had to be delidded with a 240mm Corsair AIO cooler to hit 70c and 1.363v and that was after hours and hours of messing around with it.

I wouldn't go over 1.40v nor 80c some chips just cannot get there my friend it's all about the silicone lottery


----------



## pcixopatt

Thanks.I have one problem a hear chacking in many headphones on my pc


----------



## Tennobanzai

I can't overclock my cache over 4.3Ghz even though I set the max cache to 4.6. Is there something i'm overlooking? It's not crashing, it's just not going over 4.3Ghz according to HWInfo


----------



## pcixopatt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horakur333*
> 
> I wouldn't go over 1.40v nor 80c some chips just cannot get there my friend it's all about the silicone lottery


On delided cpu can I exceed 1.4v?


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcixopatt*
> 
> On delided cpu can I exceed 1.4v?


Depends on how hot it gets. More voltage equals more heat and the 7700K runs hot in the first place. Running your chip at and above 1.40v will start to degrade your chip just as 80c and above temps will degrade it over time. If your going to buy a new chip in a year or two then who cares lol


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcixopatt*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Horakur333*
> 
> I wouldn't go over 1.40v nor 80c some chips just cannot get there my friend it's all about the silicone lottery
> 
> 
> 
> On delided cpu can I exceed 1.4v?
Click to expand...

Silicon lottery says you can go up to 1.45v with no problems. LInk: https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/7700k52g


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Silicon lottery says you can go up to 1.45v with no problems. LInk: https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/7700k52g


They also don't warranty their chips beyond 1 year so theres that.

TBH the voltage doesn't matter so much as the current exposure the chip goes through during it's lifespan. A lightly used chip at 1.45V will be less likely to degrade than a chip with heavy AVX type usage at <1.4V.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Silicon lottery says you can go up to 1.45v with no problems. LInk: https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/7700k52g


Nowhere in that link does it say that chip can run at 1.45v LONG TERM with no problems.
All it says is it is STABLE and can PASS STABILITY TESTS at 1.45v when PURCHASED. Nowhere on their webpage do they GUARANTEE that the chip will run at that voltage long term, whatsoever.

I'll tell you right now and bet you $500 dollars of my own money.
You buy that chip and run it at 1.45v 24/7, 5.2 ghz on air or water for a year and it WILL have degraded.
Yes if it's warrantied then they MAY probably have to replace it, if it just STOPS working, of course, but I don't know how their warranty service works. I don't know if they warrant their chips against degradation at all. In fact, I seriously doubt it.


----------



## scracy

You can safely run up to 1.4 to 1.425V 24/7 without degrading your CPU provided you keep temps in check and don't exceed 2x TDP, its current that kills a CPU not so much the voltage.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> You can safely run up to 1.4 to 1.425V 24/7 without degrading your CPU provided you keep temps in check and don't exceed 2x TDP, its current that kills a CPU not so much the voltage.


I wouldn't even consider 2x TDP to be safe. The most realistic figure I've seen thrown around is 100A (Intel is notoriously secretive, the 100A is for Broadwell IIRC as per their whitepaper).

So basically, at whatever voltage, as long as the chip isn't exposed to prolonged periods of >100A, it should be safe from degradation.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> I wouldn't even consider 2x TDP to be safe. The most realistic figure I've seen thrown around is 100A (Intel is notoriously secretive, the 100A is for Broadwell IIRC as per their whitepaper).
> 
> So basically, at whatever voltage, as long as the chip isn't exposed to prolonged periods of >100A, it should be safe from degradation.


From Asus overclocking guide "*One of the questions that always arises when we're dealing with overclocking is "how much Vcore is safe?" Generally, we recommend constraining an overclock to stay below 2 X the stock power consumption of the processor under full load*".


----------



## pcixopatt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> From Asus overclocking guide "*One of the questions that always arises when we're dealing with overclocking is "how much Vcore is safe?" Generally, we recommend constraining an overclock to stay below 2 X the stock power consumption of the processor under full load*".


I delided my cpu core i7 7700k/What i must change to reach 5.1 ghz


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcixopatt*
> 
> I delided my cpu core i7 7700k/What i must change to reach 5.1 ghz


Change your multiplier to 51 and increase your Vcore until it is stable and below or at 1.42V just keep an eye on temps, if it is not stable at that sort of voltage you may not be able to get 5.1 with your CPU, silicon lottery applies.


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *scracy*
> 
> Change your multiplier to 51 and increase your Vcore until it is stable and below or at 1.42V just keep an eye on temps, if it is not stable at that sort of voltage you may not be able to get 5.1 with your CPU, silicon lottery applies.


I was just kind of looking back at these posts... I could be wrong but I'm just going to shoot anyways... @pcixopatt when we are talking about the Silicone Lottery we aren't talking about the website that sells delided chips they tested overclocks on and then resell for a bunch of cash... we are talking about the randomness factor involved with the mass production of CPU chips. Although the manufacturing process is incredibly precise especially at the 14nm level, silicone itself has impurities at the atomic level. Silicone being the semiconductor that makes it possible to have a few billion transistors on a tiny chip, this means that every single chip that's produced will operate a little differently than the next. It's called the silicone lottery because you never know how a chip you've bought will perform. There are some people who lose this lottery and get 7700K's that can never hit 5.0ghz safely under 1.4v - 1.42v and some very lucky winners who can get to 5.2ghz at or under 1.4v. It's all luck of the draw!

That link from Silicone Lottery's website says the Vcore is 1.45v, the clockspeed 5.2ghz and the AVX offset -2? So when the chip in under a Prime95 stress test or something using heavy AVX instructions, AVX is technically running at 5.0ghz and it needed 1.45v to be stable there? Maybe I'm missing something but that sounds like complete poop on a stick to me.


----------



## Falkentyne

It means the chip will be GAME or NON AVX stable at 5.2 ghz 1.45v but require 5 ghz 1.45v for AVX. That's all.

Find me any chip in EXISTENCE that can run 5.2 ghz SMALL FFT AVX or FMA3 8 thread prime 95 100% stable on air or water and i will sell you some land in North Korea and pay for your plane ticket.

You won't.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Silicon lottery says you can go up to 1.45v with no problems. LInk: https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/7700k52g
> 
> 
> 
> Nowhere in that link does it say that chip can run at 1.45v LONG TERM with no problems.
> All it says is it is STABLE and can PASS STABILITY TESTS at 1.45v when PURCHASED. Nowhere on their webpage do they GUARANTEE that the chip will run at that voltage long term, whatsoever.
> 
> I'll tell you right now and bet you $500 dollars of my own money.
> You buy that chip and run it at 1.45v 24/7, 5.2 ghz on air or water for a year and it WILL have degraded.
> Yes if it's warrantied then they MAY probably have to replace it, if it just STOPS working, of course, but I don't know how their warranty service works. I don't know if they warrant their chips against degradation at all. In fact, I seriously doubt it.
Click to expand...

Yes it does they have a one year warranty so you can run it under load 24/7 at that voltage.
Quote:


> This CPU is guaranteed stable when using the settings below and matching components from our QVL.
> 
> 1.45V Vcore
> -2 AVX Offset


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> It means the chip will be GAME or NON AVX stable at 5.2 ghz 1.45v but require 5 ghz 1.45v for AVX. That's all.
> 
> Find me any chip in EXISTENCE that can run 5.2 ghz SMALL FFT AVX or FMA3 8 thread prime 95 100% stable on air or water and i will sell you some land in North Korea and pay for your plane ticket.
> 
> You won't.


Gotcha. So what would be a good benchmark intended for Gaming / Non AVX that will still crank the CPU use up to 100% and not hammer in AVX or Non RAM related Small FFT instructions? Does Realbench fit that bill? On their website it says:

"Listening to our community we found no free, modern (e.g. using SSE4 and AVX extensions, and testing DXVA) single benchmark that tests productive apps anyone can use. This performance knowledge gives a sense of real value to an upgrade, overclock or simple BIOS tweak, so we took it on ourselves to create one. Please share it and compare with anyone looking to evaluate their system!"

Handbrake, Luxmark and other rendering software does use the CPU and GPU together but gaming will never really bring on the pain like those will.

Obviously using any of the GPU Benchmarks would be a good way to judge Gaming performance but those never get CPU use up to 100% at least not on my machine. Is the AVX offset being a negative value the only way to really find the highest gaming stable performance for a CPU overclock?


----------



## Falkentyne

Best REAL WORLD approximation of full stability under worst case conditions that are NOT AVX/FMA3?

Prime 95, 1344K FFTs in place custom. AVX and FMA3 disabled in local.txt. However this will heat the chip up beyond what might be its stable temp limit if you're pushing extremely hard and at high voltage/overclocks.


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Best REAL WORLD approximation of full stability under worst case conditions that are NOT AVX/FMA3?
> 
> Prime 95, 1344K FFTs in place custom. AVX and FMA3 disabled in local.txt. However this will heat the chip up beyond what might be its stable temp limit if you're pushing extremely hard and at high voltage/overclocks.


When I was using the OC guide Gigabyte published for getting to 5ghz w/ 7700K's when the Z270 chipset first came out it recommended 1344K FFTs in place custom setting using a semi older version of Prime95, 27.9 Build 1 I was using those same instructions and it seemed to keep temps lower than just running the blend test. You're saying disabling AVX and FMA3 via the text file will increase temps?

Maybe a better question to ask, with modern games and dev code written in Direct X 12, 11 and even 10 what set of instructions are most commonly being used? And I guess with Prime95 one could go into the text file and exclude all irrelevant instruction sets. I could have sworn DirectX12 has some AVX in it though, I'm no developer but a buddy of mine who does that for a living was talking about that the other day


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horakur333*
> 
> When I was using the OC guide Gigabyte published for getting to 5ghz w/ 7700K's when the Z270 chipset first came out it recommended 1344K FFTs in place custom setting using a semi older version of Prime95, 27.9 Build 1 I was using those same instructions and it seemed to keep temps lower than just running the blend test. You're saying disabling AVX and FMA3 via the text file will increase temps?
> 
> Maybe a better question to ask, with modern games and dev code written in Direct X 12, 11 and even 10 what set of instructions are most commonly being used? And I guess with Prime95 one could go into the text file and exclude all irrelevant instruction sets. I could have sworn DirectX12 has some AVX in it though, I'm no developer but a buddy of mine who does that for a living was talking about that the other day


Using the brand new version of prime95 and disabling AVX and FMA3 via local.txt (read undoc.txt) will make it function identically to the old prime 95 build that doesn't support AVX.

And no, I'm saying using any small FFT test will increase temps over regular stress tests, and testing 1344K FFT in place has the highest temps of small FFT overall (rather than normal small FFT stress test). This is assuming AVX is disabled of course. Maybe I'm wrong but that's what I see when I compare small FFT vs 1344K in place FFT. in place is maybe 2-3C hotter.


----------



## OutlawII

For the love of god why must everyone continue running prime 95? There are lots of articles talking about it just Google it, i for one do not use it. It is over the top and not represenative of real world everyday usage of anyone's cpu. At best its a great way to degrade a cpu


----------



## MooMoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> For the love of god why must everyone continue running prime 95? There are lots of articles talking about it just Google it, i for one do not use it. It is over the top and not represenative of real world everyday usage of anyone's cpu. At best its a great way to degrade a cpu


Some people like good stability.


----------



## Falkentyne

I degraded my 2600k which was originally stable at 1.36v @ 5 ghz, by running AVX prime95, just to get into the 5 ghz club.
And to this day, people have insulted and flamed, trolled, verbally harassed and ridiculed me for degrading my chips, saying "it's my fault" and "I'm an incompetent overclocker" and "chips don't degrade.

Only VERY recently did others actually start admitting that chips running prime at high vcore DO degrade, EVEN IF IT'S FAR BELOW 1.52V !

i still have completely ZERO respect for a few jerks here and on XTremesystems for flaming and insulting me for degrading northwood P4 3.4C chips (WITHOUT EVEN RUNNING PRIME ON THOSE TISSUE PAPER CHIPS); stock vcore 1.5v....all it took to degrade those was >1.65v and GAME ON IT.

People wonder why I don't care about nor respect anyone anymore and why I have virtually no friends. Well--you caused it with your insulting people who KNEW More and worked more than you, who found problems, so deal with it. You won't live on this planet forever anyway. (Not referring to the poster above who admitted degradation does happen).

Sue me if you don't like what I just said. You can't do ANYTHING to me.


----------



## ezveedub

I will run Prime95 for small testing, but never for any extended periods of time. It literally is just wearing out your PC parts and if it runs fine and temps seem good for a short period of time, then leave stuff as is. It likes running IO tests on SSDs constantly....you get a result, but you will kill your SSDs faster too, lol


----------



## AshBorer

just out of curiosity, what will happen if you try to set your vcore to like 2.5V? Will it boot then immediately burn out? will it not even boot? Instant CPU death?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OutlawII*
> 
> For the love of god why must everyone continue running prime 95? There are lots of articles talking about it just Google it, i for one do not use it. It is over the top and not represenative of real world everyday usage of anyone's cpu. At best its a great way to degrade a cpu


The are folks that run calculations that utilize the processor the same as prime also more. Intel's linpack is a test for severs has more utilization causing more heat then prime95 AXV/FMA3. Linpack and prime run the processor with minimal data bubbles using all integers and floating point calculation units.

Example, In gaming some units of the processor are running just like prime95 without the heavy use of floating point units, so the processor as a hole stays cooler however, portions of the processor is working just has hard as prime 95.

Instruction pipelining attempts to keep every part of the processor busy at the same time like doing calculations or prime95 and Linpack there is almost no data bubbles or stalls. When there are pipeline stalls for that moment of time that part of the processor is Idle.

So the thing that prime95 or Linpack adds is more total heat because of the lack of pipeline bubbles and full use of the integer floating point unit. In gaming some transistors work just as hard as prime95 between the Pipelining data bubbles.

So in the end 8 hours of gaming is about 6 hours of prime95 or linpack.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> I degraded my 2600k which was originally stable at 1.36v @ 5 ghz, by running AVX prime95, just to get into the 5 ghz club.
> And to this day, people have insulted and flamed, trolled, verbally harassed and ridiculed me for degrading my chips, saying "it's my fault" and "I'm an incompetent overclocker" and "chips don't degrade.
> 
> Only VERY recently did others actually start admitting that chips running prime at high vcore DO degrade, EVEN IF IT'S FAR BELOW 1.52V !
> 
> i still have completely ZERO respect for a few jerks here and on XTremesystems for flaming and insulting me for degrading northwood P4 3.4C chips (WITHOUT EVEN RUNNING PRIME ON THOSE TISSUE PAPER CHIPS); stock vcore 1.5v....all it took to degrade those was >1.65v and GAME ON IT.
> 
> People wonder why I don't care about nor respect anyone anymore and why I have virtually no friends. Well--you caused it with your insulting people who KNEW More and worked more than you, who found problems, so deal with it. You won't live on this planet forever anyway. (Not referring to the poster above who admitted degradation does happen).
> 
> Sue me if you don't like what I just said. You can't do ANYTHING to me.


You aren't the only one, @DarkWizzie had issues too, they are the ones who post the recommended safe voltages that this community mostly follows lol.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AshBorer*
> 
> just out of curiosity, what will happen if you try to set your vcore to like 2.5V? Will it boot then immediately burn out? will it not even boot? Instant CPU death?


My guess is it would boot just fine. It would just slowly die within the next 60 minutes or so if any load whatsoever is placed on it. IIRC Buildzoid took about 40 minutes to kill an Athlon with 1.8V and he needed Cinebench to do it.


----------



## Falkentyne

You can't boot with 2.0v, as far as I know, on any current system. If you're talking about something like 1.75v and higher, that can only be done via a "LN2" jumper for subzero benching, usually done by people going for world records, or sponsored benchers who get free hardware from companies (their tests and marketing sells products).

If you mean a suicidial normal voltage like 1.65v, system may fail to boot, OCP may kick in, without some sort of override for it.
If you force the override and aren't on LN2, the processor will most likely be permanently damaged as soon as any load is put on it.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> You aren't the only one, @DarkWizzie had issues too, they are the ones who post the recommended safe voltages that this community mostly follows lol.
> My guess is it would boot just fine. It would just slowly die within the next 60 minutes or so if any load whatsoever is placed on it. IIRC Buildzoid took about 40 minutes to kill an Athlon with 1.8V and he needed Cinebench to do it.


