• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

help overclock i9 14900k

Joined
Jan 5, 2021
Messages
74 (0.06/day)
hello everyone i have

mobo asus z690 hero bios 2802

i9 14900k sp98 p106 e84 mc80

cooler nh-d15

i see a lot of people with sp like mine overclock the cpu to 5.7 with 1.16-1.8v

mine need 1.21-1.22 llc6 and bios prediction show 1.19 and still the cpu not stable

does i have bad cpu? does it motherbord problem? or mybe the cooler?

thanks for the help
 

ir_cow

Staff member
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
3,603 (0.64/day)
Location
USA
I can tell you right now your not getting to 5.7 Ghz all- core (P) with a air cooler. The CPU will be pulling over 320 watts.

I would just leave It alone and let the turbo do its thing.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2021
Messages
2,511 (2.24/day)
Location
Germany
System Name Sunk Cost Fallacy
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Motherboard ASRock B650E Steel Legend Wifi
Cooling Arctic Liquid Freezer II 360 Rev. 7
Memory 2x16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 NEO 6000 CL30
Video Card(s) Sapphire Nitro+ RX 7900 XTX Vapor-X
Storage WD Black SN850X 1TB + 2x 2TB, 2x 4TB Crucial MX500, 4TB Samsung 870 Evo.
Display(s) Alienware AW2723DF, LG 27GR93U, LG 27GN950-B
Case Lian Li O11 Air Mini
Audio Device(s) Bose Companion Series 2 III, Sennheiser GSP600 and HD599 SE - Creative Soundblaster X4
Power Supply bequiet! Dark Power Pro 12 1500w Titanium
Mouse Logitech GPRO X Superlight & G502 X
Keyboard Corsair K65 RGB Mini, Razer Black Widow V3 TKL
VR HMD Oculus Rift S
your cooler is nowhere near good enough.
if you want to overclock a 14900k (which is only a thing for tasks like games) you need a high end custom loop.
rather undervolt with an adaptive offset to get higher all core boost clocks.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2017
Messages
8,777 (3.36/day)
System Name Good enough
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 7900 - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora Edge
Motherboard ASRock B650 Pro RS
Cooling 2x 360mm NexXxoS ST30 X-Flow, 1x 360mm NexXxoS ST30, 1x 240mm NexXxoS ST30
Memory 32GB - FURY Beast RGB 5600 Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX 7900 XT - Alphacool Eisblock Aurora
Storage 1x Kingston KC3000 1TB 1x Kingston A2000 1TB, 1x Samsung 850 EVO 250GB , 1x Samsung 860 EVO 500GB
Display(s) LG UltraGear 32GN650-B + 4K Samsung TV
Case Phanteks NV7
Power Supply GPS-750C
You need a 360mm AIO minimum for that CPU before you even think about overclocking.
 
Joined
Jan 5, 2021
Messages
74 (0.06/day)
my cpu does 5.5p 44e on 1.10v load llc3 stable all tasks

i saw with the same cpu sp98 people do 5.7p 44e on 1.17-1.18v pulls on cinbench 278waat

when i try 1.18v the cpu not stable in r23 i need more volt

if i will get beter cooler can my cpu be stable in low voltage?
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
10,189 (1.71/day)
Location
Austin Texas
Processor 13700KF Undervolted @ 5.6/ 5.5, 4.8Ghz Ring 200W PL1
Motherboard MSI 690-I PRO
Cooling Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120 w/ Arctic P12 Fans
Memory 48 GB DDR5 7600 MHZ CL36
Video Card(s) RTX 4090 FE
Storage 2x 2TB WDC SN850, 1TB Samsung 960 prr
Display(s) Alienware 32" 4k 240hz OLED
Case SLIGER S620
Audio Device(s) Yes
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse Xlite V2
Keyboard RoyalAxe
Software Windows 11
Benchmark Scores They're pretty good, nothing crazy.
my cpu does 5.5p 44e on 1.10v load llc3 stable all tasks

i saw with the same cpu sp98 people do 5.7p 44e on 1.17-1.18v pulls on cinbench 278waat

when i try 1.18v the cpu not stable in r23 i need more volt

if i will get beter cooler can my cpu be stable in low voltage?

