katulen

Hello. First of all, specs: Intel Core i7 9700K NZXT Kraken X72 Asus Rog Strix Z390-F GAMING Asus Rog Strix RTX2070 O8G GAMING 8GB GDDR6 Corsair Vengeance RGB 16GB: 2x8GB DDR4 3000MHz Samsung 970 EVO Plus MZ-V7S500BW 500GB (NVMe) - M.2 Card Toshiba P300 3.5´´ 2TB - 7200rpm 64MB SATA-600 Corsair RM750x NZXT H series H700i Window Black I started to experience some instability with my 5GHz overclock. I decided I wanted to start from scratch, but before I did so, I updated BIOS to newest version and it reset everything as well. I am currently struggling to hit the same overclock as previously, and I wondered if my CPU might have degraded. The overclock which were stable before was: Multiplier: 50 XMP: Enabled AVX: Auto MCE: Auto LLC: 5 Manual voltage: 1.385v VCORE @ load: 1.350v AC/DC Load Line: 0.01 / 0.01 VCCIO: 1.250v VCCSA: 1.150v It passed 8 hours Realbench, 2 hours Prime95 26.6, Intel Burn Test & OCCT Linpack NonAVX. Now it struggle passing 2 hours of Realbench, 15mins of P95 etc. My temps has always been fine, hovering around 50-65 under load (gaming), so I doubt that should have caused any damage. So what happened throughout the last 10 months or am I doing something wrong ?? Thanks in advance. Best regards

I did not, and it make sense. Quote - "the first run will always have the full turbo budget, but if subsequent runs do not allow the budget to refill, it may get less turbo." I just didnt see this scenario back 10 months ago when I just got my 9700K. It was running 4.6GHz at stock with no throttling. However, now, after the BIOS update that wasnt the case. I had to make the "budget pool" bigger (changing short & long duration power limits) to be able to maintain 4.6GHz under heavy load. So I do not know what the difference from 10 months ago till now is.

So I did what you said. I changed long and short duration power limits to 4095 (max) and ran 10x CBR15 tests with no throttle at all. But, I really thought my system should and would be able to run at 4.6GHz on heavy load without throttling with default BIOS settings. I am pretty sure it was able to do so 10 months ago, before I started my first OC on this CPU.

Hmm. Havent heard about that tho. Also, as I write this, I am currently in a game now, holding 4.6GHz at all times - no throttling at all. I guess the difference between running the game & Cinebench R15 - there is a different in the current send to the CPU - which is why power limit is exceeded on cinebench and not the game? Also, I will take a look at the article you send.

Okay thanks. Also read my previous post as i edited as you were writing yours. So basicly, i7 9700k is suppose to boost to 4.6GHz if all 8 cores is being used. So when running Cinebench R15 it should stay on 4.6GHz throughout the entirety of the test. But since it throttles due to power limit exceeded, it down clocks. But why it throttles when running default, i simply dont understand.

Everything is default, except XMP is enabled. So MCE is on "Auto - Lets BIOS optimize". But if MCE is ON, wouldnt it try to boost all cores at 4.9GHz at load? Also, it seems I can do 2x Cinebench R15 where it sits on the expected 4.6GHz, but then the 3rd it starts throttling due to "Power Limit Exceeded". EDIT: Found this article on MCE: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?106375-MCE-explanations-and-others Quote: "Auto means that the board has liberty to determine what limits are reasonable, competitive, reliable and logical. Factors such as thermal, performance, Segment, competitor’s out of box perf, stability are taken into account." So that might be the reason it's hitting Power Limit or?

Hello. I recently ran into some instability issues with my overclock and system in general. I wanted to start from scratch, so I decided to update my BIOS before, since there was 4 newer versions for my board. I succesfully updated BIOS, and wanted to run some Cinebench R15 tests with only XMP enabled, to see if everything was fine. I noticed the first couple of runs, was just fine - running at 4.6GHz on all cores as it should. But after 2-3 runs, I suddenly noticed my core clock throttling down to 4.2/4.3GHz. I noticed in HWinfo that it says "Power Limit Exceeded" for all 8 cores was "Yes". https://gyazo.com/060f6aaf5deb2fa2517b9c919f76e685 I know that I can probably change Long and Short duration power limits in the bios. But my CPU is supposed to run 4.6GHz on all cores as default - i.e. Turbo Boost right? My system is running only with XMP enabled - everything else is default/stock on a completely fresh BIOS. How come this is happening ? My specs: i7-9700k Asus Rog Strix Z390-F NZXT Kraken X72, Asus Rog Strix RTX2070 Corsair Vengeance RGB 3000MHz @ 16GB (2x8) Corsair RM750x Best regards

Hmm i see. I just thought the reason for doing stresstest, was to stress the CPU as hard as possible, and therefor it made a good reference to whether your OC was stable or unstable for anything else So out of curiousity. What did you do with your OC to fix crashing in Assassins Creed?