Sorry if I seem bitter. Years and years of drama, betrayal, disappointment, my own personal mental issues, and that combined with losing contact (as I mentioned in a post with no replies, a half cambodian/half vietnamese friend whose first name may have been "Whit" (sounds like Whyt or Rit, but definitely with a W sound) and last name Nguyen, but I do NOT know the spelling of the first name, only the sound (the exact sound) many years ago, have made me this dark person I am now. Sorry.


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Sorry if I seem bitter. Years and years of drama, betrayal, disappointment, my own personal mental issues, and that combined with losing contact (as I mentioned in a post with no replies, a half cambodian/half vietnamese friend whose first name may have been "Whit" (sounds like Whyt or Rit, but definitely with a W sound) and last name Nguyen, but I do NOT know the spelling of the first name, only the sound (the exact sound) many years ago, have made me this dark person I am now. Sorry.


Try Nguyet, its a common name for girls and the pronunciation amongst Saigon people is similar to whi-et. Quyet is the male equivalent also pronounced similar to whit depending on the region.

People from southern vietnam pronounce their Q and Ng with a W sound. People from the middle of Vietnam pronounce both with a Y sound and people from the north pronounce with a distinct western Q and Ng.


----------



## Falkentyne

Thank you. I'll try that. I'll hope for the best, as that is a lead, but he was half cambodian and I still remember very vividly he pronounced his name with a strong "W" sound, as I was confused the first time I heard it. So I'll have to balance it out and look for both "Whit" and "Quyet", just in case his first name was not vietnamese based, and God knows what "Whit" could be if it was Cambodian/Khmer.

If I somehow manage to find him (I have very VERY critical cues that would rekindle a memory from 25 years ago) it would be the most significant, monumental thing ever in my life. And would undo a great evil that was done (which made me lose his phone# in 1992).

Cues: Westminster, California, Time Out (Cerritos Mall), Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (Konami arcade), TMNT2 (turtles in time); his favorites arcade games of the time, and Chess...

Ok back to topic, guys, sorry. I''m just struggling so much here....


----------



## Dasboogieman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Thank you. I'll try that. I'll hope for the best, as that is a lead, but he was half cambodian and I still remember very vividly he pronounced his name with a strong "W" sound, as I was confused the first time I heard it. So I'll have to balance it out and look for both "Whit" and "Quyet", just in case his first name was not vietnamese based, and God knows what "Whit" could be if it was Cambodian/Khmer.
> 
> If I somehow manage to find him (I have very VERY critical cues that would rekindle a memory from 25 years ago) it would be the most significant, monumental thing ever in my life. And would undo a great evil that was done (which made me lose his phone# in 1992).
> 
> Cues: Westminster, California, Time Out (Cerritos Mall), Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (Konami arcade), TMNT2 (turtles in time); his favorites arcade games of the time, and Chess...
> 
> Ok back to topic, guys, sorry. I''m just struggling so much here....


Whit is an uncommon phonetic for native Khmer/Cambodian. They tend to follow an almost Indian/Hindu phonetics. W sounds are predominantly viet.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dasboogieman*
> 
> Whit is an uncommon phonetic for native Khmer/Cambodian. They tend to follow an almost Indian/Hindu phonetics. W sounds are predominantly viet.


Hi, I sent you an important PM, if you have the time...
Thank you!


----------



## Bogga

Hi again my fellow clockers...

Sat down this morning and started overclocking my delided 7700k. But since the beginning of time I've used ASUS and now I'm on a Gigabyte mobo... so I'm totally lost. I followed a guide I found which took me through settings to reach 5ghz with nice pictures so I couldn't do anything wrong (I hope







)

https://view.joomag.com/gigabyte-z270-overclocking-guide-gigabyte-200-series-overclocking-guide/0767815001483933769

But let's say I want to use offset. Do I leave/set vcore at normal and then use DVID as the offset? Let's say vcore at normal is 1.245 and I need 1.33 for a stable overclock. Do I set DVID to +0.085... Now it's no guarantee that this would be stable. But if we assume it is, then that would be the correct way? I read somewhere else that C-states should be left enabled for this, is that correct as well?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Hi again my fellow clockers...
> 
> Sat down this morning and started overclocking my delided 7700k. But since the beginning of time I've used ASUS and now I'm on a Gigabyte mobo... so I'm totally lost. I followed a guide I found which took me through settings to reach 5ghz with nice pictures so I couldn't do anything wrong (I hope
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> https://view.joomag.com/gigabyte-z270-overclocking-guide-gigabyte-200-series-overclocking-guide/0767815001483933769
> 
> But let's say I want to use offset. Do I leave/set vcore at normal and then use DVID as the offset? Let's say vcore at normal is 1.245 and I need 1.33 for a stable overclock. Do I set DVID to +0.085... Now it's no guarantee that this would be stable. But if we assume it is, then that would be the correct way? I read somewhere else that C-states should be left enabled for this, is that correct as well?


Yes that is how you set the settings for offset. It works perfect on my Gigabyte motherboard.


----------



## Bogga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yes that is how you set the settings for offset. It works perfect on my Gigabyte motherboard.


So c-states left enabled and normal vcore with plus voltage on dvid so I reach the desired vcore...

Guess I'll try it out this weekend


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yes that is how you set the settings for offset. It works perfect on my Gigabyte motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> So c-states left enabled and normal vcore with plus voltage on dvid so I reach the desired vcore...
> 
> Guess I'll try it out this weekend
Click to expand...

Yes that is exactly how you set Dynamic DVID Vcore for less ware and power savings.

I have c-states enabled and Speed step, they only run when the CPU is idle with no load so it does not effect overclocking.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bogga*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yes that is how you set the settings for offset. It works perfect on my Gigabyte motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> So c-states left enabled and normal vcore with plus voltage on dvid so I reach the desired vcore...
> 
> Guess I'll try it out this weekend
Click to expand...

I also want to mention when looking for what is needed for Vcore, just leave Vcore on Auto and overclock in small steps starting from the highest turbo ratio and see what the the Vcore runs on it's own with a stress test then set what you need.


----------



## pcixopatt

I'am full stable on 7700k 5GHZ,on 1.355 voltage.Is it good voltage?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pcixopatt*
> 
> I'am full stable on 7700k 5GHZ,on 1.355 voltage.Is it good voltage?


Voltage is fine


----------



## pcixopatt

I have 7700k.What means vccpll oc?I lowering this and get less heat about 10c on aida fpu test max core 68c.I have 5ghz and how much i can lower this?


----------



## brozo

Hey everyone. First post, second overclocked build. Wanted to build up a decent gaming rig for a family member's Christmas gift.

I had a hell of a time figuring out why I couldn't get any more than 4.5GHz out of the system before manually setting PLL. I was hoping for another lottery unicorn 5GHz chip but I'm happy with the results nonetheless.

Set by step overclocking methodology, build links, and pre/post OC benchmarks: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1n2RP5f_684fnbq1kn_ceXsCeU1DcqoHXXGSese88XPg/

Code:



Code:


Username: brozo
CPU Model: i5-7600k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 48
Core Frequency: 4.8
Cache Frequency: 4.0
Vcore in UEFI: 1.37
Vcore: 1.376
FCLK: 800
Cooling Solution: h100i v2 + delidded 
Stability Test: OCCT 4.5.1 64MB 8T 64bit 1hr and x264 16T 15hr
Batch Number: Vietnam X724C075
Ram Speed: 3200 16-18-18-36 2T 
Ram Voltage: 1.35V
VCCIO: 1.175
VCCSA: 1.15
Motherboard: ASRock z270m Pro4
LLC Setting: Level 2
Misc Comments: AVX offset 0. PLL 1.005V

*OCCT 4.5.1 64MB 8T 64bit 1hr*


*x264 16T 15hr*


----------



## sammaz

i5 7600k @ 48Ghz-Core
Enermax Liqmax 120 aio cpu cooler
16G Corsair Vengenge LED DDR4 3200 XMP
MSI z270i mobo
EVGA 1080 Ti black edition gaming
650W EVGA psu

I am able to run 24+ hours of Realbench at 1.24V on the CPU in bios...(Real world is 1.26 under load, 1.24 idle)

When running OCCT or Prime95 I must increase my voltages to 1.32V on the CPU in bios (Real world 1.35 under load, 1.32 idle)

Since I use this machine only for room scale VR gaming I have never had any stability problems running at 1.24V 4.8Ghz

Is there a way that I can set the power to scale to 1.32V only when those extreme benchmarks like OCCT and Prime95 are under heavy load? I would like it to be at 1.24V 4.8Ghz whn in VR and gaming.

Is this possible?

Thanks all!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sammaz*
> 
> i5 7600k @ 48Ghz-Core
> Enermax Liqmax 120 aio cpu cooler
> 16G Corsair Vengenge LED DDR4 3200 XMP
> MSI z270i mobo
> EVGA 1080 Ti black edition gaming
> 650W EVGA psu
> 
> I am able to run 24+ hours of Realbench at 1.24V on the CPU in bios...(Real world is 1.26 under load, 1.24 idle)
> 
> When running OCCT or Prime95 I must increase my voltages to 1.32V on the CPU in bios (Real world 1.35 under load, 1.32 idle)
> 
> Since I use this machine only for room scale VR gaming I have never had any stability problems running at 1.24V 4.8Ghz
> 
> Is there a way that I can set the power to scale to 1.32V only when those extreme benchmarks like OCCT and Prime95 are under heavy load? I would like it to be at 1.24V 4.8Ghz whn in VR and gaming.
> 
> Is this possible?
> 
> Thanks all!


Using adaptive Vcore will adjust voltage according to load. It works off VID scaling and load.


----------



## AshBorer

For a 7700k, 1.375v is fairly safe long term, right? Because that's what it looks like mine overclocked to 5GHz requires.

I looked in the OP and it said 1.45/1.37 for recommended vcore voltage. I don't know why there are two numbers, but my 1.375 basically on par with one of those figures.


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AshBorer*
> 
> For a 7700k, 1.375v is fairly safe long term, right? Because that's what it looks like mine overclocked to 5GHz requires.
> 
> I looked in the OP and it said 1.45/1.37 for recommended vcore voltage. I don't know why there are two numbers, but my 1.375 basically on par with one of those figures.


1.375V is perfectly fine for 24/7 use, I ran my [email protected] for nearly a year without any issues


----------



## Horakur333

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AshBorer*
> 
> For a 7700k, 1.375v is fairly safe long term, right? Because that's what it looks like mine overclocked to 5GHz requires.
> 
> I looked in the OP and it said 1.45/1.37 for recommended vcore voltage. I don't know why there are two numbers, but my 1.375 basically on par with one of those figures.


I've been running my 7700K for almost a year at 1.373V / 5.0ghz / RAM OC'd 3200mhz with all Intel power management & C States turned off which means whenever it's turned on its at 1.373V / 5.0ghz with no problems. Probably turned on for at least 4 - 8 hours per day every day of the week. I have done some serious heat management though as this chip runs extremely hot. To make it possible to stay at or under 70c on synthetic benchmark loads required deliding with a liquid metal thermal paste replacement for the grey peanut butter Intel put in between the die and IHS, 240mm AIO & elaborate system of fans. Heat over 80c all the time can definitely cause more problems than voltage being near 1.40v

So as long as you have some type of cooling solution in place that can handle the temps, I'd say yes you should be good


----------



## AshBorer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Horakur333*
> 
> I've been running my 7700K for almost a year at 1.373V / 5.0ghz / RAM OC'd 3200mhz with all Intel power management & C States turned off which means whenever it's turned on its at 1.373V / 5.0ghz with no problems. Probably turned on for at least 4 - 8 hours per day every day of the week. I have done some serious heat management though as this chip runs extremely hot. To make it possible to stay at or under 70c on synthetic benchmark loads required deliding with a liquid metal thermal paste replacement for the grey peanut butter Intel put in between the die and IHS, 240mm AIO & elaborate system of fans. Heat over 80c all the time can definitely cause more problems than voltage being near 1.40v
> 
> So as long as you have some type of cooling solution in place that can handle the temps, I'd say yes you should be good


I have delidded and the max temp I'm hitting is around 78C using prime 95 v27.9. Under normal use it rarely eclipses 70C. I'm using a True Spirit 140 Power as my cooler.

Glad to hear that 1.375v is fine. My temps aren't an issue either as far as I can tell. In fact before I delidded in p95 i was reaching 87C with 1.28 V, so im using a lot more voltage and getting a 10C drop in temp (was a 20C drop with the same voltage). I just delidded this week in really excited about the result.

Thanks for the replies guys


----------



## PanzerIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Whats the default CPU PLL, mines defaulting to 1.25v on Auto with a 9 Hero.


Does the CPU PLL voltage change depending on the cpu used or its a fixed number set by the board maker that varies from Asus to Gigabyte, MSI etc?

On my *MSI Krait Gaming Z370* it is blank in the bios when i look for voltage so i cant know how much is being used. The info on the right says default is suppose to be 1.20v and on my i5 8600K i had a 4.7Ghz lame OC stable with Vcore 1.35v and all other voltage on Auto but as soon as i tryed PLL at 1.0v which is just 0.20v under default yet most people like Asus is rated quite lower than my PLL and now MY COMPUTER IS BRICKED!!!









I tryed clearing cmos and it still wont boot! The ez debug led is stuck at first step out of 4, which is *(CPU Undetected or Fail)* and it stays there no matter what. I tryed changing ram slot, removing the vga etc nothing works. The GTX1080 fans wont spin and i get no signal, no lights on kb or whatsoever... How the F can trying to boot once with a PLL of 1.0v instead of 1.2v. Can kill my 335$ CPU!?

So lucky it has to be Jan 1st 2018 so everything is closed and i cant do anything during my only day off...


----------



## v10killer

Username: v10killer
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5.31Ghz
Reference Clock: 106Mhz
Cache Frequency: 5.3Ghz
Vcore in BIOS: 1.395
Vcore: 1.408
Cooling Solution: Delidded with Grizzly Conductonaut and Lapped, Custom Loop 360mm rad and 280mm rad
Stability Test: 8 hours realbench

link to firestrike score








https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24349039?


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PanzerIV*
> 
> Does the CPU PLL voltage change depending on the cpu used or its a fixed number set by the board maker that varies from Asus to Gigabyte, MSI etc?
> 
> On my *MSI Krait Gaming Z370* it is blank in the bios when i look for voltage so i cant know how much is being used. The info on the right says default is suppose to be 1.20v and on my i5 8600K i had a 4.7Ghz lame OC stable with Vcore 1.35v and all other voltage on Auto but as soon as i tryed PLL at 1.0v which is just 0.20v under default yet most people like Asus is rated quite lower than my PLL and now MY COMPUTER IS BRICKED!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I tryed clearing cmos and it still wont boot! The ez debug led is stuck at first step out of 4, which is *(CPU Undetected or Fail)* and it stays there no matter what. I tryed changing ram slot, removing the vga etc nothing works. The GTX1080 fans wont spin and i get no signal, no lights on kb or whatsoever... How the F can trying to boot once with a PLL of 1.0v instead of 1.2v. Can kill my 335$ CPU!?


I have no clue on your particular motherboard, but some manufacturers (read: gigabyte) have a "CPU/PLL overvoltage" setting, which is an offset value, defaults to 0. Just a hunch, but if your MB had a similar option you may have tried +1.0 overvoltage, and it's easy to imagine how 2.2V instead of 1.2V could fry stuff on boot. ..


----------



## v10killer




----------



## PanzerIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kalpa*
> 
> I have no clue on your particular motherboard, but some manufacturers (read: gigabyte) have a "CPU/PLL overvoltage" setting, which is an offset value, defaults to 0. Just a hunch, but if your MB had a similar option you may have tried +1.0 overvoltage, and it's easy to imagine how 2.2V instead of 1.2V could fry stuff on boot. ..


Oh trust me it wasn't an offset and I've already tryed 1.25v with zero issue, or the bios default 1.20v so that's why I find it odd that 1.00v would kill the CPU instantly.