Yes, but not really - if you're at the point where you're unstable at temps below tjmax, then you're unstable.
 
Joined
Jan 5, 2006
Messages
17,531 (2.64/day)
System Name AlderLake / Laptop
Processor Intel i7 12700K P-Cores @ 5Ghz / Intel i3 7100U
Motherboard Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Master / HP 83A3 (U3E1)
Cooling Noctua NH-U12A 2 fans + Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut Extreme + 5 case fans / Fan
Memory 32GB DDR5 Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB 6000MHz CL36 / 8GB DDR4 HyperX CL13
Video Card(s) MSI RTX 2070 Super Gaming X Trio / Intel HD620
Storage Samsung 980 Pro 1TB + 970 Evo 500GB + 850 Pro 512GB + 860 Evo 1TB x2 / Samsung 256GB M.2 SSD
Display(s) 23.8" Dell S2417DG 165Hz G-Sync 1440p / 14" 1080p IPS Glossy
Case Be quiet! Silent Base 600 - Window / HP Pavilion
Audio Device(s) Panasonic SA-PMX94 / Realtek onboard + B&O speaker system / Harman Kardon Go + Play / Logitech G533
Power Supply Seasonic Focus Plus Gold 750W / Powerbrick
Mouse Logitech MX Anywhere 2 Laser wireless / Logitech M330 wireless
Keyboard RAPOO E9270P Black 5GHz wireless / HP backlit
Software Windows 11 / Windows 10
Benchmark Scores Cinebench R23 (Single Core) 1936 @ stock Cinebench R23 (Multi Core) 23006 @ stock
CPU's never seem to be fast enough... :D
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2017
Messages
8,777 (3.36/day)
System Name Good enough
Processor AMD Ryzen R9 7900 - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora Edge
Motherboard ASRock B650 Pro RS
Cooling 2x 360mm NexXxoS ST30 X-Flow, 1x 360mm NexXxoS ST30, 1x 240mm NexXxoS ST30
Memory 32GB - FURY Beast RGB 5600 Mhz
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX 7900 XT - Alphacool Eisblock Aurora
Storage 1x Kingston KC3000 1TB 1x Kingston A2000 1TB, 1x Samsung 850 EVO 250GB , 1x Samsung 860 EVO 500GB
Display(s) LG UltraGear 32GN650-B + 4K Samsung TV
Case Phanteks NV7
Power Supply GPS-750C
if i will get beter cooler can my cpu be stable in low voltage?
It's possible, a CPU running at 90C might behave differently than one running at 80C. But don't expect much, the point of the extra cooling is to avoid throttling, that's more important. Also better cooling means you can use higher voltages until temperatures become a problem.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
6,359 (1.44/day)
Location
Florida
System Name natr0n-PC
Processor Ryzen 5950x - SMT Off
Motherboard B450 AORUS M
Cooling EK AIO - 6 fan action
Memory Patriot - Viper Steel DDR4 (B-Die)(4x8GB)
Video Card(s) EVGA 3070ti FTW
Storage Various
Display(s) PIXIO IPS 240Hz 1080P
Case Thermaltake Level 20 VT
Audio Device(s) LOXJIE D10 + Kinter Amp + 6 Bookshelf Speakers Sony+JVC+Sony
Power Supply Super Flower Leadex III ARGB 80+ Gold 650W
Software XP/7/8.1/10
Benchmark Scores http://valid.x86.fr/79kuh6
Overclocking is like a bad compulsion. Not every chip is the same. You can try to push it but only if you have the right tools and parts to keep it cool and under control.

