4790k -- does disabling HT/cores increase overclock?

[SuperCactus]

I read somewhere that disabling hyperthreading and cores will yield better overclocks (?)

1) how can I disable cores/hyperthreading (on Z97), if possible?

2) Does it actually work? For example, if 4.8ghz is a standard 4790k water overclock with all 4 cores, would I be likely to hit 5Ghz on just 3 cores w/o hyperthreading, using a maximum strength watercooler (thermaltake water 3.0 ultimate)?

any links or brief explanations/info greatly appreciated.

thanks everyone.

[Guest]

I read somewhere that disabling hyperthreading and cores will yield better overclocks (?)

1) how can I disable cores/hyperthreading (on Z97), if possible?

2) Does it actually work? For example, if 4.8ghz is a standard 4790k water overclock with all 4 cores, would I be likely to hit 5Ghz on just 3 cores w/o hyperthreading, using a maximum strength watercooler (thermaltake water 3.0 ultimate)?

any links or brief explanations/info greatly appreciated.

thanks everyone.

Most likely false, I hit 5, but the voltage, through the fucking roof.

Don't run it at 5. 4.9 at max no one needs 5, except me lmao 

[Elfuego]

1> In the bios there should b an option

 

2> you might get a few mhz but probably not much, not sure why you would bother but its silicon lottery - I have 1 core (out of 6) that will do well past 5.5ghz, and a second that will do 5.9Ghz but its not worth running it.

[TheMcSame]

Can't say I know for sure, though I doubt it, not sure why you'd sacrifice HT for the sake of an extra few MHz though. Those 4 threads will do far more than a tiny bump in clock speed will... That and you'd essentially have an i5 with an i7 "badge".

[SuperCactus]

Can't say I know for sure, though I doubt it, not sure why you'd sacrifice HT for the sake of an extra few MHz though. Those 4 threads will do far more than a tiny bump in clock speed will... That and you'd essentially have an i5 with an i7 "badge".

good question, here's the situation:

Starcraft 2 maxes performance on 3 cores according to benchmarks (game uses 2, background OS/etc uses 3rd core). It's also heavily CPU limited. Ive got a 1440p 144hz monitor, so pushing out frames quickly is important.

The reason for going with the 4790k (I currently have a 4690k) is that I presume 4790k's are binned/manufactured more carefully, since their stock speed is 4.4ghz rather than the 4690k's 3.9ghz stock turbo. What do you think, man?

[0ld_Chicken]

I did not notice a big reference when disabling ht. Maybe a few degrees. I haven't extensively tried disabling cores but i did once for an oc competition and i got to 5 but it was still very iffy on volts and temps. Didn't play with that too much though

[Guest]

good question, here's the situation:

Starcraft 2 maxes performance on 3 cores according to benchmarks (game uses 2, background OS/etc uses 3rd core). It's also heavily CPU limited. Ive got a 1440p 144hz monitor, so pushing out frames quickly is important.

The reason for going with the 4790k (I currently have a 4690k) is that I presume 4790k's are binned/manufactured more carefully, since their stock speed is 4.4ghz rather than the 4690k's 3.9ghz stock turbo. What do you think, man?

the 4790k is one of the fastest 4 core CPU's you won't need a few extra MHz, 4.9GHz is overkill for any game let alone 5.

The only time we would get 5 is if we are doing Cinebench

Granted, I'm extremely lucky and can use 4.9 as my daily driver and, then set the voltage to some 1.5 volts and can run 5GHz and if I put some 1.7 volts boot at 5.1/5.2 

My chip handles thermals extremely well, but the voltage, it sucks that right up.

[TheMcSame]

good question, here's the situation:

Starcraft 2 maxes performance on 3 cores according to benchmarks (game uses 2, background OS/etc uses 3rd core). It's also heavily CPU limited. Ive got a 1440p 144hz monitor, so pushing out frames quickly is important.

The reason for going with the 4790k (I currently have a 4690k) is that I presume 4790k's are binned/manufactured more carefully, since their stock speed is 4.4ghz rather than the 4690k's 3.9ghz stock turbo. What do you think, man?

Even in those sorts of situations, I doubt 100MHz is going to be a game changing difference.

 

As for binning, the i7s will be 'binned' in a sense, but as far as I'm aware the mainstream Core iX chips (and possibly the pentium chips?) are all made the same way but some have parts disabled for stability reasons since Intel bin their chips for the sake of stability rather than overclocking. Don't get me wrong, the K chips probably receive some of the better chips out the lot but stability is the no.1 priority. The chips are (probably) made with the intention to be i7s/Xeons and then 'downgraded' until they're stable or recycled/literally binned

[i_build_nanosuits]

As far as i'm concerned no disabling HT did not significantly improved my overclocking capabilities...in fact it won't change anything i run 4.2ghz at 1.16v, 4.3ghz at 1.26v and 4.4ghz at 1.35v regardless.