Usually one would just reset the CMOS but it won't reset or maybe it did and it's just the CPU that died out of nowhere as still nothing. I'll have to create an RMA with the store today, that really pissed me off garbage MSI board, they could have kept their dual bios I had on a cheaper Z87 model 4 years ago.


----------



## v10killer

MSI mobo's are hit and miss really. Thats the case for all brands I believe. I honestly think that shipping is hard on them. This is my 3rd one. Seems to be a good one though.


----------



## Kalpa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PanzerIV*
> 
> Oh trust me it wasn't an offset and I've already tryed 1.25v with zero issue, or the bios default 1.20v so that's why I find it odd that 1.00v would kill the CPU instantly.
> 
> Usually one would just reset the CMOS but it won't reset or maybe it did and it's just the CPU that died out of nowhere as still nothing. I'll have to create an RMA with the store today, that really pissed me off garbage MSI board, they could have kept their dual bios I had on a cheaper Z87 model 4 years ago.


Yup it was just a wild guess (and pretty much the only thing I could think of), with the supposedly improved PLL controls in Z370 boards I'm even more clueless as usual to what the different vendors' BIOSes are like.


----------



## moorhen2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *v10killer*
> 
> Username: v10killer
> CPU Model: 7700k
> Base Clock: 4200
> Core Multiplier: 50
> Core Frequency: 5.31Ghz
> Reference Clock: 106Mhz
> Cache Frequency: 5.3Ghz
> Vcore in BIOS: 1.395
> Vcore: 1.408
> Cooling Solution: Delidded with Grizzly Conductonaut and Lapped, Custom Loop 360mm rad and 280mm rad
> Stability Test: 8 hours realbench
> 
> link to firestrike score
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/24349039?


No screenies of your 8 hour Realbench run then at those uncore and core frequencies ??


----------



## ducegt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moorhen2*
> 
> No screenies of your 8 hour Realbench run then at those uncore and core frequencies ??


3dmark's 30 second bench that pulled 75w and peeked at 65C not enough?









My 7700K can do 3dmark at 5.4ghz with 280mm AIO.


----------



## Teiji

Hello, I just delidded and overclocked my 7700K to 5Ghz. Voltage set in BIOS is 1.36 with LLC 4 and AVX offset 2. In HWinfo, it shows 1.38 max. Realbench 30min passed with max temp at 86C, but in game I get 74C max (usually hover around 45-60s though).

I'm perfectly fine with temps, but I'm wondering *is it safe to run at 1.38 vcore for years (preferably 2-3 years before I upgrade to new CPU)?* I don't run my PC 24/7, but I do game, VR, and watch video with SVP Pro (which uses the CPU a lot more than regular users) 4 hours a day and 12h+ on weekends when I'm off.

Spec:
7700K 5Ghz 1.36 vcore BIOS (1.38 in OS)
Asus Z270E
Noctua NH-D15 cooler
ASUS GeForce GTX 1080
CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 3000 XMP
Corsair HX1000i 1000W


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Teiji*
> 
> Hello, I just delidded and overclocked my 7700K to 5Ghz. Voltage set in BIOS is 1.36 with LLC 4 and AVX offset 2. In HWinfo, it shows 1.38 max. Realbench 30min passed with max temp at 86C, but in game I get 74C max (usually hover around 45-60s though).
> 
> I'm perfectly fine with temps, but I'm wondering *is it safe to run at 1.38 vcore for years (preferably 2-3 years before I upgrade to new CPU)?* I don't run my PC 24/7, but I do game, VR, and watch video with SVP Pro (which uses the CPU a lot more than regular users) 4 hours a day and 12h+ on weekends when I'm off.
> 
> Spec:
> 7700K 5Ghz 1.36 vcore BIOS (1.38 in OS)
> Asus Z270E
> Noctua NH-D15 cooler
> ASUS GeForce GTX 1080
> CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 3000 XMP
> Corsair HX1000i 1000W


The Vcore will be just fine for 3+ years.


----------



## Teiji

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The Vcore will be just fine for 3+ years.


Awesome, thanks!


----------



## AshBorer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Teiji*
> 
> Awesome, thanks!


Just out of curiosity, do you know what your ambient temps are? Or more importantly the air actually entering your cooler?

In my case (no pun intended), air entering my tower cooler is usually ~1-2C warmer than air entering the case. Its understandable if you don't have any real way to measure that though.


----------



## Teiji

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AshBorer*
> 
> Just out of curiosity, do you know what your ambient temps are? Or more importantly the air actually entering your cooler?
> 
> In my case (no pun intended), air entering my tower cooler is usually ~1-2C warmer than air entering the case. Its understandable if you don't have any real way to measure that though.


Ambient temp during those tests/gaming sessions were 24-25C. Not sure bout the "air actually entering your cooler" part. I have 2x Noctua NF-A14 instrustrialPPC-2000 as front intake (case) fans running at 100%, so I think there should be plenty of fresh air.


----------



## AshBorer

What happens in P95 (version 27.9) after about 15 min with just the standard torture test? My temps always jump like 15C or more haha. . Im guessing thats where it starts making heavy use of AVX instruction sets? Here's my 7700k temps including "ambient" (CPU air intake temp.) 5000Mhz and 1.38 Vcore. My cooler is Thermalright True Spirit 140 Power.

This is what im talking about in prime 95:



Heres some temp data from the custom x264 benchmark that the OP recommends:



And heres an hour of BF1 64player conquest mode, notice the slightly higher ambient temps due to GPU load:



And lastly, this is my build:


----------



## Falkentyne

What test are you using? Small FFT? Blend?
Certain tests draw more power on certain FFT sizes.

It's recommended usually that you run 1344K FFT's in place for a more balanced overall test that is still a heavy load, for testing your CPU.

then you wont have to deal with erratic increases.
And for testing memory, you go to custom and set minimum FFT to 512K and maximum FFT to 4096K and RAM size to 75% of your RAM (e.g. 24576mb if you have 32GB) for memory testing


----------



## AshBorer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> What test are you using? Small FFT? Blend?
> Certain tests draw more power on certain FFT sizes.
> 
> It's recommended usually that you run 1344K FFT's in place for a more balanced overall test that is still a heavy load, for testing your CPU.
> 
> then you wont have to deal with erratic increases.
> And for testing memory, you go to custom and set minimum FFT to 512K and maximum FFT to 4096K and RAM size to 75% of your RAM (e.g. 24576mb if you have 32GB) for memory testing


I didn't change any settings in prime95 as far as i remember. Im not at my computer right now. I think i just pressed "run torture test" or something of that nature.


----------



## Halo_003

I just set up my 7700K system tonight. Only things I did in BIOS were set CPU vcore to 1.225, CPU multiplier to 49, and set RAM frequencies. I haven't done any long term testing yet, just Intel XTU for 60 minutes. From what I have seen though, it is looking like a promising CPU. I will have to take time tomorrow to push and see what it can do, I haven't tried for higher than 4900MHz yet.









When on water is anyone delidding to run direct die? Or are most people remounting the IHS with a better TIM?


----------



## scracy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Halo_003*
> 
> I just set up my 7700K system tonight. Only things I did in BIOS were set CPU vcore to 1.225, CPU multiplier to 49, and set RAM frequencies. I haven't done any long term testing yet, just Intel XTU for 60 minutes. From what I have seen though, it is looking like a promising CPU. I will have to take time tomorrow to push and see what it can do, I haven't tried for higher than 4900MHz yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When on water is anyone delidding to run direct die? Or are most people remounting the IHS with a better TIM?


Bare die is not worth the risk vs the very slight drop in temps you get by doing so


----------



## boomersooner918

Hey all, I just received my i5 7600K and was curious if anyone has seen or had experience with batch #L734C670. There is also a circle with an "e4" just to the right of the batch number, not sure if that is significant. I start overclocking it this weekend so wish me luck.


----------



## tongerks

hello guys. iset in bios 51 multiplier but when it boots to windows its 4.9ghz only?

im using maximus ix hero. please help..

here is my cpuz validation.
https://valid.x86.fr/kulwad


----------



## brozo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tongerks*
> 
> hello guys. iset in bios 51 multiplier but when it boots to windows its 4.9ghz only?
> 
> im using maximus ix hero. please help..
> 
> here is my cpuz validation.
> https://valid.x86.fr/kulwad


If your AVX offset is "-2" you'll see this behavior occasionally. If you have any sort of power saving enabled then your clock speed might be reduced as a result as well.


----------



## tongerks

i dont have avx offset i just leave it on default. and where i can find the power saving on my board? i search it but i didnt find any word related to power savings. i suspect that this something todo with intel turbo boost?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tongerks*
> 
> hello guys. iset in bios 51 multiplier but when it boots to windows its 4.9ghz only?
> 
> im using maximus ix hero. please help..
> 
> here is my cpuz validation.
> https://valid.x86.fr/kulwad


Try increasing the BIOS CPU power limits.


----------



## ducegt

Asrock released the Meltdown fix for the Z270 K6 today and AIDA64's benchmarks show absolutely no performance regression. They also cited "improved memory compatibility" with their updates to every board so I'm curious to see if that effects OCing. Rig at home is running RB for 8 hours to see if OC stability has changed. 5ghz @ 1.264v under load/droop and 1.28v idle. 7700k.


----------



## eskudo12791

Looking for a little help here. Been trying to get a stable 5.0, or heck at this point I would take a stable 4.9.
My setup is as follows:

GIGABYTE AORUS GA-Z270X-Gaming K5
Samsung 960 PRO Series
EVGA SuperNOVA 750 G2
CORSAIR DOMINATOR Platinum Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 DRAM 3000MHz
Corsair Hydro Series, H100i v2

I have attempted the run the system at 5.0 using are core multiplier of 50 and a uncore of 46. For voltage I was starting at 1.365.
The system was stable and ran through several 3D Mark tests, ran well in Prime95 and I was experiencing no issues. Last night though I was playing Wildlands for a few hours and encountered a random reboot.
I then downloaded x264 and began to make a pass, made it about 3 minutes and rebooted.

Where is best to start so that I can squeeze out at least some overclock here?

Thanks ahead of time.


----------



## MikeS3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eskudo12791*
> 
> Looking for a little help here. Been trying to get a stable 5.0, or heck at this point I would take a stable 4.9.
> My setup is as follows:
> 
> GIGABYTE AORUS GA-Z270X-Gaming K5
> Samsung 960 PRO Series
> EVGA SuperNOVA 750 G2
> CORSAIR DOMINATOR Platinum Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 DRAM 3000MHz
> Corsair Hydro Series, H100i v2
> 
> I have attempted the run the system at 5.0 using are core multiplier of 50 and a uncore of 46. For voltage I was starting at 1.365.
> The system was stable and ran through several 3D Mark tests, ran well in Prime95 and I was experiencing no issues. Last night though I was playing Wildlands for a few hours and encountered a random reboot.
> I then downloaded x264 and began to make a pass, made it about 3 minutes and rebooted.
> 
> Where is best to start so that I can squeeze out at least some overclock here?
> 
> Thanks ahead of time.


Drop that uncore down to 42 (default). My CPU does 5.1 but can't handle any uncore overclock. You may need more voltage depending on how your temps are looking. If your'e going for 5.0 without AVX offset then you may need more voltage. x264 uses AVX.


----------



## jamieporter101

New to post here but an old follower. Been reading for years. 

About to attempt to overclock my 7700k on a ASRock Fatality K6.
Cooling with a H100i v2 with Corsair 3200 ram.

Totally confused in this bios as of now but we will see what happens. Deliding was done locally but not impressed and I think there is too much Conductanaunt applied son I oreded some more.

Hope to get some basic help along the way. 

Glad to finally post. 

JP


----------



## Bride

Username: Bride
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 4.2 GHz
Cache Frequency: 4.4 GHz
Core Frequency: 4.8 GHz
Core Multiplier: 48
Reference Clock: 100 MHz
Vcore in BIOS: 1.400 V
Vcore: 1.416 V

Motherboard: Z170A Asrock Z170A-X1-3.1 http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z170A-X13.1/
Batch Number: China L738C406
Cooling Solution: delidded, handmade copper lid, Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra, Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut

Stability Test: 1 hour OCCT


----------



## nrpeyton

Quick question guys.

Are CPU's more or less tolerant to voltage with newer generations?

I.E. would a 45nm CPU last longer being tortured with 1.9v or would a 14nm _(i7 7700k for example)_ last longer at 1.9v?

And whatever answer is given.. is the same true for GPU's?

I'm just curious!

Thanks.


----------



## nrpeyton

Quick question guys.

Are CPU's more or less tolerant to voltage with newer generations?

I.E. would a 45nm CPU last longer being tortured with 1.9v or would a 14nm _(i7 7700k for example)_ last longer at 1.9v?

And whatever answer is given.. is the same true for GPU's?

I'm just curious!

Thanks.


----------



## wingman99

nrpeyton said:


> Quick question guys.
> 
> Are CPU's more or less tolerant to voltage with newer generations?
> 
> I.E. would a 45nm CPU last longer being tortured with 1.9v or would a 14nm _(i7 7700k for example)_ last longer at 1.9v?
> 
> And whatever answer is given.. is the same true for GPU's?
> 
> I'm just curious!
> 
> Thanks.


I would think the 45nm would last longer at 1.9v compared to 14nm at the same temperature do to the larger feature size.


----------



## nrpeyton

Wow this thread really is dead.


----------



## wingman99

What is the stock cache speed MHz of a i7 7700k?


----------



## Falkentyne

3 below maximum non turbo multiplier (so if that's 4200 mhz, then x39).


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> 3 below maximum non turbo multiplier (so if that's 4200 mhz, then x39).


I use to think that was true, how was this done 4500Mhz Cache and CPU 4600GHz? I can only go 3 bellow the maximum turbo multiplier.


----------



## Falkentyne

wingman99 said:


> I use to think that was true, how was this done 4500Mhz Cache and CPU 4600GHz? I can only go 3 bellow the maximum turbo multiplier.


If your Bios has an option, set min and max cache ratio to the same value.
You can do the same thing in Throttlestop if your Bios doesn't have the option for min and max cache multiplier.
Usually not recommended at higher overclocks as this hurts stability for little benefit.


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> If your Bios has an option, set min and max cache ratio to the same value.
> You can do the same thing in Throttlestop if your Bios doesn't have the option for min and max cache multiplier.
> Usually not recommended at higher overclocks as this hurts stability for little benefit.


I can set my cache the same as the CPU overclocked multiplier, however it will only do 300MHz less.


----------



## Falkentyne

You have to set the MINIMUM and maximum to the same value. That overrides that. At least it does on my laptop. I've tested it. But I get instabilities 

If that doesn't work, use Throttlestop 8.50 and set min and max to the exact same value there. I can't go above x44 cache or I start getting too much instability. X45/X45 is just BSOD at full load even at 1.2v which is rock stable at x45/x42.


----------



## wingman99

Falkentyne said:


> You have to set the MINIMUM and maximum to the same value. That overrides that.


I see now, I don't have those options only the cache multiplier.


----------



## Falkentyne

Just use Throttlestop 8.50. You can force min and max to the same value there.


----------



## nrpeyton

In HWINFO64 I have:

CPU Power
CPU Package Power
IA Cores Power

What's the difference. Which one is actually the correct one to use for CPU's power draw in watts?_ (currently they are all showing different values).

_Thanks.


----------



## nrpeyton

jamieporter101 said:


> New to post here but an old follower. Been reading for years.
> 
> About to attempt to overclock my 7700k on a ASRock Fatality K6.
> Cooling with a H100i v2 with Corsair 3200 ram.
> 
> Totally confused in this bios as of now but we will see what happens. Deliding was done locally but not impressed and I think there is too much Conductanaunt applied son I oreded some more.
> 
> Hope to get some basic help along the way.
> 
> Glad to finally post.
> 
> JP


12 phases for 4 cores, have fun


----------



## Prodeje79

I could use some help with my setup. I have a i5-7600k ASUS Z170 Pro Gaming. I am currently at 4.8Ghz 1.345V.

I recently installed a Thermalright Le GRAND MACHO. It is supposedly on par with the Noctua NH-D15, but with one fan and quieter. I used Artic Silver 5 yesterday, so it obviously hasn't fully broken in yet. On a related note, I now have a tube of Thermal Grizzly Kryronaut, so will be putting that on soon.


