Discussion in 'Overclocking & Cooling' started by mrw1986, Feb 9, 2012.
Haha, I appreciate his dwelling inside. He can give me more solid advice that way lol.
Alright, well here's a question. With these chips, is there a HUGE difference between say 4.5ghz and 5ghz? Would I notice anything with my system specs? I game and transcode movies. The way I look at it is that I did all that stuff fine on my Q6600 @ 3.6ghz.
I'm not crazy familiar with the difference 500mhz will make with these chips.
I figure if I run 4.5ghz at a lower voltage it will be better overall considering what Paulie and dave have said.
Heh. All i do is clock stuff for reviews and take care of my kids. I do tend to have a bit more experience than the avg joe.
Not that i think that's something to brag about. I'm TPU's board/memory reviewer, so knowing about this stuff is just something I need to do my job right.
To me, there is a very perceptible difference between 4.5 GHz and 5 GHz. The question is whether it's really nessecary.
When you OC CPU, L3 and such gets clocked up too(L3 matches speed with CPU speed), so you get a healthy memory bandwdith boost with the CPU speed increase as well. This makes for a larger overall impact that can be noticed from just CPU multi jumps. Most apps aren't going to take advantage of the extra speed, but encoding will, for sure.
Hmm, well I guess it's all up to what I can be stable at 1.4v. Does upping the VTT/PLL still make a difference? I couldn't get this chip stable at 5ghz 1.45v with my PLL raised past 1.709v (go figure). Would raising my VTT perhaps let me obtain 5ghz at 1.4v? Also, I'll have to toy with my LLC settings.
I'm using offset mode right now so I can take advantage of SpeedStep. Maybe I'll see what my highest clock is at 1.4v fixed and then translate that to my offset value.
I find that 4.8ghz on water is a sweet spot, and a good chip will do this on 1.38v. Almost every chip I've had needs significantly more than that to gety stable at 5.0. I can tell a difference in performance b/t 4.5 and 4.8, but not really b/t 4.8 and 5.0.
I've also found many chips to clock better with lower PLL. I have better luck clocking with fixed voltage rather than offset...but I think that most people prefer offset.
Now that you mention it I have seen 4.8ghz thrown around multiple forums as a "sweet spot" for these chips.
Some good information in this thread. Thanks guys for giving me some even more useful insight as well. Good to know once I finally make the jump also up to Sandy.
Yup. However, if you crunch or keep a heavy load on the chip, it's only a sweet spot for a chip on water. I prefer 4.6 on air, but I'm really OCD about my temps, and I don't like to see higher than 65c, even with stability testing.
PLL = CHECK!!! I run 1.65v PLL on my personal chip. helps keep temps a bit lower, and also let me use less CPU voltage.
Offset vs manual...dependso n the board. Gigabyte..use offset. ASUS, use manual. At first i tohught that this was due to AWARD/AMI BIOS implementations, but now that Gigabyte is also on AMI, the same is still true, so it's jsut the way the BIOS is programmed that dictates which is best. However, if you go on ASUS ROG forums, you'll find ASUS "Staff" recommending that you use Offset, and no CPU PLL Overvoltage. I haz a confuse there...
Sweetspots...generally, yes, but there will be chips that jsut plain ol don't support those multis. Crazyeyesreaper has a chip that is stuck on 43x multi. I doubt he'd even hit 4.8 GHz on that chip. And it's not his board, as I was pushing 5 GHz on his obard(which i sent to him)without any problems.
Anyway, Paulie and I agree on most of this stuff.
I wouldn't run that high voltage 24/7. Electron migration will eat a chip up low temps or not.
FYI I didn't read the entire thread so forgive me if I missed you guys covering that.
Again, backing up the don't go over 1.4 vCore....
... I look forward to your results M.
imo dont go over 1.4, i like to volt around 1.37-.39 around 4.8ghz
I have an ASRock and from what I've been reading offset is the way to go. Most people find a more stable overclock at a lower voltage that way. I'm not sure if I want to go lower on my PLL. From what I've seen they said going lower than 1.709 on my board isn't a good idea. They don't really explain why, though. Also, with Sandy I understand every chip has a Multi wall now.