Then you get a result you wanted and realize there is nothing is left to do.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
10,189 (1.71/day)
Location
Austin Texas
Processor 13700KF Undervolted @ 5.6/ 5.5, 4.8Ghz Ring 200W PL1
Motherboard MSI 690-I PRO
Cooling Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120 w/ Arctic P12 Fans
Memory 48 GB DDR5 7600 MHZ CL36
Video Card(s) RTX 4090 FE
Storage 2x 2TB WDC SN850, 1TB Samsung 960 prr
Display(s) Alienware 32" 4k 240hz OLED
Case SLIGER S620
Audio Device(s) Yes
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse Xlite V2
Keyboard RoyalAxe
Software Windows 11
Benchmark Scores They're pretty good, nothing crazy.
difference at 4k between 5.7 and 5.5 is actually nothing.

majority of the gaming speed comes from ram tuning.
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2023
Messages
193 (1.06/day)
Location
USA
System Name Dark Palimpsest
Processor Intel i9 13900k with Optimus Foundation Block
Motherboard EVGA z690 Classified
Cooling MO-RA3 420mm Custom Loop
Memory G.Skill 6000, 32GB
Video Card(s) Nvidia 4090 FE with Heatkiller Block
Storage 3 NVMe SSDs, 2TB-each, plus a SATA SSD
Case Be quiet! Dark Base Pro 900
Audio Device(s) Logitech G Pro X
Power Supply Be quiet! Straight Power 12 1200W
Mouse Logitech G502 X
Keyboard GMMK Pro + Numpad
difference at 4k between 5.7 and 5.5 is actually nothing.

majority of the gaming speed comes from ram tuning.
I wish there was more test data available for this (memory scaling and tuning differences). Guru3D's test is the only one I've seen and they show no difference at 4k and negligible difference at 1440p. Benchmarks, sure...but in games?...I haven't seen any proof of this outside claims from people who charge customers for tuning to get "more FPS" in games like CoD, CS:GO, and Apex. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I am saying I would like to see real tangible evidence of this from credible sources.
 

Cheeseball

Not a Potato
Supporter
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
1,813 (0.33/day)
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
System Name 2023 AMD Work & Gaming Rig
Processor AMD Ryzen™ 7 7950X3D
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix X670E-I Gaming WiFi
Cooling ID-COOLING SE-207-XT Slim Snow
Memory TEAMGROUP T-Force Delta RGB 2x16GB DDR5-6000 CL30
Video Card(s) ASRock Radeon RX 7900 XTX 24 GB GDDR6 (MBA)
Storage 2TB Samsung 990 Pro NVMe
Display(s) AOpen Fire Legend 24" 390Hz (25XV2Q), Alienware 34" 165Hz (AW3423DWF), LG C2 42" 120Hz (OLED42C2PUA)
Case Cooler Master Q300L V2
Audio Device(s) Kanto Audio YU2 and SUB8 Desktop Speakers and Subwoofer, Cloud Alpha Wireless
Power Supply Corsair RM850x White (2021)
Mouse Logitech Pro Superlight (White), G303 Shroud Edition
Keyboard Corsair K70 RGB TKL Champion Series / Wooting 60HE / NuPhy Air75
VR HMD Occulus Quest 2 128GB
Software Windows 11 Pro 64-bit 22H2 Build 22621.1992
I wish there was more test data available for this (memory scaling and tuning differences). Guru3D's test is the only one I've seen and they show no difference at 4k and negligible difference at 1440p. Benchmarks, sure...but in games?...I haven't seen any proof of this outside claims from people who charge customers for tuning to get "more FPS" in games like CoD, CS:GO, and Apex. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I am saying I would like to see real tangible evidence of this from credible sources.
Apex has a 300 FPS engine limit which can easily be reached with a 11800H and a RTX 3080M at competitive settings (1080p). So tuning both CPU and GPU wouldn't help much at all with this game on higher-end hardware like what OP has.

@tomer20vt You would need an AIO or custom water-cooling to get better results. If the CPU sees that it isn't near its thermal (not TDP, but really heat) limit, it will continue to push higher.