That being said, I went ahead and ran the x286 custom test with 1,16,normal settings. Closer to the end I definitely hit 90°C. Is that too hot? I can post my HWinfo screenshot. What should I try/do next?


Here are the settings in the ASUS bios. BCLK left at 100.
- Sync All Cores
- 1 core ratio limit 48 (all four)
- CPU Core/Cache Current Limit Auto with Min and Max at 44
- CPU Core/Cache Voltage Manual with CPU core voltage override 1.345V


----------



## hotrod717

Prodeje79 said:


> I could use some help with my setup. I have a i5-7600k ASUS Z170 Pro Gaming. I am currently at 4.8Ghz 1.345V.
> 
> I recently installed a Thermalright Le GRAND MACHO. It is supposedly on par with the Noctua NH-D15, but with one fan and quieter. I used Artic Silver 5 yesterday, so it obviously hasn't fully broken in yet. On a related note, I now have a tube of Thermal Grizzly Kryronaut, so will be putting that on soon.
> 
> 
> That being said, I went ahead and ran the x286 custom test with 1,16,normal settings. Closer to the end I definitely hit 90°C. Is that too hot? I can post my HWinfo screenshot. What should I try/do next?
> 
> 
> Here are the settings in the ASUS bios. BCLK left at 100.
> - Sync All Cores
> - 1 core ratio limit 48 (all four)
> - CPU Core/Cache Current Limit Auto with Min and Max at 44
> - CPU Core/Cache Voltage Manual with CPU core voltage override 1.345V


Check your mount. That's way too high even with AS5. And yes, please use the TG instead. Are you delidded?


----------



## Prodeje79

hotrod717 said:


> Check your mount. That's way too high even with AS5. And yes, please use the TG instead. Are you delidded?


I did remove the monstrosity, clean, and re-apply AS5 yesterday. It definitely ran slightly cooler, but still hit 90 on core 0 and core 3. I am not delidded. I have a Corsair 400r case FYI.

This as5 may be 10 years old too. Hopefully that is the root cause. I'll try the TG after complete removal and remount of whole thing. Edit: this post was because I was still too hot after remount and reapply. Reading several reviews, this thing should match the Noctua, so I should never see above 70 right? https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7986/thermalright-le-grand-macho-rt-cpu-cooler-review/index6.html


----------



## Prodeje79

Completely removed and remounted with TG. No change really. Core 3 actually hit 91 vs 90 previously. Also CPU package hit 94 vs 91 . Also hit core Max 91 vs 90. Technically worse.


----------



## MooMoo

Isn't that normal without delid and that much voltage?

One thing I'm sure, these run like hot potatos without delidding. Consider delidding if you want to shave temps down.


----------



## hotrod717

MooMoo said:


> Isn't that normal without delid and that much voltage?
> 
> One thing I'm sure, these run like hot potatos without delidding. Consider delidding if you want to shave temps down.


 1.34v isnt that much voltage. But, more to the point the case and adequate, cool ventilation makes a difference. I havent ran in a retail case for years. Mountain Mods UFO Extended or open bench table for me. As long as you dont have animals or toddlers, a open bench is same price as a case.


----------



## MooMoo

hotrod717 said:


> 1.34v isnt that much voltage. But, more to the point the case and adequate, cool ventilation makes a difference. I havent ran in a retail case for years. Mountain Mods UFO Extended or open bench table for me. As long as you dont have animals or toddlers, a open bench is same price as a case.


Yea, it isn't much. I put my words a bit wrong there as I meant to refer the voltage he mentioned.

Could you Prodeje79 post pic of your setup/case so we would see if theres something to improve.

If you haven't heard about delidding much, it usually would shave 10-20c off from temps (when done properly) with these kaby lakes.


----------



## Prodeje79

MooMoo said:


> Yea, it isn't much. I put my words a bit wrong there as I meant to refer the voltage he mentioned.
> 
> Could you Prodeje79 post pic of your setup/case so we would see if theres something to improve.
> 
> If you haven't heard about delidding much, it usually would shave 10-20c off from temps (when done properly) with these kaby lakes.


I'll definitely pick up more/different fans for my Corsair 400r case. I prefer silent as possible. Please suggest what and where you'd recommend them.
Maybe a new 140mm for rear exhaust and another 140mm for top exhaust and then maybe and and use a 140mm underneath as intake? pull out all unused drive cages?


Here is my late 1990s desk setup. I am looking to replace soon. I'm kind of embarrassed to share lol
There is all open air around the case, even the back. I dont think it is that constricted. Maybe those drive cages are blocking a lot? I am using NVMe and one 3.5 HDD, so I could pull all of those out. I added pic of the default fan setup. Two 120mm in front and one 120mm in back.
https://imgur.com/a/NqYNW


I also started a reddit thread. I think I am going to pick up the CM h500m when it comes out in a month or two. 
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocki...0k_asus_z170_pro_gaming_help_48ghz_1345v_too/


----------



## Prodeje79

No more responses? 

Finally made it to MicroCenter today! The one two pack of non LED ML140 was gone. I should have reserved it online! I may just order a set online. I went ahead and picked up another 7600k. They said I am welcome to use it and return in unconditionally within the 2 weeks. If it runs much cooler, I may call a manager and see if they will allow even exchange. Naturally they pushed the protection plan on me.

In related news, I shared my situation and this thread for thermalright. They are sending me another Le Grand macho RT so I can eliminate them as the possibility. I am unclear if I need to return my original to them.

I also opened a trouble ticket with intel. Naturally they said it is in the OK range since under 100 basically.

If this CPU runs hot too, I will probably ship my original to silicon lottery for $40. Think I should splurge and have them bin/test it? $20 more and they give them their recommended vcore and AVX offset? I will have to read up on AVX offset and how/if I will use that with my board.

lastly, I've been DYING to get a new case. I am trying to hold out for the h500m. Let me know if you see any crack head deals I should get instead of waiting. Very tempting, digging the SE! http://a.co/9LU0KKk

I had picked up the EVGA CLC 280 but it wouldnt fit in my case!

EDIT: I installed the new CPU and it is ice cold 30 degrees colder at load. I called MC and got a manager. He agreed let me swap CPUs!
This is with identical settings, voltage everything. Reload my album to see my temp comparison. I might as well do a longer test too. If I get to keep this extra Macho, I may send it to someone to review alongside Noctua and AIO water.


----------



## AshBorer

Im pretty sure i had one of the worst 7700ks out there in terms of temperatures. At 1.27V i'd hit 87C in prime 95. Looking more closely at my temps, it was only one of my four cores that was abnormally hot, like 8-10C hotter than the rest. 

post-delid all are within a few degrees of each other, which is nice. At 1.385V and 5.0Ghz im at around 68-70C full load unless running AVX instructions which add another 8C or so.


----------



## shedd

Hey guys, quick question:
During x264 stress test(16t, normal), my image goes black for a second with a few pixelated areas from the previous screen, then goes back to normal. 
I'm sure it's not the monitor shutting off, just the image goes black.
I'm trying to figure out what it means and if it's normal to happen during x264, because I don't get the same thing at all while doing Prime95 with 1344k FFT's.

i7 7700k 4.9Ghz 
Gigabyte Z270X-UD3
Corsair Vengeance 3000Mhz CL15

Vcore 1.32
LLC High
Cache freq 4.5Ghz
AVX Offset 2


----------



## sdmf74

Personally I wouldnt do any stress testing/stability testing till we get some stable bios'


----------



## shedd

Are Gigabyte bios's regarded as unstable?


----------



## pcixopatt

Who knows how to do adaptive Voltage?I have Z270X GAMING 5 5GHZ and Vcore on HWmonitor min and max almost the same.I overclocks in bios or I must use another programm like Intel xtu?


----------



## wingman99

shedd said:


> Are Gigabyte bios's regarded as unstable?


Mine work great, it is very stable 24/7.


----------



## floydstime

Having some trouble OC'ing my rig. I get stable prime95 at 4.9 ghz @1.355 volts with LLC 1. When I go to try 5.0 ghz, I incrementally step up my voltage and it wont even load windows. I stepped it up all the way to 1.405 (stopped there out of fear) was able to get into windows, but it freezes almost instantly. It seems like it is too much of a jump from 4.9 to 5.0. I don't recall previous overclocks having that much of a jump... Should I press the envelope a little more? Should go back to [email protected] then step start stepping from 5 with LLC level 2? Or did I just not win the chip lottery? Any help would be appreciated thanks! Temps are 92C under load with an H110i V2.

My rig.

7600K
Asrock z270m Pro4
Trident Memory
M.2 SSD
Titan X Pascal
850 Watt evga bronze
(I don't think anything else is significant...)

-floydstime


----------



## sdmf74

Youve hit a wall with your chip, also your thermally limited


----------



## shedd

Could also be his motherboard holding the chip back.
This thread might have some useful info for you about the motherboard http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4282&title=7700k-z270-extreme4-cant-get-5ghz-stable


----------



## wingman99

floydstime said:


> Having some trouble OC'ing my rig. I get stable prime95 at 4.9 ghz @1.355 volts with LLC 1. When I go to try 5.0 ghz, I incrementally step up my voltage and it wont even load windows. I stepped it up all the way to 1.405 (stopped there out of fear) was able to get into windows, but it freezes almost instantly. It seems like it is too much of a jump from 4.9 to 5.0. I don't recall previous overclocks having that much of a jump... Should I press the envelope a little more? Should go back to [email protected] then step start stepping from 5 with LLC level 2? Or did I just not win the chip lottery? Any help would be appreciated thanks! Temps are 92C under load with an H110i V2.
> 
> My rig.
> 
> 7600K
> Asrock z270m Pro4
> Trident Memory
> M.2 SSD
> Titan X Pascal
> 850 Watt evga bronze
> (I don't think anything else is significant...)
> 
> -floydstime


Try 1.425V Vcore for 5.0. Silicon lottery https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/products/7700k50g


----------



## Kryton

Mine has reached 5.0 on air and did rather well overall, cooler used was an older Tt OCK Frio I had to run with it. 
http://hwbot.org/submission/3808720_
http://hwbot.org/submission/3808449_
http://hwbot.org/submission/3808447_

Did have some very nice ambients when done but the chip responds well, temps did get a little warm but within tolerance (Of course). 
I do plan on delidding it at some point, tried earlier and almost had a disaster trying it so backed off from that for now and just gonna enjoy the chip for what it is. 

However my low RAM speeds are another matter to consider, the board is the obvious cause of it (Maximus IX Hero) and I will be hunting for a different board later.


----------



## floydstime

*Thermal limit*

So I had some errors at [email protected] while using the HTC Vive and so I readjusted the test parameters and got a fail... So I began the process of increasing voltage and got it to 1.37 when my temps spiked to 100C. It looks like I can't even get to 4.9. Could be my board, but I hear this chip needs delidding to do proper OC. I am running [email protected] stable, but I do get issues if I enable AVX when running prime95. I could raise the voltage up, but I hear that is unnecessary because AVX isn't used in most programs and even when it is used (at least for what I use my computer for), the processor isn't pushed hard enough for it to matter. What are your thoughts on this?


----------



## wingman99

It looks like your doing fine. If you want to run a little higher clock speed you will need to delid. The higher temperatures when when increasing the voltage shows the motherboard is doing just fine. The processor is just reaching it's own limits. As of 12/01/17, the top 65% of tested 7600Ks were able to hit 5.0GHz or greater.

I can run 5.0 GHz at 1.4v with my $99.00 Gigabyte Z170 HD3 I just can't prime95 with my cooling and no delid only game.


----------



## AshBorer

Here are my 7700k temps delidded. I can run at 5.0Ghz with about 1.38V, but then my computer has issues booting for whatever reason. Its probably a motherboard issue (MSI Z270 Gaming Pro Carbon). Cooler is a Thermalright TRUE Spirit 140 Power.


----------



## wingman99

floydstime said:


> So I had some errors at [email protected] while using the HTC Vive and so I readjusted the test parameters and got a fail... So I began the process of increasing voltage and got it to 1.37 when my temps spiked to 100C. It looks like I can't even get to 4.9. Could be my board, but I hear this chip needs delidding to do proper OC. I am running [email protected] stable, but I do get issues if I enable AVX when running prime95. I could raise the voltage up, but I hear that is unnecessary because AVX isn't used in most programs and even when it is used (at least for what I use my computer for), the processor isn't pushed hard enough for it to matter. What are your thoughts on this?


I found a review on your motherboard and it is capable of running 5.1GHz with prime95 no AVX with a fan on the VRM.


----------



## shedd

That's Z370 with Coffee Lake CPU though...


----------



## Dnic41

Finally took time to test to 5GHZ with vcore @ 1.25
Max temp on 1hr RealBench was 84C om Core 3 with delidded CPU. 
Not too bad, think I will leave it here since it is air cooled.


----------



## AshBorer

Dnic41 said:


> Finally took time to test to 5GHZ with vcore @ 1.25
> Max temp on 1hr RealBench was 84C om Core 3 with delidded CPU.
> Not too bad, think I will leave it here since it is air cooled.


5GHz @ 1.25V? That's incredibly good!

btw what cooler do you have?


----------



## Krazee

So I completed my delid this weekend with my 7700k and I used Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut. I did reseal it using the Rockit 88 tool. With the overclock of 4.8 at 1.25 v my temps did get up to 81 at two cores during stress tests. I am using a H100i v2 for cooling. I am assuming I have to re-do correct?


----------



## AshBorer

Krazee said:


> So I completed my delid this weekend with my 7700k and I used Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut. I did reseal it using the Rockit 88 tool. With the overclock of 4.8 at 1.25 v my temps did get up to 81 at two cores during stress tests. I am using a H100i v2 for cooling. I am assuming I have to re-do correct?




That is definitely too warm for your OC and voltage with that cooler. Did you put the liquid metal on both the die and the underside of the IHS?


----------



## Krazee

AshBorer said:


> That is definitely too warm for your OC and voltage with that cooler. Did you put the liquid metal on both the die and the underside of the IHS?


Yup I did, I masked both sections off properly before applying. Guess I will have to open it back up


----------



## Dnic41

AshBorer said:


> 5GHz @ 1.25V? That's incredibly good!
> 
> btw what cooler do you have?


My thoughts as well after seeing some of the voltage people are applying. Cryorig H7.


----------



## Krazee

Just redid the delid and now I got 66 the highest. Woot, super excited!


----------



## shedd

Krazee said:


> Just redid the delid and now I got 66 the highest. Woot, super excited!


Nice, what did you do differently this time?


----------



## Krazee

shedd said:


> Nice, what did you do differently this time?


I put a bit less silicone to seal it, even thinner this time around. I added just a tad more liquid metal, it looked like the metal on the dye and IHS never made contact and when resealing I tightened the reseal more. 

It did the trick !


----------



## darcdiaz

Hi All,

I'm new here and this is my first post. I've been trying to find my lowest possible stable voltage for my Core i7 7700K @4.8Ghz - preferably Adaptive voltage. Do you guys usually stress test your for 8 hrs? See my OC settings and stress test below:

CPU: 7700K
Motherboard: Strix Z270E
RAM: 2z 8GB G.Skill Trident Z 3200MHz 
GPU: Strix GTX 1080 Ti - not OC'ed

Username: darcdiaz
CPU Model: 7700K
Base Clock: 4200
Base Frequency: 100
Core Multiplier: 48
Core Frequency: 4800
IA DC Load Line: 0.01
IA AC Load Line: 0.01
Asus Multicore Enchancement: Disabled
Core Cache Voltage: Adaptive
Offset Mode Sign: +
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage: 1.235
Offset Voltage: 0.001
Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage: 1.235
Max Vcore in Aida64: 1.248
Cooling Solution: Delidded, Custom LCS (Dual Radiator - 360 and 240 cooling both CPU and GPU)
DRAM Frequency: 3200Mhz
DRAM Timings: 16 18 18 38
Stability Test: 1 hr (Aida64 Stress Test)

Room Temperature: 28c


----------



## devlamania

I could manage my 7700K to get 4.8 GHz at 1.24v today. Did some stress test in CPUZ and Cinebench, seems stable, 79c max temp (it's summer here).
Problem is, my knowledge is pretty limited to frequency and vCore. I don't know what else to tweak. I don't plan to delid it right now, cause rockit88 and conductonaut is $100 total to ship from amazon to India - pretty costly considering the risk of damaging a $430 CPU. BUT I want to squeeze as much I can keeping below 80c during normal usage. Can anyone guide me with the name of the things I should start tweaking one by one ? I can read about them one by one and take baby steps tweaking them. I have Asus Z270F motherboard.


