What do the experts think about this OC guide?

[hill160881]

I used this youtube guide to get my 9600k to 5.1 on my xi formula. Its stable but I feel 1.455 volts is way to high. I have to say it worked just the way he said the first time. In my experience thats rare when overclocking.

https://youtu.be/95Ujni7-fVM

These were the settings I changed per the videos advice. Under load its right at the predicted voltage of 1.412v in cpuz with these settings.
Extreme tweaker screen
-XMP 1 then click no when prompted, because I want to overclock manually.
-AVX offset 3 or 4
-sinc all cores at 5.1ghz

In the external digi power control screen
-Load line calibration 7
-CPU current capability 170%
In the CPU power management screen
Long duration package power limit 4095 maxed out
Package power time window 127 maxed out
Short duration package power limit 4095 maxed out

Extreme tweaker screen again
-CPU core cache current limit max 255.75 maxed out
-min cpu cache ratio 43
-max cpu cache ratio 43
-CPU core voltage override 1.455v

After 1 hour on prime 95 it got really hot a few times and one core ran up to 95c with an average across all cores of 85c. AIDA64 ran for 1 hour with a max temp of 70c and an average of 60c. It stays under 36c while playing overwatch for an hour.

My question is are these voltages necessary or can I get them down with different settings? Or should I leave it and be happy? It would be nice to get them down and go to 5.2ghz.

[Arne_Saknussemm]

der8auer is an expert..so the guide is good...but as always it's only a guide and no doubt tries to account for a whole variety of silicon.

Often your own CPU will have it's own ideal voltages so experiment...try reducing voltage until you encounter instability

[hill160881]

Thanks for the response. Ya if I drop the voltage one setting it gets hardware failures and if I drop it two settings it bsod. So it looks like I have gotten all i will get. I can go to 5.2 but it needs 1.480-1.500v and as much as I dont care about this chip I do need it to keep working even after I upgrade to the 9900k. It would be interesting to see just how far it will go on water.

I will say the stability got much better after I installed a water loop that included the Vram. The temps came down about 20c.

I also increased the dram voltage from 1.050v to 1.200v that made it rock solid at the rams advertised speeds of 2666mhz at xmp 1.


BTW i loved that OC guid to happiness! good stuff.

[Guitarmageddon1]

I actually followed this kaby lake one and it worked just fine. Was the first one I found worth a damn where people didn't copout of using adaptive voltages, the way you should go.

https://edgeup.asus.com/2017/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide/3/

[hill160881]

Why should you use adaptive voltage? What are the benefits?

[Arne_Saknussemm]

hill160881 wrote:
Thanks for the response. Ya if I drop the voltage one setting it gets hardware failures and if I drop it two settings it bsod. So it looks like I have gotten all i will get. I can go to 5.2 but it needs 1.480-1.500v and as much as I dont care about this chip I do need it to keep working even after I upgrade to the 9900k. It would be interesting to see just how far it will go on water.

I will say the stability got much better after I installed a water loop that included the Vram. The temps came down about 20c.

I also increased the dram voltage from 1.050v to 1.200v that made it rock solid at the rams advertised speeds of 2666mhz at xmp 1.


BTW i loved that OC guid to happiness! good stuff.

Heh...cheers for reading:o

Water will certainly help some with load temps and maybe stability ...certainly good for squeezing out that last 1%...but as said...that last 100MHz can be well on the diminishing returns performance wise and not really woth it.

Adaptive can be a neat feature...applies voltage where it's needed at higher than stock turbo frequencies...and it allows downclocking and downvolting (speedste/speedshift) to work vs manual voltage...

Love the avatar by the way:D

[hill160881]

So using this guid and the advice here I have manged to get my voltages down to much lower levels and got a higher clock as well.

I am at
5.0ghz, 4.9ghz avx at 1.310v Prime95 stable
5.1ghz, 5.0ghz avx at 1.390v Prime 95 stable
5.2ghz, 4.8ghz avx at 1.45v Aida 64 stable, gaming profile only. I picked up about 15-20 fps from 5.0ghz

Now I am going to try and set the same profiles but with adaptive mode.

[mdzcpa]

hill160881 wrote:
So using this guid and the advice here I have manged to get my voltages down to much lower levels and got a higher clock as well.

I am at
5.0ghz, 4.9ghz avx at 1.310v Prime95 stable
5.1ghz, 5.0ghz avx at 1.390v Prime 95 stable
5.2ghz, 4.8ghz avx at 1.45v Aida 64 stable, gaming profile only. I picked up about 15-20 fps from 5.0ghz

Now I am going to try and set the same profiles but with adaptive mode.

Nice clocks. The 5.1ghz at 1.390 (AVX at 5ghz) is a nice compromise.

[mdzcpa]

1.455v is quite a bit of voltage for daily use. I use 1.3v to hit 5.1 GHZ all core. I suggest seeing how far your chip can get at 1.3v-1.4v. That last 100 mhz can really require you to crank of the voltage with diminishing returns and heat gets to be an issue. LLC 7 is also heavy for daily use. Some droop is healthy for your chip. Transient overshoot can be rough on a chip especially at those voltages.

[Silent_Scone]

Voltage is excessive but shouldn’t be an issue thermals permitting. Even when running P95 in this way, the current consumed isn’t much of a concern on this platform (although not always the best test of every day use case).

Personally, would drop back to 50 ratio / LLC6 and tune there.

hill160881 wrote:
Why should you use adaptive voltage? What are the benefits?

Namely, using the stock VID stack for non-turbo/ low load multipliers.