Well I would like too. But im pretty confident all my drivers are up to date. The one I didnt do was CAMAPP, but did that yesterday as written above. Therefor had some suspicion that could be the culprit. Also my NVIDIA driver is the 2nd latest. And reason for that, is that the newest NVIDIA driver is causing issues, and therefor i rolled back. But again, if it was a voltage issue, how come I can pass 2x Realbench 8hour stresstest with no issue, but playing PUBG makes it crash ?

Yeah thats what I got told as well. The thing is, i did several 8hr realbench testing and all passed. With 1.315v (offset -0.053v) vccio 1.100v. I am currently at 1.340v (offset -0.053v), VCCIO 1.150v. So you'd assume its a voltage issue. But if it was, how come I can pass 2x Realbench 8hour stresstest with no issue, but playing PUBG makes it crash ? Both is also AVX. Had "IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL" 3 times today, while playing PUBG. 1 time while i was ingame, and 2 times while i was ALT+TAB'd and EDIT: So I did some research, and I have no clue if this could be a potential cause. CAMAPP (NZXT app) asked me for 3 days to update, which I didnt. However, I did update yesterday. When googling IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL camapp, there is several people back in the days, whom had issues with CAMAPP causing BSOD IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL. Thoughts on this?

3000 MHz. DRAM Voltage is 1.300v (didnt touch this - default after enabling XMP) I got told my vccio was high when it was on 1.3XXv, so tryid decreasing it. I then got the same BSOD twice within 30 minutes. First time, i'd upping vcore by 10mv. Then got the same BSOD, so upped VCCIO to 1.150v. Trying to figure out what is causing this.

Alrite, thanks. Btw. atm. i trying to finetune my OC by lowering the voltage as far as i can, using adaptive. Ran 8hr Realbench last night, and everything seemed ok. However, today while playing PUBG i get a BSOD, with the error message: IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL I've read different opinions to this error. Some say its Driver related, some says its Overclock related. So it makes me wonder, whether it's a driver issue, windows issue (reinstall windows) or a voltage issue? I've also finetuned my VCCIO from 1.300v to 1.100v and had it like that for the past 3 days, but perhaps it needs more juice ? Any thoughts on this?

I've got Manual Mode, Adaptive Mode(Optional: Offset) and Offset Mode. So when you refer to "Offset mode" you don't think about Adaptive Mode + an offset, but Offset Mode as its own option, yeah? Is there any information on the specific VID tables available out there? Can't seem to find any. Found an Intel Article from years back, but I assume its different from chipset to chipset. FYI, I made the current OC this morning, and everything worked fine. But tonight i noticed that I had a "WHEA Error" listed in my HWiNFO. Didn't have any BSODs, crashes or anything all day. But I assume when getting WHEA Errors there is something, somewhere, which isn't stable. So upped the voltage by 0.005

I know. As said, it is just itching my eye, and wanted to see if it was normal and if I could fix it Okay, so did very little testing. Made my adaptive voltage 1.315v and 0 offset - During RB vcore was 1.385v. I made a negative offset of 0.053v, ran RB again, and now its at 1.341v, and in games sitting on 1.332v. So now its the opposite from what I had before, however better - I would assume. But if I at some point play a game which is more CPU heavy, and it crashes - I assume I just adjust the voltage or offset accordingly, correct? Another thing I made notice of. Due to my negative offset 0.053v, it made my minimum idle vcore a bit lower. Lowest is 0.568. Before it was +0.600v. Is that a problem? I only did like 15-30mins of RB testing, so obviously have to do more thoroughly testing, and will so when I get this tuned in.

Problem is, if i do that i wont be stable in Realbench / Prime95 etc. Only for my games. I already know my min. voltage is 1.332v for being stable at 5.0GHz. Which is why i am currently using 1.350v with LLC 5, because that gets me to 1.332v-1.341v. As said above. Already clarified whats my min. voltage for being stable is. Can't I work out from that? The issue is, if I put a negative offset of 0.018. It will probably work fine in games, since i get a slight vboost. However if I then do Prime95 i wont be stable there. I hope you understand what i say here

For starters. Reboot your PC, go into BIOS and reset everything to default. Hint; When you're in BIOS, hit F5 makes it go back to default. Save changes and exit BIOS. When it boots up, open up the software, which you used to overclock your GPU, and put everything back to default. See if that helped with your game/chrome issue. Regards to buying new PC parts, i am sure there a loads of guys in here that has some good tips for you

Okay. So the thing is, with LLC 5 i get vdroop, with LLC 6 i get vboost. So your suggestion is to e.g. use LLC 6 to get vboost, but adjust offset accordingly to that? Problem is tho, if im on 1.368v when playing games, with LLC 6 i will probably have around 1.380-1.390v. So I will need to use a negative offset of 0.030-0.040v. Is that how you mean or? If so, would it change anything to do it the otherway around ? So e.g. using LLC 4 (bigger vdroop) but adjust with a positive offset ?