----------



## Nawafwabs

guys i have problem please help me .!

yesterday i got my CPU after i sent it to someone to Delidd it

so i run my pc with stock speed clock 4.2 and voltage 1.2

my temp jump to 80 when i did stress test by cpu-z

that surprise me and make me scared , i never had temp like this before at stock speed clock

when my cpu temp 80 i never hear my fan noise like before , i see it work at low speed and i cant change speed of fan

i have h100i v2 and it is not pass 6 month with me

i try to reset bios i try everthing and temp jump to high value at strees test

please tell me is that bad delidd or bad water cooling ?


----------



## MooMoo

Nawafwabs said:


> guys i have problem please help me .!
> 
> yesterday i got my CPU after i sent it to someone to Delidd it
> 
> so i run my pc with stock speed clock 4.2 and voltage 1.2
> 
> my temp jump to 80 when i did stress test by cpu-z
> 
> that surprise me and make me scared , i never had temp like this before at stock speed clock
> 
> when my cpu temp 80 i never hear my fan noise like before , i see it work at low speed and i cant change speed of fan
> 
> i have h100i v2 and it is not pass 6 month with me
> 
> i try to reset bios i try everthing and temp jump to high value at strees test
> 
> please tell me is that bad delidd or bad water cooling ?


If the cooler is well seated, then it sounds like there haven't been made any delidding or the delidding went wrong.


----------



## pcixopatt

what is vcplloc?
I lowered from 1.23 to 1.13 temps lowered too.


----------



## AshBorer

I rarely ever stress test for more than an hour. If its stable for an hour under a test i assume that it is stable. If it happens to not be stable - maybe i blue screen within the next few days while gaming - i simply bump the voltage up a little bit until i no longer blue screen anymore. 

If i were using my computer for more productivity tasks - especially if they are work related - i would stress test longer. More likely than not i'd reduce the clock to an easily obtainable overclock with pretty much guaranteed stability though. Like i'd probably back down from from 5Ghz and go to 4.9 or maybe even 4.8 if what im doing is super important.


----------



## shedd

pcixopatt said:


> what is vcplloc?
> I lowered from 1.23 to 1.13 temps lowered too.






Just keep it at 1.2v so your temp readings don't change


----------



## ADWL

devlamania said:


> I could manage my 7700K to get 4.8 GHz at 1.24v today. Did some stress test in CPUZ and Cinebench, seems stable, 79c max temp (it's summer here).
> Problem is, my knowledge is pretty limited to frequency and vCore. I don't know what else to tweak. I don't plan to delid it right now, cause rockit88 and conductonaut is $100 total to ship from amazon to India - pretty costly considering the risk of damaging a $430 CPU. BUT I want to squeeze as much I can keeping below 80c during normal usage. Can anyone guide me with the name of the things I should start tweaking one by one ? I can read about them one by one and take baby steps tweaking them. I have Asus Z270F motherboard.



I am in the same boat. I have been able to get my 7700k stable with the x264 stress test at 4.8 GHz and 1.275v. It will not pass y cruncher over 4.7GHz. It will boot up to 5.0Ghz but will fail any stress test. I can't get it to go any higher than that even applying 1.4v vcore on custom water loop. The temps are about 80 degrees max on real bench stress test. I think I have adjusted everything to allow it to be able able to reach higher temps in terms of power consumption, so maybe we both just had no luck with our chips. What kills me is that I can get the vcore so low, I just want it to be stable with 1.4 so I know I have done everything right.


----------



## Falkentyne

ADWL said:


> I am in the same boat. I have been able to get my 7700k stable with the x264 stress test at 4.8 GHz and 1.275v. It will not pass y cruncher over 4.7GHz. It will boot up to 5.0Ghz but will fail any stress test. I can't get it to go any higher than that even applying 1.4v vcore on custom water loop. The temps are about 80 degrees max on real bench stress test. I think I have adjusted everything to allow it to be able able to reach higher temps in terms of power consumption, so maybe we both just had no luck with our chips. What kills me is that I can get the vcore so low, I just want it to be stable with 1.4 so I know I have done everything right.


Have you tried adjusting VCC_PLL and VCC_PLL_OC (if available in the Bios) by +100mv to +150mv?
Also have you tried DROPPING the CPU cache ratio down to a limit of x42? (you can force a limit of x42 by setting minimum to 8x and maximum to 42x in the Bios).


----------



## ASO7

How can i know the actual PLL voltage when i have it on Auto ?


----------



## Torus15

I've just upgraded from a 4790K to a 7700K and as the Haswell chip was a fairly good overclocker 5.075 GHz at only 1.35 volts I was worried If I got a poor 7700K it might not even be an upgrade.
I'm however fairly impressed so far. I set the Core volts to 1.2 in the BIOS (ASRock Z170 OC Formula) which is 1.178 measured on a multimeter under stress with LLC set to level 2. I started to up the frequency and got to 5.0 GHz before failing Cinebench R15 and 11.5.
I then upper the Vcore to 1.25 in the BIOS giving 1.225v under stress from the multimeter. This got 5.0 Ghz stable but no luck with 5.1 Ghz which needed 1.3 v BIOS, 1.28v Multimeter.
Temperatures wise I was hitting mid to high 70's so I decided to delid and relid with a replacement copper IHS with Thermal Grisley Liquid metal. Temps dropped 19 to 20 degrees, so now low to mid 50's under the exact same conditions and setup.
Upping the frequency to 5.2 GHz has required 1.34 volts in the BIOS or 1.32 on the multimeter.
Now I've plotted a Voltage/frequency graph from 4.9 up to 5.2 GHz and it is a straight line/linear so any guesses how far this little gem will go?
Temps are in the high 50's so that isn't a problem
Oh cooling is a D5 pump with 360 rad.
I was wondering your thoughts on a safe working voltage, I kinda tied to keep my haswell below 1.35v with 1.375 a max for short benchmarks. Is Kaby lake similar?


----------



## Kryton

Yes it's about the same. 
As long as load temps are OK you're doing just fine.


----------



## Torus15

Thanks for the reply.
I got my Haswell from Silicon Lottery in the USA as a 4.9 Ghz bin at 1.3v. At the time no binned Haswells had Vcores over 1.35v, in comparison the higher binned KabyLakes are up to 4.3v or so.
I'm using this system on a test bench mainly for GPU benchmarking competitions so anything above 5.2 Ghz will be reasonable competitive for Ambient.


----------



## dubiousdubber

Current settings:
Core Mult: 49
Cache Mult: 45
Vcore: 1.24
LLC: Mode 5
VCCIO: 0.9
SA: 1.0
RAM: 3000MHz 15-17-17-35 @1.33v

This was the best I could get without temps reaching 80C or above.
Did I screw up my delid, or just get unlucky?
I'm using a Cryorig R1 Ultimate, I can get a stable overclock at higher speeds with higher voltage. 
5.0 is no problem at 1.30v, but my temps hit the mid 80s in a 15 minute run of RealBench.
If I don't overclock my RAM I can get reasonable temps (Max of 82 on one core, the rest at 76) with 5.0 @ 1.35v, but as soon as I overclock my RAM the temperatures shoot up into the mid to high 80s. What gives?


----------



## Kaihekoa

How do you guys recommend stress testing a non-AVX workload?


----------



## Kaihekoa

dubiousdubber said:


> Current settings:
> Core Mult: 49
> Cache Mult: 45
> Vcore: 1.24
> LLC: Mode 5
> VCCIO: 0.9
> SA: 1.0
> RAM: 3000MHz 15-17-17-35 @1.33v
> 
> This was the best I could get without temps reaching 80C or above.
> Did I screw up my delid, or just get unlucky?
> I'm using a Cryorig R1 Ultimate, I can get a stable overclock at higher speeds with higher voltage.
> 5.0 is no problem at 1.30v, but my temps hit the mid 80s in a 15 minute run of RealBench.
> If I don't overclock my RAM I can get reasonable temps (Max of 82 on one core, the rest at 76) with 5.0 @ 1.35v, but as soon as I overclock my RAM the temperatures shoot up into the mid to high 80s. What gives?


Do you have numbers to compare to for before it was delidded? RAM doesn't get hot unless you're putting tons of voltage into it, so I would suspect that perhaps you didn't assemble something properly after relidding and seating the cooler.


----------



## Nenkitsune

Almost killed my motherboard getting it ready to drop my 7700k into it. Was stupid and tried doing it through windows, crashed the PC, then corrupted the main bios lol. Motherboard luckily has dual bios specifically for this reason.

No final settings yet. I need to delid this chip. Right now it's sitting at 4.7ghz, 1.21v running realbench and temps hover between the 80-84c mark

stock voltage this chip wanted was 1.25v soooo it needs a delid, bad. It's really obvious too. My radiator isn't getting anywhere near as warm as my 6600k running at 4.6ghz with 1.34v when it was running between 60-70c at full load.

apparently my 7700k doesn't like my ram overclock, or I messed up the settings a bit cause I had to go from my 3000mhz overclock to the stock 2400mhz clock to get it stable for the time being.


----------



## wingman99

Nenkitsune said:


> Almost killed my motherboard getting it ready to drop my 7700k into it. Was stupid and tried doing it through windows, crashed the PC, then corrupted the main bios lol. Motherboard luckily has dual bios specifically for this reason.
> 
> No final settings yet. I need to delid this chip. Right now it's sitting at 4.7ghz, 1.21v running realbench and temps hover between the 80-84c mark
> 
> stock voltage this chip wanted was 1.25v soooo it needs a delid, bad. It's really obvious too. My radiator isn't getting anywhere near as warm as my 6600k running at 4.6ghz with 1.34v when it was running between 60-70c at full load.
> 
> apparently my 7700k doesn't like my ram overclock, or I messed up the settings a bit cause I had to go from my 3000mhz overclock to the stock 2400mhz clock to get it stable for the time being.


What motherboard do you have?


----------



## Nenkitsune

it's a gigabyte GA-z170xp-sli. I really shouldn't have expected that huge ram overclock to be stable on the new chip so for now I'm working on finding my CPU max stable then I'll move to getting more out of the ram.


----------



## wingman99

Nenkitsune said:


> Almost killed my motherboard getting it ready to drop my 7700k into it. Was stupid and tried doing it through windows, crashed the PC, then corrupted the main bios lol. Motherboard luckily has dual bios specifically for this reason.
> 
> No final settings yet. I need to delid this chip. Right now it's sitting at 4.7ghz, 1.21v running realbench and temps hover between the 80-84c mark
> 
> stock voltage this chip wanted was 1.25v soooo it needs a delid, bad. It's really obvious too. My radiator isn't getting anywhere near as warm as my 6600k running at 4.6ghz with 1.34v when it was running between 60-70c at full load.
> 
> apparently my 7700k doesn't like my ram overclock, or I messed up the settings a bit cause I had to go from my 3000mhz overclock to the stock 2400mhz clock to get it stable for the time being.





Nenkitsune said:


> it's a gigabyte GA-z170xp-sli. I really shouldn't have expected that huge ram overclock to be stable on the new chip so for now I'm working on finding my CPU max stable then I'll move to getting more out of the ram.


Interesting I have a Gigabyte. How did you know the backup BIOS kicked in?


----------



## Nenkitsune

because the main bios was so corrupted that it required clearing the cmos and once I got into the bios and reset my settings and rebooted, it would instantly go into a no-post boot loop where the fans would kick for a second then shut down and attempt to boot again. Even with 100% default settings. I also figured the bios must have gotten corrupted because the updater only got to like 10% complete when the pc crashed.

any attempt to load the system normally caused boot loops and clearing cmos it seems triggered the backup bios to kick in. 

Once I updated the bios through the bios using a thumbstick I saw that once it successfully flashes the new version, it then copies it over to the backup chip. Makes sense doing it that way to ensure it doesn't totally brick the board.

also, the new gigabyte bios skin is horrible and ugly as sin. this is the old style

https://overclocking.guide/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Advanced-CPU-Core-Settings_15-31-24.jpg

the new one is that red skin that's horrible looking in comparison.


----------



## wingman99

Nenkitsune said:


> because the main bios was so corrupted that it required clearing the cmos and once I got into the bios and reset my settings and rebooted, it would instantly go into a no-post boot loop where the fans would kick for a second then shut down and attempt to boot again. Even with 100% default settings. I also figured the bios must have gotten corrupted because the updater only got to like 10% complete when the pc crashed.
> 
> any attempt to load the system normally caused boot loops and clearing cmos it seems triggered the backup bios to kick in.
> 
> Once I updated the bios through the bios using a thumbstick I saw that once it successfully flashes the new version, it then copies it over to the backup chip. Makes sense doing it that way to ensure it doesn't totally brick the board.
> 
> also, the new gigabyte bios skin is horrible and ugly as sin. this is the old style
> 
> https://overclocking.guide/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Advanced-CPU-Core-Settings_15-31-24.jpg
> 
> the new one is that red skin that's horrible looking in comparison.


The way the backup BIOS works it clears the whole main BIOS including the preset saves. Sounds like you just had improper settings and cleared only the CMOS.


----------



## Nenkitsune

no, it wasn't just improper settings. Even optimized defaults would fail to post. I broke the bios in a way that caused it to become unable to post. So the only thing I can think is that clearing cmos was causing it to fall back to booting from the backup or something.

clearing cmos is supposed to cause it to boot optimized defaults, but once I got into the bios, rebooting using optimized defaults was causing bootloops till i reflashed.


----------



## wingman99

Nenkitsune said:


> no, it wasn't just improper settings. Even optimized defaults would fail to post. I broke the bios in a way that caused it to become unable to post. So the only thing I can think is that clearing cmos was causing it to fall back to booting from the backup or something.
> 
> clearing cmos is supposed to cause it to boot optimized defaults, but once I got into the bios, rebooting using optimized defaults was causing bootloops till i reflashed.


I don't know how you can flash Gigabyte if it is bootlooping? The BIOS has to post with default BIOS setup settings for you to flash.:headscrat


----------



## Nenkitsune

I could clear the cmos and get into the bios. Exiting the bios would start the bootloop until I cleared the cmos again. Basically you could boot the PC one time, get into the bios, but if you ever exited the bios you would have to reset the cmos again. And you could not boot the pc into windows after clearing the cmos because it would automatically halt the boot because of the cmos clear and send you to the bios menu to set it back up.

it was a really strange situation. at least I was able to even get into the bios so I could flash the new version.


----------



## 2ndLastJedi

dubiousdubber said:


> Current settings:
> Core Mult: 49
> Cache Mult: 45
> Vcore: 1.24
> LLC: Mode 5
> VCCIO: 0.9
> SA: 1.0
> RAM: 3000MHz 15-17-17-35 @1.33v
> 
> This was the best I could get without temps reaching 80C or above.
> Did I screw up my delid, or just get unlucky?
> I'm using a Cryorig R1 Ultimate, I can get a stable overclock at higher speeds with higher voltage.
> 5.0 is no problem at 1.30v, but my temps hit the mid 80s in a 15 minute run of RealBench.
> If I don't overclock my RAM I can get reasonable temps (Max of 82 on one core, the rest at 76) with 5.0 @ 1.35v, but as soon as I overclock my RAM the temperatures shoot up into the mid to high 80s. What gives?


What have you done with the VCCPPL_OC voltage? I dont seem to have that voltage but only VCCPLL. 
When i enable XMP my temps jumps 10-15 C with 3000 c15 Trident Z. 
I lowered VCCPLL from 1.2 to 1.1 and temps dropped 15C but im not sure this is a correct teading after what ive read about incorrect readings after adjusting VCCPPL_OC but is that the same as VCCPLL?
Im using [email protected] @1.235 on Z170 extreme4 Asrock.