I have tested this with a i7-12700K and i5-13500 with a stock Intel cooler (Laminar RM1), a NH-D12L, a Thermalright FC140 and an EVGA CLC 280mm AIO. The CPUs were able to get better, more consistent clockspeed with the AIO (I saw around 65C max) compared to the three air coolers. The FC140 did keep high clocks for long but at a max of 88C, which is still not near the thermal limit of 100C but proves that if the CPU is cooler = more clockspeed. All tested with Cinebench R23 multi-core at the time.
 

ir_cow

Staff member
Joined
Sep 4, 2008
Messages
3,603 (0.64/day)
Location
USA
%1 lows matter more and that's were RAM speed / timings come into equation. Extra 200mhz for the CPU isn't going to do anything if it's not at 1080 low playing CS2
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
10,189 (1.71/day)
Location
Austin Texas
Processor 13700KF Undervolted @ 5.6/ 5.5, 4.8Ghz Ring 200W PL1
Motherboard MSI 690-I PRO
Cooling Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120 w/ Arctic P12 Fans
Memory 48 GB DDR5 7600 MHZ CL36
Video Card(s) RTX 4090 FE
Storage 2x 2TB WDC SN850, 1TB Samsung 960 prr
Display(s) Alienware 32" 4k 240hz OLED
Case SLIGER S620
Audio Device(s) Yes
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse Xlite V2
Keyboard RoyalAxe
Software Windows 11
Benchmark Scores They're pretty good, nothing crazy.
I wish there was more test data available for this (memory scaling and tuning differences). Guru3D's test is the only one I've seen and they show no difference at 4k and negligible difference at 1440p. Benchmarks, sure...but in games?...I haven't seen any proof of this outside claims from people who charge customers for tuning to get "more FPS" in games like CoD, CS:GO, and Apex. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I am saying I would like to see real tangible evidence of this from credible sources.
There are sources out there, it's difficult testing to do so time-bound tech writers working for larger outlets tend not to want to dive into it. Also that test was done on a 3090 - which was hard bottlenecked at 4k.

So for instance, in my case, this is the exact same system, same clock speed CPU, one with DDR5 76000 vs DDR5 6400:
1700170897490.png


Same Rig at 7600 XMP (no tuning yet):
1700171369602.png


This is everything identical except ram -

so you can see the cpu minimum FPS went from 208 to 224 (usually about 230ish - I have stuff open now, not a clean boot).


HWUB did some stuff:
1700171549205.png


1700171832381.png

Here you can see ram tuning on intel 13th gen -- look at the DDR5 6000 tuned. You're gaining on average about 5-10% on just tuning timings. You're not going to get that from a 5500mhz to 5700mhz a (3.6% bump in clockspeed) - especially when the clockspeed is not a limiting factor for the lows..

Combine this with some windows tweaks (disabling vbs, priority tweaks, ultimate performance mode etc.) and you will net another few % and you have a rig that's running 10-15% faster with no clockspeed bump. But if you spent your time chasing the last 3.6% clocks you would get a rig that's like 1-2% faster and consumes 800W and heats your room.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 5, 2023
Messages
193 (1.06/day)
Location
USA
System Name Dark Palimpsest
Processor Intel i9 13900k with Optimus Foundation Block
Motherboard EVGA z690 Classified
Cooling MO-RA3 420mm Custom Loop
Memory G.Skill 6000, 32GB
Video Card(s) Nvidia 4090 FE with Heatkiller Block
Storage 3 NVMe SSDs, 2TB-each, plus a SATA SSD
Case Be quiet! Dark Base Pro 900
Audio Device(s) Logitech G Pro X
Power Supply Be quiet! Straight Power 12 1200W
Mouse Logitech G502 X
Keyboard GMMK Pro + Numpad
There are sources out there, it's difficult testing to do so time-bound tech writers working for larger outlets tend not to want to dive into it. Also that test was done on a 3090 - which was hard bottlenecked at 4k.