Hmm okay. But for the gaming part of the "issue", it is not something I should be worried about ? And could it potentially be "fixed" by using a negative voltage offset ? It iches my eye to see i'm having a vcore at 1.368v x'D And add to that, I assume using a fixed voltage instead, would proberly fix all the "issues" combined.

Make sense. Well that applies with the game part, where its not really under any load, and therefor a slight vboost occur. But it doesn't really apply to Realbench vs. Prime95 nonAVX then ? Cause its the straight opposite in my situation right. Or is Prime95 just more stressful vs. Realbench, even tho the Prime95 i use is nonAVX ?

Hey guys. I've managed to get my overclock stable with adaptive voltages, however I have experienced some weird behavior which im trying to find an answer to. I hope you can help me. Here is a quick brief of my OC settings: Adaptive voltages: 1.350v Offset 0 (Auto) AVX: Auto LLC: Level 5 When running Realbench, my VCore is 1.350v (no vdroop). When running Prime95 nonAVX my VCore is 1.332v (vdroop). When playing games, e.g. CS:GO or PUBG, my VCore is 1.368v (vboost) So is the reason behind this voltage behavior, caused by the type of load that is put on the CPU ? E.g. stresstesting using Realbench, which uses AVX instructions, is causing my CPU to need more voltages, and therefor sits on 1.350v. Where running Prime95 nonAVX causes my CPU to be fine with 1.332v, due to no AVX instructions. And with games, where my CPU load is 40-50%, needs even less voltages to be stable, and therefor makes a slight vboost. Or perhaps the answer is due to having Offset set to auto ? I don't know if above is the cause of this, I do feel it could be a solution, but i am absolutely clueless on this tho. Please correct me if I am wrong. Hoping to find an answer to this behavior.

No worries, i appreciate your help so far. Perhaps a guy with the knowledge comes In at one point. Hopefully UPDATE on my 5.0GHz attempt: So i messed around with my 5.0GHz profile yesterday, and seem to be stable now. 5.0GHz XMP I - Enabled MCE - Auto AVX - Auto LLC - Level 5 SVID Support - Disabled CPU Core Voltages: 1.385v Intel Burn Test - Passed several times Prime95 v26.6 (1344-1344 FFT) - 1 hour passed Realbench - 8 hours passed. Question is now, how do i get this to work with adaptive voltages, so i can have lower voltages when idling? So if I want to change from fixed voltages to adaptive voltages to get the benefit of that, how do I get around that correctly ? Do I just put in 1.385v as Adaptive Voltage or do I also add some sort of +/- offset as well?Do i change IA DC load lines set to 0.01 ?

I agree 100% here. But point just were that i probably need to test 4.9GHz setup more than 30 minutes to conclude it is stable. However, it was stable in that sense it didnt crash/bsod in the 35 mins of testing i did, and therefor i moved on to try push it further So back to my 5.0GHz attempt. The reason im crashing, COULD be because i need to finetune my LLC to the current vcore, right? Or add more vcore voltages. Is that my only two options as this point?

I know what you mean. But I just find it very fun & exciting to mess around with overclocking, had loads of fun doing it with my GPU and wanted to try with my CPU, which ive never done before. So it's not nescessarily because i NEED the extra 400MHz. Im simply just trying to figure out if I have any more buttons to dial, before i "give up" and conclude i lost the silicon lottery. I mean these settings seemed pretty stable for 35 minutes of stability testing (Cinebench r15, Prime95 & Realbench) Multiplier: 49AVX Offset: -3XMP: XMP 1 EnabledMCE: DisabledSVID Support: DisabledBLCK Aware Adaptive Voltage: DisabledCPU Core/Cache Voltage: 1.350 Obviously it needs a longer stability testing period to actually confirm 100% stability. I just wanna see if i can push it that extra nodge, without harming my chip ofc I could try use Multicore Enhancement. Then it should hit 4.9GHz on all cores with auto voltages i pressume.

I might have lost the silicon lottery, you're right. However, what would you suggest me to try now? I was about to try 1.375v with LLC on level 6. Or you maybe have something else in mind?

I am not sure about the scale tbh, but i found this. This youtube clip is from Derbaeur. It start from the correct timestamp. Although here he talks about a z370-p board, but i assume the LLC works the same throughout the varies boards. This is from an ASUS forum, looks to be written by a ASUS employee. "On the ASUS boards, lower LLC values result in 'more droop', while higher values result in less (well, there's more to it than that, but this isn't the medium to discuss such things). It has been that way for as long as I can remember." Found this on a reddit post about same subject. "25% would allow for a lot of vdroop while 100% will allow for less vdroop If your overclocking, try and get stable on auto If the vdroop is forcing you to use more voltage then your comfortable with then try 50%. Then 75%. I wouldn’t feel comfortable at 100%. CPU’s need some kind of vdroop so they don’t hit a voltage wall under load and I dunno if 100% is too aggressive" Reddit as well: "With Asus Boards its 1 is lowest LLC = highest vdroop. And 8 is highest LLC = in most cases vboost." So you want me to try lower my spikes or increase them? That will tell me where on the scale i wanna try.