----------



## Nenkitsune

Username:Nenkitsune
CPU Model:7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 47
Core Frequency: 4.7ghz
Cache Frequency: 4.4ghz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.23
Vcore: 1.224
FCLK: 1000
Cooling Solution: Silverstone TD-02 LITE
Stability Test: 8hr real bench
Batch Number: X735C746
Ram Speed: 2400MHZ 15-15-15-35 1T
Ram Voltage:1.35
VCCIO:
VCCSA: 
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z170-XP-SLI
LLC Setting: High
Misc Comments: Not delidded, thermal limited.


----------



## 2ndLastJedi

2ndLastJedi said:


> dubiousdubber said:
> 
> 
> 
> Current settings:
> Core Mult: 49
> Cache Mult: 45
> Vcore: 1.24
> LLC: Mode 5
> VCCIO: 0.9
> SA: 1.0
> RAM: 3000MHz 15-17-17-35 @1.33v
> 
> This was the best I could get without temps reaching 80C or above.
> Did I screw up my delid, or just get unlucky?
> I'm using a Cryorig R1 Ultimate, I can get a stable overclock at higher speeds with higher voltage.
> 5.0 is no problem at 1.30v, but my temps hit the mid 80s in a 15 minute run of RealBench.
> If I don't overclock my RAM I can get reasonable temps (Max of 82 on one core, the rest at 76) with 5.0 @ 1.35v, but as soon as I overclock my RAM the temperatures shoot up into the mid to high 80s. What gives?
> 
> 
> 
> What have you done with the VCCPPL_OC voltage? I dont seem to have that voltage but only VCCPLL.
> When i enable XMP my temps jumps 10-15 C with 3000 c15 Trident Z.
> I lowered VCCPLL from 1.2 to 1.1 and temps dropped 15C but im not sure this is a correct teading after what ive read about incorrect readings after adjusting VCCPPL_OC but is that the same as VCCPLL?
> Im using [email protected] @1.235 on Z170 extreme4 Asrock.
Click to expand...

Is no one able to help me with VCCPPL Compard to VCCPPL_ OC ?
Are they different as my bios only has VCCPPL !


----------



## BoredErica

Friends, charting has been closed for a long while now, since Coffee Lake launched.


----------



## 2ndLastJedi

Why does it need to be closed ? 
Some are still rocking a Kaby Lake !


----------



## p00pee

dubiousdubber said:


> Current settings:
> Core Mult: 49
> Cache Mult: 45
> Vcore: 1.24
> LLC: Mode 5
> VCCIO: 0.9
> SA: 1.0
> RAM: 3000MHz 15-17-17-35 @1.33v
> 
> This was the best I could get without temps reaching 80C or above.
> Did I screw up my delid, or just get unlucky?
> I'm using a Cryorig R1 Ultimate, I can get a stable overclock at higher speeds with higher voltage.
> 5.0 is no problem at 1.30v, but my temps hit the mid 80s in a 15 minute run of RealBench.
> If I don't overclock my RAM I can get reasonable temps (Max of 82 on one core, the rest at 76) with 5.0 @ 1.35v, but as soon as I overclock my RAM the temperatures shoot up into the mid to high 80s. What gives?





2ndLastJedi said:


> Is no one able to help me with VCCPPL Compard to VCCPPL_ OC ?
> Are they different as my bios only has VCCPPL !


VCCPLL (that's how its written) stands for Voltage used by the CPU clock multiplier Phase-Locked Loop and that's used for extreme OC (-0 c) wich is effecting your T_sensors. 
VCCPLL_OC is the same term but used in Gigabyte MOBO.
honestly i think the problem is your CPU cooler, use water cooler especially with 5.0gHz


----------



## Rygar1976

I recently had heat spike issues on my PC and through process of elimination realized my Corsair H100 v2 AIO was going bad. While waiting for the advanced RMA to arrive, I de-clocked my i7-7700k back to stock 4.2, turned off all turbo, set avx offset to -2 and set my RAM to 2166. This kept my heat well in check until I could get everything fixed.
I originally thought the heat issue might be due to needing to replace the liquid metal after hearing some people say it might need to be replaced after a year or so.

Due to that, I ended up buying the custom copper IHS from rockit cool thats 15% larger, so I went ahead and re-did the delidding/relidding process again to replace the IHS. Here are my specs for reference, when overclocked:

CPU: i7-7700k de-lidded, Conductonaut Liquid metal on die and IHS
Custom all copper, 15% larger IHS (lid) from Rockit cool 
Kryonaut thermal grease
Overclocked to 5.0 GHz on all 4 cores at 1.36v
Stock ring speed - set to auto.

Cooler: Recently RMA'd and replaced Corsair H100v2 AIO on front of case
Using 2 fans it came with in push + 2 Corsair Maglev ML 120s in Pull for 4 fan push/pull

Case: Corsair Carbide Series® Clear 600C Inverse ATX Full-Tower Case
Upside down, PSU at the top 
2 x 140mm Corsair fans on the bottom for intake + 1 x 140mm on back for exhaust
All fans set to DC at 100%

Ram: Patriot Viper 2x8GB Kit DDR4 (PC4-29800 - 3733MHz)

GPU: Aorus 1080ti with fans set to 85%

PSU: Corsair RM1000i with fan set to 100% as an extra exhaust fan (PSU on the top of case)

HDs: Samsung EVO 960 NVMe M.2 1TB - Samsung 840 Pro 256GB SSD

Mobo: MSI Z270 Gaming M5 Motherboard


I noticed that with everything overclocked, but my RAM set to 2166 I was getting a maximum of 70c in Prime95 Blend and FFT tests, I would idle in the high 20s to low 30s and in Battlefield 1 (the most CPU intensive game ive played) I was in the 50s, with rare spikes in the lower 60s. 

Once I upped the speed of my RAM, which is only stable at 3333 MHz, my heat in Prime95 jumped to 82c. My idle was now in the high 30s to mid 40s and BF1 ran in the 70s with spikes to 80c. I posted this fact in another thread and a very kind user led me here to this thread.

My RAM (which I just contacted Patriot customer support and RMA about) kind of sucks. XMP2.0 never worked. I wouldn't boot with it set manually to 3733 and at 3600 and 3466 it would boot but give immediate rounding errors in Prime95 even with stock bios settings and CPU clock speeds. At 3333 its stable both at standard CPU clocks and my overclock to 5.0 GHz. However, with auto voltage and timings, it runs at 1.376v and the timings are very slightly off. It will NOT run at 1.35v without rounding errors, even at slower speeds. I assumed the heat issue was just another problem with the RAM. 


I went into BIOS and changed my PLL OC Voltage from Auto (which did not display an actual value) to the default 1.2v. I am now fully overclocked back to 5.0 GHz at 1.36v (which admittedly is auto and can drop a bit) and my RAM is stable at 3333 MHz at 1.376v (auto again.) Yet my temps are now IDENTICAL to what they were with the RAM at 2166 and 1.20v. 

I see here on overclock as well as on Intel and MSI forums, no one ever got to the bottom of this with an actual answer. I figure 1.2v default can't hurt and my temps with it at Auto were still acceptable anyway. Worst case scenario I have issues with my AIO again and my real temps are 10c above whats reported, but honestly, that sounds illogical IMHO.

Has anyone gotten any further with this? Also, is it worth going through with the RMA on the RAM to try and get 3733 or more of a waste of time? I am wondering if the RAM speed issues and XMP2.0 not working is actually due to the MSI z270 Gaming M5. Have people with this board had issues with RAM speeds and XMP, or simply issues with PLL OC Voltage? I was going to use Corsair Vengeance 3600 but it was out of stock and I didn't want to wait... Funny enough, I had the same issue with the MOBO I wanted, so I settled for this one as I have always had good luck with Overclocking on MSI boards in the past. Patience is not my forte lol... id rather run down to our enourmous Frys Electronics and buy everything than wait for delivery lol. 

Thanks!


----------



## buellersdayoff

Use hwinfo64 and check your vccio voltage (cpu memory controller) xmp settings on some boards over do it. At that ram speed you could possibly get away with 1.1-1.2v, if it is higher it would somewhat explain the higher temps. My board asus m8 hero applies over 1.3v for 3200MHz xmp, way too much.


Rygar1976 said:


> I recently had heat spike issues on my PC and through process of elimination realized my Corsair H100 v2 AIO was going bad. While waiting for the advanced RMA to arrive, I de-clocked my i7-7700k back to stock 4.2, turned off all turbo, set avx offset to -2 and set my RAM to 2166. This kept my heat well in check until I could get everything fixed.
> I originally thought the heat issue might be due to needing to replace the liquid metal after hearing some people say it might need to be replaced after a year or so.
> 
> Due to that, I ended up buying the custom copper IHS from rockit cool thats 15% larger, so I went ahead and re-did the delidding/relidding process again to replace the IHS. Here are my specs for reference, when overclocked:
> 
> CPU: i7-7700k de-lidded, Conductonaut Liquid metal on die and IHS
> Custom all copper, 15% larger IHS (lid) from Rockit cool
> Kryonaut thermal grease
> Overclocked to 5.0 GHz on all 4 cores at 1.36v
> Stock ring speed - set to auto.
> 
> Cooler: Recently RMA'd and replaced Corsair H100v2 AIO on front of case
> Using 2 fans it came with in push + 2 Corsair Maglev ML 120s in Pull for 4 fan push/pull
> 
> Case: Corsair Carbide Series[emoji768] Clear 600C Inverse ATX Full-Tower Case
> Upside down, PSU at the top
> 2 x 140mm Corsair fans on the bottom for intake + 1 x 140mm on back for exhaust
> All fans set to DC at 100%
> 
> Ram: Patriot Viper 2x8GB Kit DDR4 (PC4-29800 - 3733MHz)
> 
> GPU: Aorus 1080ti with fans set to 85%
> 
> PSU: Corsair RM1000i with fan set to 100% as an extra exhaust fan (PSU on the top of case)
> 
> HDs: Samsung EVO 960 NVMe M.2 1TB - Samsung 840 Pro 256GB SSD
> 
> Mobo: MSI Z270 Gaming M5 Motherboard
> 
> 
> I noticed that with everything overclocked, but my RAM set to 2166 I was getting a maximum of 70c in Prime95 Blend and FFT tests, I would idle in the high 20s to low 30s and in Battlefield 1 (the most CPU intensive game ive played) I was in the 50s, with rare spikes in the lower 60s.
> 
> Once I upped the speed of my RAM, which is only stable at 3333 MHz, my heat in Prime95 jumped to 82c. My idle was now in the high 30s to mid 40s and BF1 ran in the 70s with spikes to 80c. I posted this fact in another thread and a very kind user led me here to this thread.
> 
> My RAM (which I just contacted Patriot customer support and RMA about) kind of sucks. XMP2.0 never worked. I wouldn't boot with it set manually to 3733 and at 3600 and 3466 it would boot but give immediate rounding errors in Prime95 even with stock bios settings and CPU clock speeds. At 3333 its stable both at standard CPU clocks and my overclock to 5.0 GHz. However, with auto voltage and timings, it runs at 1.376v and the timings are very slightly off. It will NOT run at 1.35v without rounding errors, even at slower speeds. I assumed the heat issue was just another problem with the RAM.
> 
> 
> I went into BIOS and changed my PLL OC Voltage from Auto (which did not display an actual value) to the default 1.2v. I am now fully overclocked back to 5.0 GHz at 1.36v (which admittedly is auto and can drop a bit) and my RAM is stable at 3333 MHz at 1.376v (auto again.) Yet my temps are now IDENTICAL to what they were with the RAM at 2166 and 1.20v.
> 
> I see here on overclock as well as on Intel and MSI forums, no one ever got to the bottom of this with an actual answer. I figure 1.2v default can't hurt and my temps with it at Auto were still acceptable anyway. Worst case scenario I have issues with my AIO again and my real temps are 10c above whats reported, but honestly, that sounds illogical IMHO.
> 
> Has anyone gotten any further with this? Also, is it worth going through with the RMA on the RAM to try and get 3733 or more of a waste of time? I am wondering if the RAM speed issues and XMP2.0 not working is actually due to the MSI z270 Gaming M5. Have people with this board had issues with RAM speeds and XMP, or simply issues with PLL OC Voltage? I was going to use Corsair Vengeance 3600 but it was out of stock and I didn't want to wait... Funny enough, I had the same issue with the MOBO I wanted, so I settled for this one as I have always had good luck with Overclocking on MSI boards in the past. Patience is not my forte lol... id rather run down to our enourmous Frys Electronics and buy everything than wait for delivery lol.
> 
> Thanks!


----------



## Rygar1976

Thanks, I will try that!


----------



## interceptor1910

Hello.
I try to OC my 7700K and I have few problems with it.
Mobo: Z270 Tomahawk
Ram: G.SKILL Ripjaws V [email protected]
gpu: 1050ti
Cooling: NH-D15
Cpu delided with clu under ihs, and TG Kryonaut
First one is with Ram Voltage, at this speed should be 1.35, If I set it manualy it wont boot.
If I set it to 1.36 everything is fine but max voltage is 1.367 and usualy it stays at 1.360
Dunno why it is like that on this mobo.
Now, my OC settings for 4.8
LLC4
Voltage set to Adaptive
Vcore in bios 1.250
Vcore under load 1.312
SA: 1.2
I/O: 1.15
CPU PLL: 1.2
https://i.imgur.com/L8Xn1cd.jpg
Core temps are a bit weird
First two are the same 64C
Last two are much cooler at 56-57C
It's 8C difference
I aim for 5.0, anyone with this mobo can help me a bit, what to change? or just go with higher cpu ratio and voltage?

more photos:
https://imgur.com/a/fc4rB3M
I don't really know what's going on here.
For 4.8 is ok if I set in bios 1.245 but than under load it rise to 1.312
For 4.9 with avx -1 its ok if I set in bios 1.340 but than under load it rise to 1.360
So for 4.8 it rise voltage by 0.070 but for 4.9 just 0.020
also Dram voltage is not ok.
Should run at 1.350 but at auto settings it runs at 1.360-1.367
It I try to set it manualy to 1.350, pc just won't boot.

So far 4.9 at 1.392
https://i.imgur.com/gOqi9HS.png


----------



## anticommon

Hi guys sorry for being *that guy* but I have a few noob-level questions to ask about my system/overclock.



First off, I have a 7700k & 32GB DDR4 3200 (16x2) Corsair ram installed on an Asus Maximus IX Hero motherboard.



Currently, I have the CPU running at a stable 4.9 Ghz @ 1.3v and the ram at 3200mhz 1.35v. This was a pretty basic overclock with limited adjustments in the bios.



What I would like to do is see if I can't get my CPU to 5.1-5.2 Ghz and the ram to 3466+ 3600 pref. I have gotten the CPU to run at 5.1 Ghz with 1.335v but the fourth core always has a P95 failure anywhere from 1-5 minutes in. Usually only on the 7th thread. Bumping the voltage to ~1.365 results in about a 25-30 minute delay before that fourth core takes a dump. I don't know that I want to push the CPU much harder with a higher voltage without considering my cooling - I've currently got a 360x30mm and 240x60?mm radiators in my 750D and the cooling is fine but not exceptional. Would Are there any settings I may be overlooking to try and stabilize that fourth core @ 5.0 or 5.1ghz? I have the LLC option set at 5 to help negate vdroop, and have all cores to sync to the same speed. Perhaps I can set the multiplier for the first three cores to 5.1ghz and the last to 4.9 since I know that is a stable speed? Is it acceptable to have differing multipliers depending on core strength?



I haven't had a lot of time to try and go for a max memory overclock, I've probably done a combined 20 minutes of Aida64 testing between 3333 and 3466 mhz and it seemed fine, but I'd like to make sure it is stable and I'm not entirely sure what test is best suited towards exclusively testing it vs. doing a combined CPU test. The ram defaults to 1.35v (I'm assuming from the XMP profile) but completely locks me out if I try to boot with even 1.36v. I've never had luck overclocking ram past the XMP profiles even before I switched to DDR4, so perhaps a little bit of guidance would go a long way here.



TL;DR: Overclocking noob. 7700k stuck @ 4.9 1.335v. Ram stuck @ 3200mhz cas 15. Need help going higher.



Thank you!



P.S. If there is someplace better for me to ask these questions... please let me know!