So for instance, in my case, this is the exact same system, same clock speed CPU, one with DDR5 76000 vs DDR5 6400:


Same Rig at 7600 XMP (no tuning yet):


This is everything identical except ram -

so you can see the cpu minimum FPS went from 208 to 224 (usually about 230ish - I have stuff open now, not a clean boot).


HWUB did some stuff:

Here you can see ram tuning on intel 13th gen -- look at the DDR5 6000 tuned. You're gaining on average about 5-10% on just tuning timings. You're not going to get that from a 5500mhz to 5700mhz a (3.6% bump in clockspeed) - especially when the clockspeed is not a limiting factor for the lows..

Combine this with some windows tweaks (disabling vbs, priority tweaks, ultimate performance mode etc.) and you will net another few % and you have a rig that's running 10-15% faster with no clockspeed bump. But if you spent your time chasing the last 3.6% clocks you would get a rig that's like 1-2% faster and consumes 800W and heats your room.
Thanks for that info!

Yeah, I was not disagreeing or trying to put up an argument for the clock speed vs memory situation, I was just saying I haven't seen much data for 1440p/4k testing with memory tuning.

That said, I saw the 3090 in guru3d's test and agree, the HUB tests you posted were 1080p, and your tests were the most helpful but still 1440p. I would definitely say that's not "negligible" as I had previously seen and stated above.

I have some DDR5-6000 that is B-die and doesn't tune...long story, but I have been considering trying to find some A or M-die 7200 RAM that is more tunable...I just have not found any real evidence to make it worth spending a couple hundred bucks and then trying to sell mine if I game at 1440p and my gains will be as I had previously thought: "negligible". I will also say that from the research I've done, and watching Buildzoid's videos, it certainly seems a risky endeavor and I don't think I really want to risk my Windows install...so I'd have to come up with another HD with a sacrificial Windows install that I can mess with the tuning on, then switch back over once I have things stable (so I don't risk corrupting my OS or files)...which I don't feel like doing, so I'd likely be on XMP or something very close to that, and that again makes me think that 7200-7600 memory at XMP is not going to be 5-10% faster than mine. Sorry for the book of a response, I just wanted to explain why I was so curious. Definitely not going deeper into this as it would detract from OP and I was just trying to settle the related question of what they'd gain from memory tuning.

Apex has a 300 FPS engine limit...
Sorry, Apex was probably a bad example. I just see ads for those people here and there on social media for whatever e-sports-oriented shooters people are into. I like FPS games, but generally not those where people are looking for hundreds of FPS.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2007
Messages
10,189 (1.71/day)
Location
Austin Texas
Processor 13700KF Undervolted @ 5.6/ 5.5, 4.8Ghz Ring 200W PL1
Motherboard MSI 690-I PRO
Cooling Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120 w/ Arctic P12 Fans
Memory 48 GB DDR5 7600 MHZ CL36
Video Card(s) RTX 4090 FE
Storage 2x 2TB WDC SN850, 1TB Samsung 960 prr
Display(s) Alienware 32" 4k 240hz OLED
Case SLIGER S620
Audio Device(s) Yes
Power Supply Corsair SF750
Mouse Xlite V2
Keyboard RoyalAxe
Software Windows 11
Benchmark Scores They're pretty good, nothing crazy.
Thanks for that info!

Yeah, I was not disagreeing or trying to put up an argument for the clock speed vs memory situation, I was just saying I haven't seen much data for 1440p/4k testing with memory tuning.

That said, I saw the 3090 in guru3d's test and agree, the HUB tests you posted were 1080p, and your tests were the most helpful but still 1440p. I would definitely say that's not "negligible" as I had previously seen and stated above.