I've not been able to get an Asrock contact as of yet, so haven't had a chance to play with their products, ergo i don't have any advice there. There have been a few boards that I have played with that don't even allow you to lower PLL votlage from the stock setting, anyway.
My 2600K gets 1.65v PLL, but my 3960X...it needs only 1.45v PLL. Sadly, my 3960X isn't a very good clocker, and I think it might have degraded a bit too. PLL more comes into play with BClk scaling, anyway, and beucase PCI and BClk are tied together, there's not a lto of wiggle room there.
I've heard many users happy with ASRock, but there are quite a few that aren't happy as well, so I really want to see for myself what's what with them.
So I've had several people on oc.net tell me my OC is fine for 24/7 use. However, I think I value your opinion more since you seem to have more experience...definitely trying 1.4v
As would we all like you to see for yourself. Why can't you just get your hands on an Asrock board or three some other way? A trade or something, idk.
Yeah, I have found that often OCN opinions differ. I go with the angle of 100% 24/7 stable OCs, with trying to make sure that stabilty, and not benchmark scores, are the first priority. I mean, I can run my 2600K @ 5.0 GHz easily...but I run 4.6 GHz or even stock, because I like to save a bit on the power bill. I think most users in OCN would run the 5 GHz speed 24/7.
Which is not to say their opinion is wrong, but it's clear that the end goals do differ, so the perspective differs.
You know, I have considered this, but that would not be fair to the other companies that sponsor me with products. In order for a company to have a review posted, they MSUT supply the part that is being reviewed. I really want to play with AsRock, but I must stick within those guidelines, mainly becuase I like to have the ability to test extensively outside of the testing done for reviews, and I like to update review numbers at my leisure. I've already OK'ed with W1zz my reviewing AsRock products, but finding a rep that can get me parts seems like trying to get blood from a stone.
This will be handy to know for when I come to overclock my 2700K.
Listen I get you wanna push limits but keep it in perspective....
1. Do you need such an OC? Are you running something so taxing it needs it?
2. Is it worth the risk? The problems?
3. If so buy the OC insurance.
Im still arguing with myself to OC or not. This 2600K eats everything.
I'm running an Asrock Z68 E4 Gen3. I tend to find more long term stability with fixed voltage, but better suicide runs (or as close as I get to one) with offset. The difference is minimal though. As far as opinions at OC.net, to each their own. Experience tells me that there is very low performace gain to potential cost going from 4.8 to 5.0 24/7. The chips do not scale well enough with voltage over 4.8 to justify 200mhz.
Use as much voltage as you want. Ivy Bridge will be out in a month or so and you'll just buy one of those anyways. Even if it starts to degrade... so what. It not like SB chips aren't capable if you have to run at a lower clock eventually. It's just computer hardware, I say abuse the sh*t out of it.
You belong on OCN.
1.4-1.45, with proper cooling, hasnt seen to shown any degradation at this point in time. It could take the usuable life to 10 years instead fo 15, but who the hell, that overclocks, keeps a chip that long?
Once you start getting over that, and especially to 1.5v+ that is when the degradation can occur. Under 1.4v is nothing.
They have a pair over there I guess...vs n00bfest here!
You should stick to buying prebuilts. Make sure it has a nice locked bios and run as stock as possible.
There's two sides to this coin.
Different crowds have different needs and wants. You can call it a noobfest, that's fine. But if we count the number of watercooled rigs here vs there, I'm sure it paints a very different picture. Just because a user has different requirements from their PC doesn't make them a noob..unless you think knowing more and pushing more makes you smarter, and somehow superior.
Sure. Some don't care about hardware longevity. But we've got an increasing number of users here that tend to keep their machines for long stretches, and don't upgrade on every release.
I don't need the top performance my rig can give me..when stock is fine. I find no need to OC and give performance boosts I have no use for.
Not every situation is going to suit every user. I choose the recommend what will work for everyone, and those that need more..will get it on their own.
Separate names with a comma.