----------



## wingman99

anticommon said:


> Hi guys sorry for being *that guy* but I have a few noob-level questions to ask about my system/overclock.
> 
> 
> 
> First off, I have a 7700k & 32GB DDR4 3200 (16x2) Corsair ram installed on an Asus Maximus IX Hero motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> Currently, I have the CPU running at a stable 4.9 Ghz @ 1.3v and the ram at 3200mhz 1.35v. This was a pretty basic overclock with limited adjustments in the bios.
> 
> 
> 
> What I would like to do is see if I can't get my CPU to 5.1-5.2 Ghz and the ram to 3466+ 3600 pref. I have gotten the CPU to run at 5.1 Ghz with 1.335v but the fourth core always has a P95 failure anywhere from 1-5 minutes in. Usually only on the 7th thread. Bumping the voltage to ~1.365 results in about a 25-30 minute delay before that fourth core takes a dump. I don't know that I want to push the CPU much harder with a higher voltage without considering my cooling - I've currently got a 360x30mm and 240x60?mm radiators in my 750D and the cooling is fine but not exceptional. Would Are there any settings I may be overlooking to try and stabilize that fourth core @ 5.0 or 5.1ghz? I have the LLC option set at 5 to help negate vdroop, and have all cores to sync to the same speed. Perhaps I can set the multiplier for the first three cores to 5.1ghz and the last to 4.9 since I know that is a stable speed? Is it acceptable to have differing multipliers depending on core strength?
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't had a lot of time to try and go for a max memory overclock, I've probably done a combined 20 minutes of Aida64 testing between 3333 and 3466 mhz and it seemed fine, but I'd like to make sure it is stable and I'm not entirely sure what test is best suited towards exclusively testing it vs. doing a combined CPU test. The ram defaults to 1.35v (I'm assuming from the XMP profile) but completely locks me out if I try to boot with even 1.36v. I've never had luck overclocking ram past the XMP profiles even before I switched to DDR4, so perhaps a little bit of guidance would go a long way here.
> 
> 
> 
> TL;DR: Overclocking noob. 7700k stuck @ 4.9 1.335v. Ram stuck @ 3200mhz cas 15. Need help going higher.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. If there is someplace better for me to ask these questions... please let me know!


For CPU overclocking read this guide. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/gaming/how-to-overclock.html Maximum Vcore 1.4v and 90c whichever comes first.

For memory try increasing the ram voltage up to 1.45v


----------



## Kuba12

Hi Guys
I am a new person on this forum. 
At the beginning I wanted to say hello and apologize for my rather poor English - I'm 17 years old 
I have a Intel Core i5-7600K with MSI Z270 Gaming Plus, my processor catch a big temperatures. On the desktop I have a 39-46C, I use ThermalGrizzly Kryonaut paste and SilentiumPC Grandis 2 cooling. Searching on the Internet for the solution of my problem I found information about the possibility of changing the *CPU PLL OC Voltage *into smaller ones, I decreased from 1.2 to 1.1. And my temperature on the desktop is 27-33C. My processor is running at 4.6GHz at 1.30. Are these temperatures real? Does anyone have any confirmed information?
Please help.
Regards, Kuba


----------



## wingman99

Kuba12 said:


> Hi Guys
> I am a new person on this forum.
> At the beginning I wanted to say hello and apologize for my rather poor English - I'm 17 years old
> I have a Intel Core i5-7600K with MSI Z270 Gaming Plus, my processor catch a big temperatures. On the desktop I have a 39-46C, I use ThermalGrizzly Kryonaut paste and SilentiumPC Grandis 2 cooling. Searching on the Internet for the solution of my problem I found information about the possibility of changing the *CPU PLL OC Voltage *into smaller ones, I decreased from 1.2 to 1.1. And my temperature on the desktop is 27-33C. My processor is running at 4.6GHz at 1.30. Are these temperatures real? Does anyone have any confirmed information?
> Please help.
> Regards, Kuba


CPU PLL OC Voltage changes the temp sensor reading not the actual processor temperature. Received that information from Intel.


----------



## Kuba12

So set to auto mode?How to improve my temperature? 
Regards


----------



## MooMoo

Kuba12 said:


> So set to auto mode?How to improve my temperature?
> Regards


Delid would be most efficient way to improve your temps. Other ways to improve would be case cooling optimizing, squeezing lower vcore, upgrading cpu cooler. What I've also read messing with PLL OC voltage just messes sensor readings.


----------



## BoredErica

Checking back to say good luck on your overclocks people!


----------



## Kuba12

Thanks for help. Now I am back to auto settings PLL OC. I order delid service for my processor - Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra would be fine for i5-7600K?


----------



## Falkentyne

Kuba12 said:


> Thanks for help. Now I am back to auto settings PLL OC. I order delid service for my processor - Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra would be fine for i5-7600K?


PLL OC Voltage is supposed to be used to avoid "cold bugs" when using subzero cooling. I also believe a similar setting (not sure if it's the same setting) is to be used for high BCLK overclocking (pushing the BCLK far past 100.0 mhz), but I don't know which setting is what exactly There's "PLL OC Voltage", "CPU PLL Voltage offset" and "PLL Termination Voltage", and very little documentation on what is. (PLL Termination Voltage is in the Asus ROG Bios).

Yes, delidding carefully with a PROPER tool.
The best tool is made by the professional overclocker:

https://www.amazon.com/der8auer-Delid-Die-Mate-Heatsink/dp/B01N6T4LD9

This DOES work on the 8700K and 8600K.

There's a Rockit tool that is cheaper but I know nothing about that.


----------



## Kuba12

Thanks but I prefer give my processor to a specialist 
Anyone had an accident that the CPU in idle had 40C and less after delid?
Regards


----------



## MrHarris

interceptor1910 said:


> Hello.
> I try to OC my 7700K and I have few problems with it.
> Mobo: Z270 Tomahawk
> Ram: G.SKILL Ripjaws V [email protected]
> gpu: 1050ti
> Cooling: NH-D15
> Cpu delided with clu under ihs, and TG Kryonaut
> First one is with Ram Voltage, at this speed should be 1.35, If I set it manualy it wont boot.
> If I set it to 1.36 everything is fine but max voltage is 1.367 and usualy it stays at 1.360
> Dunno why it is like that on this mobo.
> Now, my OC settings for 4.8
> LLC4
> Voltage set to Adaptive
> Vcore in bios 1.250
> Vcore under load 1.312
> SA: 1.2
> I/O: 1.15
> CPU PLL: 1.2
> https://i.imgur.com/L8Xn1cd.jpg
> Core temps are a bit weird
> First two are the same 64C
> Last two are much cooler at 56-57C
> It's 8C difference
> I aim for 5.0, anyone with this mobo can help me a bit, what to change? or just go with higher cpu ratio and voltage?
> 
> more photos:
> https://imgur.com/a/fc4rB3M
> I don't really know what's going on here.
> For 4.8 is ok if I set in bios 1.245 but than under load it rise to 1.312
> For 4.9 with avx -1 its ok if I set in bios 1.340 but than under load it rise to 1.360
> So for 4.8 it rise voltage by 0.070 but for 4.9 just 0.020
> also Dram voltage is not ok.
> Should run at 1.350 but at auto settings it runs at 1.360-1.367
> It I try to set it manualy to 1.350, pc just won't boot.
> 
> So far 4.9 at 1.392
> https://i.imgur.com/gOqi9HS.png



Try enabling memory fast boot, change your ram voltage to 1.375 manually, change your PLL OC back to auto, change your PCH to 1.03-1.05. Change your load line setting LLC4 back to auto. 

have you tried setting your cpu vcore mode from adaptive back to auto and manually 
typing in 1.321v? If not it’s worth a try. 

What does your advanced cpu feature page look like? (The one with c states, short/long power durations, dmi linkspeed, fclk early startup frequency, virtualization on off, vt-d, and CFG lock settings will reside. 

I would personally change max cpu current to 256, short and long power levels to 4096, and the power duration time duration limit to either auto or 8-16 seconds (I choose 8)

Also I would enable C1E support, then disable c state support, leave CFG lock enabked, change fclk startup freq to 1000mhz, leave dmi link speed to auto, enable virtualization and vt-d, if it’s not already ready and leave CFG lock enabled.

I would also not use avx offset if at 5000 MHz or lower cpu clock speed. I would also bump up the vvcsa one notch to 1.16, and lower the vccio to 1.19.

Lastly, I would go into advanced dram settings and look for round trip latency optimize, and change it from auto to enabled, and perhaps disabling dram overboost option while making sure the dram has at least 1.37v going to jt, preferably 1.375 or 1.38.

Cheers and good luck. Oh and make sure you update your 7700s microcode via windows microcode update service tool. 

Oh yeah, try setting your fans to pwm, at least the ML120/140’s, could be running all fans at 100% dc causing a slight load/noise interference causing stability’s issues if you have a lower end psu.

Good luck and feel free to PM me for further discussion. 

-I have a 7700k delided via rockit tool using ultra laboratories liquid metal / TG conductonaut oc’d to 5.1GHz, 1.345v LLC6, temps at 59c max on hottest core in a room that’s 75-79 Fahrenheit in temperature.
-Z270 Apex IX mobo with 2x8gb gskill 4266 ram running at 4133mhz, 17-18-18-38-360, 1T/1N @ 1.43v, extreme phase setting
-custom ek loop with dual revo d5 and ek m9a monoblock using dual hw Labs nemesis GTR 420top/360front radiators and full ML120/140 fans in a push configuration
-be quiet dark base 900 pro case paired with seasonic flagship prime titanium 1000watt psu
-also use Corsair dominator ram fan cooler that supplements the monoblocks cooling of the vrms, attached to the unique dimm2 riser card which holds my 1tb 970pro m.2 in the m2_1 slot with ek m2 heatsink
-1080gtx ti hydrocopper is watercooled so no additional heat source which if you can subdue any ambient heat sources that are local, could help increase stability and lower voltage requirements across the range, which would help your temps out.


----------



## DanielF50

Would love to be charted when/if the spreadsheet is ever updated 

Username: DanielF50
CPU Model: 7700k
Base Clock: 4200
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5 GHz
Cache Frequency: 4.7 GHz
Vcore in UEFI: 1.35v
Vcore: 1.333v
FCLK: 1000 Mhz
Cooling Solution: Noctua NH-D15 (Delided w/ Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut & Noctua NT-H1)
Stability Test: IBT v2.54
Batch Number: L705C003 (UK)
Ram Speed: 3000-15-17-17
Ram Voltage: 1.35v
VCCIO: 1.0v
VCCSA: 1.1v
Motherboard: z170 Gigabyte Z170X-UD3
LLC Setting: High


----------



## n1kobg

*Change your LLC. 4 is too much.*



interceptor1910 said:


> Hello.
> I try to OC my 7700K and I have few problems with it.
> Mobo: Z270 Tomahawk
> Ram: G.SKILL Ripjaws V [email protected]
> gpu: 1050ti
> Cooling: NH-D15
> Cpu delided with clu under ihs, and TG Kryonaut
> First one is with Ram Voltage, at this speed should be 1.35, If I set it manualy it wont boot.
> If I set it to 1.36 everything is fine but max voltage is 1.367 and usualy it stays at 1.360
> Dunno why it is like that on this mobo.
> Now, my OC settings for 4.8
> LLC4
> Voltage set to Adaptive
> Vcore in bios 1.250
> Vcore under load 1.312
> SA: 1.2
> I/O: 1.15
> CPU PLL: 1.2
> https://i.imgur.com/L8Xn1cd.jpg
> Core temps are a bit weird
> First two are the same 64C
> Last two are much cooler at 56-57C
> It's 8C difference
> I aim for 5.0, anyone with this mobo can help me a bit, what to change? or just go with higher cpu ratio and voltage?
> 
> more photos:
> https://imgur.com/a/fc4rB3M
> I don't really know what's going on here.
> For 4.8 is ok if I set in bios 1.245 but than under load it rise to 1.312
> For 4.9 with avx -1 its ok if I set in bios 1.340 but than under load it rise to 1.360
> So for 4.8 it rise voltage by 0.070 but for 4.9 just 0.020
> also Dram voltage is not ok.
> Should run at 1.350 but at auto settings it runs at 1.360-1.367
> It I try to set it manualy to 1.350, pc just won't boot.
> 
> So far 4.9 at 1.392
> https://i.imgur.com/gOqi9HS.png



Change yor Load Level Calibration -LLC, IDK on MSI boards which is highest and lowest. Try different LLC setting. Thats why your voltage spikes under load. 

I have 7600k on 5.3ghz. On AsRock board I use 2 (from 4), 1 is the highest. on 3 & 4 my voltage spikes like yours under load. on 5ghz my voltage is 1,255; 5,1ghz 1,295v; 5,2ghz 1,355v; 1,395 is on 5,3ghz. It can spike to 1,560v when I increase the CPU cache to 5ghz with 5,3ghz on the CPU. Normal use (CPU 5,2ghz , RAM:3200mhz, Cache:4,8ghz) on 1,395v. It spikes to 1,405v in CPU-z. Thats from my LLC.

Dont go above 1,390-1,425v for every day use. And for RAM voltage 1,4-1,5v is completely OK for 24/7. Its normal to increase the voltage you set uin Bios. so 1,367v is fine fo you.


----------



## Ironclad17

Need some help with using x264 Stability Test. I can't get the core frequency to remain locked at the max multiplier. I know it's not thermal or power throttling because I can run IBT for several minutes without the same downclocking behavior. Running a 7700K at 5 GHz on an AsRock z170m Pro4 in Windows 10. First someone should have mentioned that Windows 10 interferes with the stability test if it's placed in the program files directories. I disabled C states and I set minimum processor state to 100% in the OS power options and it still downclocks. Tried disabling SpeedStep and SpeedShift as well with no change. Will increasing process priority prevent this?

Does Realbench have the same issue?


----------



## n1kobg

Ironclad17 said:


> Need some help with using x264 Stability Test. I can't get the core frequency to remain locked at the max multiplier. I know it's not thermal or power throttling because I can run IBT for several minutes without the same downclocking behavior. Running a 7700K at 5 GHz on an AsRock z170m Pro4 in Windows 10. First someone should have mentioned that Windows 10 interferes with the stability test if it's placed in the program files directories. I disabled C states and I set minimum processor state to 100% in the OS power options and it still downclocks. Tried disabling SpeedStep and SpeedShift as well with no change. Will increasing process priority prevent this?
> 
> Does Realbench have the same issue?


Dude set it on High Performance, On Ballanced & Power Save the CPU scaling is active. 
ps.If i understood correctly the question...


----------



## Ironclad17

I already tried that to no avail. Tried higher process priority to no avail. I did notice how it behaved though. The clock dropped when HWInfo indicated it was approaching thermal limit (red text) but it never actually reached throttle territory. Should I try disabling thermal throttling? It's a 280 rad on a delidded chip so I'm not getting anywhere near 100 C.

Double checked it and nope neither "Ultimate Performance" nor "High Performance" stop the downclocking and this time temperatures got no where near throttle territory, max 85 C.


----------



## n1kobg

Ofcourse you should disable thermal throttle from bios, along with all power save features. It will run faster than before because this feature reduce the CPU cycles. Unpark CPU as well if not done yet.


----------



## Ironclad17

It's no where near throttle territory though so why would that setting even have an impact? I did disable C-states already. All the cores are active at 100% in the power profile (except the multiplier went from 45 to 42 across the board) so it's not a parking issue, and isn't parking just when a core enters C6? Have you noticed any of these issues with the stability test yourself?

Thinking outside the box maybe it's not an OS or UEFI setting but could the vrm just be overheating? I'll try disabling thermal throttling and put a case fan directly over the vrms tonight.


----------



## n1kobg

DUDE 
DISABLE CPU THERMAL THROTTLING  THATS THE REASON. This feature throttles the CPU. its not what you think it is. It makes your CPU work less to preserve power & avoid higher temps. With this enabled the CPU will never get "near the throttle territory". Thats the point.


----------



## n1kobg

Sry i just saw this. for IO-L Initial value- I set it on 3 or 2. Default is 4. It will lower IO-L Channels.


----------



## Ironclad17

Gotcha! It didn't work. I'm about ready to throw in the towel.


----------



## jambazz

Ironclad17 said:


> Gotcha! It didn't work. I'm about ready to throw in the towel.


I betcha it is the AVX offset parameter that is set on your system.
If the x264 stress test does AVX workloads, then the CPU will lower its multipliers as not to generate too much heat. This offset can be set to 0 in the BIOS. Then normal and AVX workloads all run at the same multiplier.