I have some DDR5-6000 that is B-die and doesn't tune...long story, but I have been considering trying to find some A or M-die 7200 RAM that is more tunable...I just have not found any real evidence to make it worth spending a couple hundred bucks and then trying to sell mine if I game at 1440p and my gains will be as I had previously thought: "negligible". I will also say that from the research I've done, and watching Buildzoid's videos, it certainly seems a risky endeavor and I don't think I really want to risk my Windows install...so I'd have to come up with another HD with a sacrificial Windows install that I can mess with the tuning on, then switch back over once I have things stable (so I don't risk corrupting my OS or files)...which I don't feel like doing, so I'd likely be on XMP or something very close to that, and that again makes me think that 7200-7600 memory at XMP is not going to be 5-10% faster than mine. Sorry for the book of a response, I just wanted to explain why I was so curious.
I actually had this same dilemma, and please -- by all means disagree - this is a nerd forum after all.

I had 64GB of 6200/6400 memory and was super curious to see what would happen with 7600 -- so i grabbed some 48GB sticks really cheap Oloy kit (that I will get around to tuning or so i tell myself).

I can say that cyberpunk (the game I'm currently playing) definitely does feels a smoother in 4k but it's because of my settings --i'm locked at 120FPS with DLSS no RT and only 80-90% usage on the 4090, so running straight CPU bottleneck the entire time (100% load on all P cores). They all do feel slightly better varying degrees. It's really because of the latency i think -- I can feel the difference between 65 and 55 latency and see it in the numbers, but the speed seems somewhat irrelevant.

When you bottleneck the GPU fully at 4k then no - ram's not gonna make a difference. If you're playing competitive or high FPS you can still be latency bound even at 4k,.

Is it night and day difference? definitely no - but it is more difference than a 200Mhz cpu bump - absolutely.
 
Joined
Jul 29, 2023
Messages
30 (0.14/day)
System Name Shirakami
Processor 13700k (5.7 GHz (2c) / 5.6GHz (4c) / 5.5 (8c) Ring 48x) / E 4.4 GHz / 175W PL
Motherboard ASUS Gaming Z690 ITX - Thermaltake Contact frame
Cooling Corsair iCUE H100i ELITE CAPELLIX (50% Fan @ idle - 75% @ load - Balanced pump)
Memory 2x24GB Hynix M-Die @ 6800 (32-40-32-34-28) - Fully tuned secondary/tertiary
Video Card(s) 6900 XT Reference: 2250 MHz load AVG. / 2100 mem / 200W draw
Case Lian Li Q58: Open side panel, 120mm fan on DDR5 / PCH / NVMe - 2x 120mm fan GPU exhaust
VR HMD Reverb G2 V2
Software Windows 10 Pro (NTLite stripped down) - Process Lasso on Ecores
hello everyone i have

mobo asus z690 hero bios 2802

i9 14900k sp98 p106 e84 mc80

cooler nh-d15

i see a lot of people with sp like mine overclock the cpu to 5.7 with 1.16-1.8v

mine need 1.21-1.22 llc6 and bios prediction show 1.19 and still the cpu not stable

does i have bad cpu? does it motherbord problem? or mybe the cooler?

thanks for the help
NH-D15 is a great cooler, don't misunderstand, but it's not going to get you too far with a 14900k. The main issue with your CPU is the thermal density, you'll hit thermal limitations long before voltage.. unless, you disable hyperthreading - which is what I do (you can check my specs).

If all you do is game, you can really benefit from three things when it comes to CPU-related overclocking.

1. Core frequency - of course, pushing it higher is often better. Most games only care about single threaded performance on modern CPU's. Once you have enough multithreaded performance, single is often what holds you back the most. For the games I personally play, frequency is all that matters - hyperthreading does absolutely nothing whatsoever to boost my framerate. My testing in Cyberpunk 2077 showed an 8% boost with HT enabled, and is one of the few titles that actually scale with HT. Other games show little to no difference.

2. RAM tuning. I recognize your screen name because I helped you previously tune your memory in another thread. It's an easy +8% if you do it correctly.

3. Process lasso. I don't see very many people discuss this, but it's a wonderful application that I recommend using. It lets you bind applications, permanently, to your selected cores. I leave all of my necessary bloatware pinned onto the efficiency cores. While the boost in framerate is pretty miniscule (2% at most) - the frametimes, in my experience, are better in CPU bound scenarios.

