ASRock Enables Overclocking on Non-Z Motherboards for 10th Generation Non-K Comet Lake CPUs

[AleksandarK]

Historically, Intel has separated its processors and chipsets that accompany them to overclockable and non-overclockable ones. That means that only the "K" CPUs can be overclocked. With the latest generation, only some parts of the lineup are K CPUs, like the Core i9-10900K, i7-10700K, i5-10600K, etc. Those processors could only be overclocked one put in motherboards based on "Z" chipset, like Z390 and Z490. However, it seems like ASRock has developed a new technology that will overclock non-K CPUs on non-Z motherboards, which is quite impressive.

Called the Base Frequency Boost (BFB) technology, it will allow for overclocking the non-K processors on chipsets like B460 and H470. How will that work you might wonder? Well, ASRock will take the TDP of the CPUs and make it run in the PL1 mode, which increases the processor TDP form 65 W and turns it into a 125 W TDP beast. This will, of course, be user selective and case dependent, meaning that if your cooling system can not handle that much heat coming out from the overclocked processors, it is unlikely that they will reach the peak clocks ASRock can target. You can check out the slide below:


View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Fouquin]

This sounds a lot like the same old "multi core enhancement" tricks we've seen from others like ASUS. ASRock has a history of trying to push unofficial overclocking on their boards and having Intel subsequently torpedo their efforts. Maybe this will make it to the consumer unlike BCLK overclocking on Kaby Lake and Coffee Lake.

 

[ARF]

I thought that non-K SKUs can overclock but to a limited extent on all boards, anyways.

ASRock is nice, Intel is not nice. Intel should allow overclocking of its entire lineup, because the lineup needs to be more competitive these days.

 

[wolar]

I doubt this is legit tbh, when it happened in the past with the 6th(i think) gen intel forced the companies to release new bios and remove the ones that allowed the OC.
If this is really the same thing and Asrock knows it (as it is advertising it) then intel will most likely cause some backlash to them.

 

[tabascosauz]

I thought that non-K SKUs can overclock but to a limited extent on all boards, anyways.

ASRock is nice, Intel is not nice. Intel should allow overclocking of its entire lineup, because the lineup needs to be more competitive these days.

That has not been true since Ivy Bridge. Long gone are the days of +4 bin OCing locked chips.

And this isn't even overclocking in that same sense, max multiplier is still max multiplier. This is just a way to sustain lower boost clocks for slightly longer, so that what you buy is [kinda] what you get, unlike what Intel has been peddling with its TVB and laughable TDP figures.

 

[Caring1]

Isn't this basically what Throttlestop was allowing users to do until recently, when Intel shut it down with a microcode update?

 

[ARF]

That has not been true since Ivy Bridge. Long gone are the days of +4 bin OCing locked chips.

And this isn't even overclocking in that same sense, max multiplier is still max multiplier. This is just a way to sustain lower boost clocks for slightly longer, so that what you buy is [kinda] what you get, unlike what Intel has been peddling with its TVB and laughable TDP figures.

Sure

 

[Turmania]

2 weeks later even before the new processors are released you will see Intel lock them up, and no support for overclocking and Asrock is mot the only clever one out there they abused their position and probably will suffer the consequences from intel.

 

[spectatorx]

I doubt this is legit tbh, when it happened in the past with the 6th(i think) gen intel forced the companies to release new bios and remove the ones that allowed the OC.
If this is really the same thing and Asrock knows it (as it is advertising it) then intel will most likely cause some backlash to them.

To justify bios update intel made up some fake cpu problem and said bios update fixes that bug. I had a nice laugh off intel on that.

 

[ppn]

Enables 125 watt on 65 watt CPUs.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Enables 125 watt on 65 watt CPUs.

Pl2 is upto 250 watts but I suppose it's nice to have a nice low figure to tout.

This will get locked down in day's and doesn't matter anyway, without an external clock generator for pciex and everything attached to it, usb sata, etc it's not going to add upto much.

 

[ppn]

With 125 watts the end user can probably get 4.6GHz ALL core All day non AVX loads out of 10700 by undervolting it by 100mV. to fit in the power limit.

10400 is already 4.0Ghz allcore out of the box, with this hack Asrock only states that you would actually be able to get that 4.00GHz.