This is why many people stress test with Prime95 26.6 small fft, which does not use AVX workloads, instead of the newer Prime95 versions.


----------



## Rachdingue

Hello guys and first of all thanks OP for the guide

This is my first time getting into overclocking I have (or I think I do) an issue with temperatures. I tried the 4.8Ghz and safe voltages from the guide and the temperatures are getting like 85-90º when doing stress test. My humble experience on CPUs tells me that those temperatures are a bit high, even dangerous if it keeps that way for long. My CPU cooler stands for 150W TDP

So, are those temperatures normal? Should I delid? I've been reading lot of temperatures improvements, like 15-20º that's insane.

My Specs:
MSI Z270 Gaming Plus
I5-7600K
Ballistix Sport LT BLS16G4D240FSE 16GB
Cooler Master Hyper 612 V2

Thanks again


----------



## NIK1

I have a Asus Z270 Apex with a I7 7700K and want to test the 5.0 OC for stability..I have it now at 1.380v and not every time but alot when watching Hd videos my pc locks up and freezes,and the odd time I get DPC Watchdog violation blue screen..Mostly just lockups and freeze where I have to reboot the computer manually..So,whats good software to run to check stability on my overclock of the Cpu for start,and whats good to check the memory OC for stability also..Any suggestions appreciated...


----------



## wadec22

NIK1 said:


> I have a Asus Z270 Apex with a I7 7700K and want to test the 5.0 OC for stability..I have it now at 1.380v and not every time but alot when watching Hd videos my pc locks up and freezes,and the odd time I get DPC Watchdog violation blue screen..Mostly just lockups and freeze where I have to reboot the computer manually..So,whats good software to run to check stability on my overclock of the Cpu for start,and whats good to check the memory OC for stability also..Any suggestions appreciated...


ROG stress test

1.4v is a lot


----------



## NIK1

ROG stress test..I have it..How long should I let it run for..Also,do you think I am giving it too much juice..Should I cut it back some..Would too much volts also cause what symptoms my pc has..


----------



## wadec22

NIK1 said:


> ROG stress test..I have it..How long should I let it run for..Also,do you think I am giving it too much juice..Should I cut it back some..Would too much volts also cause what symptoms my pc has..


I think it depends on what you intend to use it for. If you are just going to game and you have an avx offset enabled, I would do 2 to 4 hours and be comfortable with it passing there. if you are using an AIO, you will probably see temps that start to get pretty uncomfortable on 1.4v. I prefer not to hit much above 80C. I'm at 5ghz on 1.328v and I think my peak temp is probably low 80's over a stress period of that duration (I use an offset of -2, for 4.8ghz on AVX).


----------



## NIK1

I cut the cpu adaptive core volts back down to 1.330 and she booted fine into windows..My LLC is set at Level 4 also..I will run ROG- RealBench V2 once I find out how long I should let it run for..I will try the 15 min test for a start and see what happens..


----------



## NIK1

Whats your core cache set at..Mine is 4.8,should I leave that alone or drop it back some..I also have good liquid cooling on her..Swiftech H240x..My temps rally never got over 75 cel when stressing before,even with 1.400v and the cpu is also delidded with liquid metal last year.The only gaming I do on this pc is Play World of Tanks,boom boom..And edit and play some hd videos occasionally..


----------



## Falkentyne

NIK1 said:


> I have a Asus Z270 Apex with a I7 7700K and want to test the 5.0 OC for stability..I have it now at 1.380v and not every time but alot when watching Hd videos my pc locks up and freezes,and the odd time I get DPC Watchdog violation blue screen..Mostly just lockups and freeze where I have to reboot the computer manually..So,whats good software to run to check stability on my overclock of the Cpu for start,and whats good to check the memory OC for stability also..Any suggestions appreciated...


Going to have to run a battery of tests. Whatever you do, do NOT run small FFT AVX prime95. Only use AVX as I instruct here below..

First, download prime95 29.4 https://www.mersenne.org/download/
Run it then close it then open the file LOCAL.TXT and add these lines at the top:

CPUSupportsAVX=0
CPUSupportsFMA3=0

Grab HWinfo64 (another nice program) while you're at it and have it running the same time as prime95). https://www.hwinfo.com/download/
Now you can do some more reasonable tests.

First do a CPU core reliability test by doing a small FFT stress test. This will put a strong load on your CPU without it getting out of control. Don't let it run 12 hours. I personally find that you don't need to let it run more than 30 minutes, as it can test the entire 8k-16k range by then. But if you really want to be sure, you can run it an hour. Have the program HWINFO64 running and look at the bottom for WHEA or CPU L0 errors also.

If that passes, now do a Vcore reliability test by running a custom test, checkbox "run FFT's in place" and enter 1344K-1344K for the range.
This stresses vcore stability more than heat stress. You absolutely MUST pass this test. 1 hour is enough for this. Half hour if you're in a hurry.

Then when you're done, you can stress the computer's IMC and main memory by doing a custom test, uncheck FFT's in place, and enter range 512K-4096K and set the memory size to 75% of your system memory. Example: if you have 32 GB of RAM, the total is 32768, so set it to 24576. For 16 GB, it's 75% of 16384. Ezpz.

This test will take much longer to do. Might have to leave it running overnight as this tests a lot of ranges now.

Finally, you should test the AVX stability test. This is similar to the 1344K test.
Open the file local.txt and change the 0 to a 1 for AVX.
Do not change FMA3.

Then run the same 1344K (don't forget to checkbox in place fft's) and it will run with AVX. This may run a bit hotter than small FFT without AVX (oddly enough it runs cooler on a 9700K and 9900K), so let it run for up to an hour.

Always monitor HWinfo64 for WHEA errors or CPU L0 errors if a thread doesn't crash.

This will take you awhile. Post your results when finished.


----------



## NIK1

Damm..I just got a blue screen 10 min into Rog Real bench stress test..DPC Watchdog Violation..I will try prime95 29.4 as per your instructions also.My memory is overclocked also..Should this be set all back on auto and take the oc off when stressing the cpu.Is DPC Watchdog Violation a memory error or cpu..


----------



## Falkentyne

NIK1 said:


> Damm..I just got a blue screen 10 min into Rog Real bench stress test..DPC Watchdog Violation..I will try prime95 29.4 as per your instructions also.My memory is overclocked also..Should this be set all back on auto and take the oc off when stressing the cpu.Is DPC Watchdog Violation a memory error or cpu..


Basic rule is you stress ONE component at a time.
I would set the memory to stock (or XMP), whatever you know is 100% stable, and then start from there. You never want to have two things holding you back at once. That becomes messy.

I did include the memory / IMC testing in my above post, but if your CPU is already unstable, that will also fail too.


----------



## NIK1

Ok thanks..I will drop the oc on the memory and set the memory to xmp and give it a whirl and report back..


----------



## white owl

Falkentyne said:


> NIK1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Damm..I just got a blue screen 10 min into Rog Real bench stress test..DPC Watchdog Violation..I will try prime95 29.4 as per your instructions also.My memory is overclocked also..Should this be set all back on auto and take the oc off when stressing the cpu.Is DPC Watchdog Violation a memory error or cpu..
> 
> 
> 
> Basic rule is you stress ONE component at a time.
Click to expand...

Should be the site motto. 
Clock and stress for one thing till it's no longer a variable.
Set cache and ram speed and voltage to manual stock or JDEC. XMP isn't advised, nor is a GPU OC. One variable at a time.


----------



## Jspinks020

Not really it may take 1.35-1.4v to pass something like RealBench.


----------



## dtfkev

Falkentyne said:


> Going to have to run a battery of tests. Whatever you do, do NOT run small FFT AVX prime95. Only use AVX as I instruct here below..
> 
> First, download prime95 29.4 https://www.mersenne.org/download/
> Run it then close it then open the file LOCAL.TXT and add these lines at the top:
> 
> CPUSupportsAVX=0
> CPUSupportsFMA3=0
> 
> Grab HWinfo64 (another nice program) while you're at it and have it running the same time as prime95). https://www.hwinfo.com/download/
> Now you can do some more reasonable tests.
> 
> First do a CPU core reliability test by doing a small FFT stress test. This will put a strong load on your CPU without it getting out of control. Don't let it run 12 hours. I personally find that you don't need to let it run more than 30 minutes, as it can test the entire 8k-16k range by then. But if you really want to be sure, you can run it an hour. Have the program HWINFO64 running and look at the bottom for WHEA or CPU L0 errors also.
> 
> If that passes, now do a Vcore reliability test by running a custom test, checkbox "run FFT's in place" and enter 1344K-1344K for the range.
> This stresses vcore stability more than heat stress. You absolutely MUST pass this test. 1 hour is enough for this. Half hour if you're in a hurry.
> 
> Then when you're done, you can stress the computer's IMC and main memory by doing a custom test, uncheck FFT's in place, and enter range 512K-4096K and set the memory size to 75% of your system memory. Example: if you have 32 GB of RAM, the total is 32768, so set it to 24576. For 16 GB, it's 75% of 16384. Ezpz.
> 
> This test will take much longer to do. Might have to leave it running overnight as this tests a lot of ranges now.
> 
> Finally, you should test the AVX stability test. This is similar to the 1344K test.
> Open the file local.txt and change the 0 to a 1 for AVX.
> Do not change FMA3.
> 
> Then run the same 1344K (don't forget to checkbox in place fft's) and it will run with AVX. This may run a bit hotter than small FFT without AVX (oddly enough it runs cooler on a 9700K and 9900K), so let it run for up to an hour.
> 
> Always monitor HWinfo64 for WHEA errors or CPU L0 errors if a thread doesn't crash.
> 
> This will take you awhile. Post your results when finished.


Wow this is wonderful haha

Should I run each one of these tests after each change in my OC?

Or should I run only the individual test associated with the change?
(ie small fft for core ratio changes, fft 1344 in place for voltage changes, custom fft for imc and memory changes?)

I just passed all of those tests with [email protected] with everything else in bios stock. Should I manually enter my memory ratings and skip right to the custom 512k-4096k test or start at the beginning?


----------



## Ironclad17

jambazz said:


> I betcha it is the AVX offset parameter that is set on your system.
> If the x264 stress test does AVX workloads, then the CPU will lower its multipliers as not to generate too much heat. This offset can be set to 0 in the BIOS. Then normal and AVX workloads all run at the same multiplier.
> 
> This is why many people stress test with Prime95 26.6 small fft, which does not use AVX workloads, instead of the newer Prime95 versions.


I may be dumb, but I'm not that dumb. If that was the case I would have had an AVX offset of like 8! I did figure it out finally. The bios on this board seem to force the cpu back down to base clock multiplier (42) whenever it hits any instability if turbo boost is enabled, and any kind of multiplier overclock requires that setting to be enabled. I got around this with 125x40 or 122x41 core clock. This of course was unstable I'm only now learning. Turns out you really do get what you pay for with motherboards. That or I have a really awful bin.

Actually it's starting to look like my fclock was also causing instability.


----------



## NIK1

I am testing and stressing my Asus Z270 IX Apex with a I7 7700k and using Rog RealBench to stress test if stable..How long should I let RB run for to test for stability..I just did a 30 min test and it stopped with errors after 5 min.I upped the core volts a bit and it was successful after the 30 min run..Should it run longer than 30 min for testing stability..Any suggestions..


----------



## wingman99

NIK1 said:


> I am testing and stressing my Asus Z270 IX Apex with a I7 7700k and using Rog RealBench to stress test if stable..How long should I let RB run for to test for stability..I just did a 30 min test and it stopped with errors after 5 min.I upped the core volts a bit and it was successful after the 30 min run..Should it run longer than 30 min for testing stability..Any suggestions..


I would test 1-4 hours to make sure it is stable.


----------



## n1kobg

Dont use only one Benchmark Or Stress test.


----------



## NIK1

One to Four hours..Thanks a bunch...


----------



## BoredErica

I wanted to do some basic maintenance on the formatting of my guide here, but with the OCN website transition and such, the OP has become a giant spaghetti monster to edit.


----------



## sir_dakz03

Hi All,

Here's my entry:
CPU Model: i7-7700k
Base Clock: 100
Core Multiplier: 50
Core Frequency: 5.0
Cache Frequency: 4.5
Vcore in UEFI: 1.35
Vcore: 1.378
Fclk: 1
Cooling Solution: DEEPCOOL Gamer Storm Captain 240EX Delidded
Stability Test: x264 16T infinity normal 9hrs

Batch Number: Malay L639G012
Ram Speed: 2666 15 17 17 35 2T
Ram Voltage: 1.35
VCCIO: N/A
VCCSA: N/A
Motherboard Z270 MSI Gaming M3
LLC Setting: N/A
Misc: No AVX Offset; Also tried Prime95 25.11 for 3hrs but no screenshot.


----------



## BoredErica

Submissions closed like 2 years ago. ._.


----------



## sir_dakz03

BoredErica said:


> Submissions closed like 2 years ago. ._.


Yeah, I figured. But it's a good guide though, and I just recently delidded my 2-year old procie. Was just eliciting a response.


----------



## X58goodness

submitting my 7700k results
1.55vcore at 5.3 ghz
on msi z270 gaming m7 motherboard 
full liquid metal under and on ihs cooled on nh-d15 
i can probs do 5.5 ghz after i get a custom water cooling loop using the nude cnc waterblocks


----------



## ducegt

My 7700K has now done 3 years at 5+ ghz. Still stable at 5.1 ghz


----------



## Bram030

Hi guys, i need some help to try hit the 5GHZ OC in my i7 7700k, is @4.8ghz with 1.32v 24/7 for 3 years with no issues, temps going on 75-80º on a full EK watercooled with a rtx 2080 ti in the loop too... with so many new cpu´s with high single core scores i think i need to get a little bit more and try to keep "cold". I will get Ryzen 3 or 11th for sure but this 7700k needs to game a few more year... I have everything in auto, only vcore (1.32v) and multi has been changed to 48, the memory´s are 3600mhz CL16 but i can´t boot them in that speed on this motherboard (Asus Strix Z270E Gaming) so they are @3333mhz... I know this is a old threat but adding more 200mhz can help to catch up ryzen 2 cpu´s in single thread...


----------



## BadBoy2K7

I have the same motherboard and set everything to auto. I am only able to achieve 4.9ghz with an avx offset of 2, so 4.7ghz stable. I am planning to delid my chip to see if it will help. Will post an update when that happens.

Update: delided my 7700K with liquid metal and I'm able to overclock to 5ghz temps are around 75c. The voltage I have to use pretty high reaching 1.4v.


----------



## dajaffer

Really need some help please!

Got myself a new GPU (GTX 2060 super) but struggling to get high fps on warcraft and such.
Looked around, supposedly it could be my CPU bottlenecking, the i7-770k.
So I've tried to overclock it for a few hours now, before buying a new CPU.
I've downloaded programs such as CPUz and Prime95.
I've changed a lot of different settings in my BIOS that I've found over the net. Countless times.
In Bios it says I'm running at 4400mhz, clock speed even.
CPU-Z says I'm not even at 1600.
Can somebody please help...
Link to some screens from CPU-z:
Gyazo
Gyazo
Gyazo


----------



## benjamen50

dajaffer said:


> CPU-Z says I'm not even at 1600.


The CPU Frequency will fluctuate depending on workload (CPU Utilisation). If it is low enough it will downclock to lower clock speeds.

I believe the speeds are in steps of 800 starting from 800.00 MHz (lowest power state when PC is idling) then it goes up in increments until it reaches the turbo boost (or desired overclock multiplier).

TL-DR: When running anything CPU intensive or demanding such as games CPU clock speed should go higher than that.


----------



## madmanmarz

How much more voltage do you usually need on 7700k on average to get stable after booting into Windows. Just looking for a roundabout idea.


----------



## BoredErica

I have finally sold my 7600k lol.
It was a nice run with my lil' CPU but time to move onto greater things.


----------



## JayG1

Hi BoaredErica, i have tried to get in contact with you via direct message but mu account won't let me. would you be willing to help me overclock my i5 7600k via a discord call? i would pay for your time ofc thats not a problem. i find it hard to follow long instruction.

Kind Regards,
Jay


----------