Overclocking is a lot different than what it once was. You can't really set a big OC without utilizing a power limit these days, unless you're direct-die & custom looping. I've tested and tuned my system extensively and can tell you the following:

In the harshest CPU bound environment I tested (Cyberpunk 2077, 720p, no frame rate cap) - the CPU draws 150 watts with spikes up to 165 watts when set to 1.44V (1.41 under load) - Hyperthreading disabled. Because the game utilizes efficiency cores, I would expect around 180 watts of power draw at similar voltages, since you have 8 more e-cores.

My power limit is set to 175W.
I would recommend using 200 to 220 watts for yourself.
You have to change short duration and long duration to the same amount (that's what PL1=PL2 means) - it caps your CPU at the set wattage. So 200 or 220 for both.

The best way to overclock currently, assuming you don't play things such as simulators that commonly push hyperthreading fairly hard, is to disable hyperthreading altogether. It lowers the thermal density greatly. As a disclaimer, if you're doing video editing or number crunching or any other type of work that actually loads the CPU fairly heavily, just leave HT enabled. Otherwise, you'll benefit greatly from disabling it from a thermal and voltage standpoint.

I recommend skimming through this video by Buildzoid.

Addressing your voltage of 1.22 @ LLC6 - this is normal. If you're on an ASUS BIOS, in my experience, you often need around 0.0200 mV higher than what's stated for the prediction - with that amount increasing the nearer you get to the frequency wall. I'm running LLC6 as well on my ASUS board, the stated vdroop is fairly minimal - but it's likely much lower, since there's a voltage drop across the CPU socket (which is why I'm fine with running 1.45v daily)

So my recommendations for core tuning are the following:

Leave the cache alone, and if you do tune it, don't go above 48x / 1.300v (it's called CPU L2 in hwinfo64) - realistically you should need only 1.200v for 46x. Don't test your luck with pushing cache voltages. It will break your chip and gives minimal gains.

Disable hyperthreading and try 1.35v LLC6 at 5600 MHz (realistically you should be able to push 5700+ on a nicely binned CPU).

Once you've finished stability testing, set a short duration & long duration power limit of 200 or 220 watts.

Don't go above 1.38v / 100 C because I don't want to be responsible for your CPU degrading. I don't know if this is your first time overclocking, but if it is, the 14900k is one hell of a chip to tame and not beginner friendly whatsoever.
 

Attachments

  • lasso.png
    lasso.png
    81.9 KB · Views: 60
Joined
Jan 5, 2021
Messages
74 (0.06/day)
thanks for everyone for the help

i want to ask another question

if i rise core pll can higher value can lower the vcore?

my stock core pll is 0.900 how much can i rise for safe?
 
Joined
Jul 29, 2023
Messages
30 (0.14/day)
System Name Shirakami
Processor 13700k (5.7 GHz (2c) / 5.6GHz (4c) / 5.5 (8c) Ring 48x) / E 4.4 GHz / 175W PL
Motherboard ASUS Gaming Z690 ITX - Thermaltake Contact frame
Cooling Corsair iCUE H100i ELITE CAPELLIX (50% Fan @ idle - 75% @ load - Balanced pump)
Memory 2x24GB Hynix M-Die @ 6800 (32-40-32-34-28) - Fully tuned secondary/tertiary
Video Card(s) 6900 XT Reference: 2250 MHz load AVG. / 2100 mem / 200W draw
Case Lian Li Q58: Open side panel, 120mm fan on DDR5 / PCH / NVMe - 2x 120mm fan GPU exhaust
VR HMD Reverb G2 V2
Software Windows 10 Pro (NTLite stripped down) - Process Lasso on Ecores
thanks for everyone for the help

i want to ask another question

if i rise core pll can higher value can lower the vcore?

my stock core pll is 0.900 how much can i rise for safe?