Thee is no need to overclock the BUS at all, just get some nice power limit headroom.

 

[Tsukiyomi91]

Shintel will do what Shintel do best. Not gonna be surprised if they lock these chip even further to protect their higher-end K chips.

 

[Caring1]

To justify bios update intel made up some fake cpu problem and said bios update fixes that bug. I had a nice laugh off intel on that.

Intel doesn't have to make up their CPU problems

 

[Space Lynx]

This sounds a lot like the same old "multi core enhancement" tricks we've seen from others like ASUS. ASRock has a history of trying to push unofficial overclocking on their boards and having Intel subsequently torpedo their efforts. Maybe this will make it to the consumer unlike BCLK overclocking on Kaby Lake and Coffee Lake.

Nothing wrong with multicore enhancement. I almost bought a i7-9700 non-k just so I could have all cores at 4.7 ghz no downclocking, going from that 5ghz all core no downclocking is really very minimal in gaming. but there is still that point of, oh yeah if we get out of just stock fluctiation we do generation 5-10 fps extra across the board, its diminishing returns after multi core enhancement is enabled though

 

[jabbadap]

Nothing wrong with multicore enhancement. I almost bought a i7-9700 non-k just so I could have all cores at 4.7 ghz no downclocking, going from that 5ghz all core no downclocking is really very minimal in gaming. but there is still that point of, oh yeah if we get out of just stock fluctiation we do generation 5-10 fps extra across the board, its diminishing returns after multi core enhancement is enabled though

Well yeah, this BFB would have allowed "multicore enhancement" on cheaper B or H boards. But still you would have been left out from xmp profiles for memory and unlike Z boards manual memory over clocking would have not worked either.

 

[tabascosauz]

Sure

Imagine thinking you're onto something special with BCLK when we're talking about multiplier SB/IVB partial OC, MCE, and now BFB all revolve around boosting the multiplier for non-K.

You think that's the only thing you can exploit by sticking to an early BIOS revision? Skylake non-K BCLK is hardlocked by Intel ME on any recent microcode.

 

[LTUGamer]

I thought that non-K SKUs can overclock but to a limited extent on all boards, anyways.

ASRock is nice, Intel is not nice. Intel should allow overclocking of its entire lineup, because the lineup needs to be more competitive these days.

If AsRock does it, that means they get permission from Intel. If Intel allows that, it means that other manufacturers will do the same. Only some unknow manufacturers could do thing against intel wishes. For example:

 

[Ruru]

I remember that they even (kinda) disabled OCing Pentium G3258 (which has an unlocked multiplier) on a Z87 board.. If it was OC'd, it allowed only one core to be used in the OS. Removing the microcode update from Windows solved that.

I remember someone speculating the reason was that "it's not a K chip even it has an unlocked multiplier" which doesn't even sound impossible to me..

 

[bug]

Have B460 and H470 been announced/released? I must have missed that.

 

[LTUGamer]

Have B460 and H470 been announced/released? I must have missed that.

Here you are :

B460 product page:

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/201841/intel-b460-chipset.html

H470 product page:

Intel® H470 Chipset - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® H470 Chipset quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

ark.intel.com

Gigabyte models:

Intel H470 / B460 | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global

Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...

www.gigabyte.com

Asrock models:

ASRock > Motherboard

www.asrock.com

 

[bug]

Here you are :

B460 product page:

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/201841/intel-b460-chipset.html

H470 product page:

Intel® H470 Chipset - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® H470 Chipset quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

ark.intel.com

Gigabyte models:

Intel H470 / B460 | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global

Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...

www.gigabyte.com

Asrock models:

ASRock > Motherboard

www.asrock.com

Ah thank you. I was really wondering what was Intel thinking releasing i3 CPUs and only the Z490 chipset.

 

[1BreathTaken]

Well yeah, this BFB would have allowed "multicore enhancement" on cheaper B or H boards. But still you would have been left out from xmp profiles for memory and unlike Z boards manual memory over clocking would have not worked either.

For the record, I just downloaded ASRock's manual for the B460M-ITX/ac and it states

• Supports Intel® Extreme Memory Profile (XMP) 2.0