In my experience, the only thing that you *MAY* have to tune is CPU Input voltage, which by default is 1.800
Pushing that to 1.8800 can help with stability at the far end of overclocking (1.45v or higher).

At the day's end, what matters is how much power the CPU is receiving. There's no silver bullet to getting a higher clockspeed. Even if you manage to get a lower vcore, the transistors are still going to necessitate a certain amount of current to run through them for switching on and off.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2020
Messages
576 (0.46/day)
System Name ASUS TUF F15
Processor Intel Core i5-10300H
Motherboard ASUS FX506LHB
Cooling Laptop built-in cooling lol
Memory 24GB @ 2933 Dual Channel
Video Card(s) Intel UHD & Nvidia GTX 1650 Mobile
Storage WD Black SN770 NVMe 1TB PCIe 4.0
Display(s) Dell 27 4K Monitor S2721QS; Samsung Odyssey G55 Curved 2K 144 Hz LC27G55TQWRXEN
Audio Device(s) LOGITECH 2.1-channel
Power Supply ASUS 180W PSU (from more powerful ASUS TUF DASH F15 lol)
Mouse Logitech G604
Keyboard SteelSeries Apex 7 TKL
Software Windows 11 Pro
%1 lows matter more and that's were RAM speed / timings come into equation. Extra 200mhz for the CPU isn't going to do anything if it's not at 1080 low playing CS2
or 720p, remember, it's "cybersport settings":D
 
Joined
Dec 25, 2020
Messages
4,187 (3.59/day)
Location
São Paulo, Brazil
System Name Project Kairi Mk. III "Lunar Tear"
Processor 13th Gen Intel Core i9-13900KS Special Edition
Motherboard MSI MEG Z690 ACE (MS-7D27) BIOS 1.F0
Cooling id-cooling Frostflow X 360 w/ Thermalright BCF and Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut Extreme
Memory G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB 32GB DDR5-6800 F5-6800J3445G16GX2-TZ5RK @ 6400 MT/s 30-38-38-38-70-2
Video Card(s) ASUS ROG Strix GeForce RTX™ 4080 16GB GDDR6X White OC Edition
Storage 1x WD Black SN750 500 GB NVMe + 4x WD VelociRaptor HLFS 300 GB HDDs
Display(s) 55-inch LG G3 OLED
Case Cooler Master MasterFrame 700 in bench mode
Audio Device(s) EVGA Nu Audio (classic) + Sony MDR-V7 cans/KZ ZSX IEMs
Power Supply EVGA 1300 G2 1.3kW 80+ Gold
Mouse Razer DeathAdder Essential Mercury White
Keyboard Redragon Shiva Lunar White
Software Windows 10 Enterprise 22H2
Benchmark Scores "Speed isn't life, it just makes it go faster."
my cpu does 5.5p 44e on 1.10v load llc3 stable all tasks

i saw with the same cpu sp98 people do 5.7p 44e on 1.17-1.18v pulls on cinbench 278waat

when i try 1.18v the cpu not stable in r23 i need more volt

if i will get beter cooler can my cpu be stable in low voltage?

No, and I strongly suggest you give up before you damage your hardware. The 13900KS/14900K is already the fastest CPU around.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2020
Messages
576 (0.46/day)
System Name ASUS TUF F15
Processor Intel Core i5-10300H
Motherboard ASUS FX506LHB
Cooling Laptop built-in cooling lol
Memory 24GB @ 2933 Dual Channel
Video Card(s) Intel UHD & Nvidia GTX 1650 Mobile
Storage WD Black SN770 NVMe 1TB PCIe 4.0
Display(s) Dell 27 4K Monitor S2721QS; Samsung Odyssey G55 Curved 2K 144 Hz LC27G55TQWRXEN
Audio Device(s) LOGITECH 2.1-channel
Power Supply ASUS 180W PSU (from more powerful ASUS TUF DASH F15 lol)
Mouse Logitech G604
Keyboard SteelSeries Apex 7 TKL
Software Windows 11 Pro
Top