Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Xg64

Overclocking voltage problem

15 hours ago, Xg64 said:

So I should go for lower voltage as long as the overclock is still stable.

ye, as long as it is stable. run some tests to make sure(i used either Aida 64 and or intel burn test along with HW monitor to check for temperature and stability) the moment it turned off means that its unstable and may require you to either

a.) lower the clock speed

b.) increase the voltage.

 

as i said, higher voltage means more stable overclock.

Recommended Posts

Posted · Original PosterOP

Sorry that I am kind of a noob to ask this.

So I had this Intel 9900k. It is able to run 5Ghz at 1.215V stably. I read and watched some overclocking guides online, one form MSI told me to run 5Ghz at 1.3V, and a video had me tried 1.25V, then I reduced the voltage a little by myself. But these guides did not mention information concerning to how voltage could affect the overclocking. Should I go for a higher frequency at a lower voltage if possible? I mean is there any point to run 5.0Ghz at 1.3V when I can do 1.215V? I think lower voltage is related to a lower temperature, so should I stick with 1.215V or go a little higher?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Xg64 said:

Sorry that I am kind of a noob to ask this.

So I had this Intel 9900k. It is able to run 5Ghz at 1.215V stably. I read and watched some overclocking guides online, one form MSI told me to run 5Ghz at 1.3V, and a video had me tried 1.25V, then I reduced the voltage a little by myself. But these guides did not mention information concerning to how voltage could affect the overclocking. Should I go for a higher frequency at a lower voltage if possible? I mean is there any point to run 5.0Ghz at 1.3V when I can do 1.215V? I think lower voltage is related to a lower temperature, so should I stick with 1.215V or go a little higher?

Higher voltage can make overclocks more stable but will require a lot more cooling.


Im with the mentaility of "IF IM NOT SURE IF ITS ENOUGH COOLING, GO OVERKILL"

 

PS: i cooled a Ryzen 5 3600(65W) with ID cooling SE207 (200W-250W tdp lol)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
4 minutes ago, Martin2132 said:

Higher voltage can make overclocks more stable but will require a lot more cooling.

So I should go for lower voltage as long as the overclock is still stable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Best Answer
15 hours ago, Xg64 said:

So I should go for lower voltage as long as the overclock is still stable.

ye, as long as it is stable. run some tests to make sure(i used either Aida 64 and or intel burn test along with HW monitor to check for temperature and stability) the moment it turned off means that its unstable and may require you to either

a.) lower the clock speed

b.) increase the voltage.

 

as i said, higher voltage means more stable overclock.


Im with the mentaility of "IF IM NOT SURE IF ITS ENOUGH COOLING, GO OVERKILL"

 

PS: i cooled a Ryzen 5 3600(65W) with ID cooling SE207 (200W-250W tdp lol)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not all CPUs are the same, some need more voltage for a given speed, while others need less.

 

Stress testing for 10-15m with Prime 95/smal FFTs should be plenty for finding if you are stable with an air cooler, more than that is a waste unless you are pushing OCs on RAM.

30m-1h would be the longest I would run a stress test for, and only if I was using a water cooler, because water cooling takes longer to reach max temp.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
19 minutes ago, pizapower said:

You should use ''IntelBurnTest v2.54(AVX version)'' @ very high to test your CPU stability.

Using an NH-U12A aircooler. The result is stable for 10 min. VID at 1.314V but I set the voltage in BIOS for 1.215V. Temperature is mostly at 53-65C range but sometimes reach to over 70 degrees. I think there might be room to go lower.

 

 

Capture.thumb.PNG.9cc3182af4a13bcd2c9dd5a8cb121aff.PNG

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Xg64 said:

Using an NH-U12A aircooler. The result is stable for 10 min. VID at 1.314V but I set the voltage in BIOS for 1.215V. Temperature is mostly at 53-65C range but sometimes reach to over 70 degrees. I think there might be room to go lower.

 

 

Capture.thumb.PNG.9cc3182af4a13bcd2c9dd5a8cb121aff.PNG

Under 80 is good, push clocks higher.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your GFlops are very low. My AMD 7 2700 does 154 GFlops @ very high. I think you don't use the AVX version.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Xg64 said:

VID at 1.314V but I set the voltage in BIOS for 1.215V

to read voltage properly, use HWinfo64 and find VR Vout reading.


"What's under the heatsink?" ep1, "Why it's not as good as it seem?" AMD fanboy edition out, episode 2 "Why my gaming board is a scam?" Intel fanboy edition coming soon (this is a link)

Hardware specs below

CPU: i7-2600K 4751MHz 1.44V (software) --> 1.4?V at the back of the socket Motherboard: Asrock Z77 Extreme4 (BCLK: 103.3MHz) CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 RAM: Adata XPG 2x8GB DDR3 (XMP: 2133MHz 10-11-11-30 CR2, custom: 2203MHz 10-11-10-26 CR1 tRFC:230 tREFI:14000) GPU: Asus GTX 1070 Dual (Super Jetstream vbios, +70(2025-2088MHz)/+400(8.8Gbps)) SSD: Samsung 840 Pro 256GB (main boot drive), Transcend SSD370 128GB PSU: Seasonic X-660 80+ Gold Case: Antec P110 Silent, 5 intakes 1 exhaust Monitor: AOC G2460PF 1080p 144Hz (150Hz max w/ DP, 121Hz max w/ HDMI) TN panel Keyboard: Logitech G610 Orion (Cherry MX Blue) with SteelSeries Apex M260 keycaps Mouse: BenQ Zowie FK1

 

Model: HP Omen 17 17-an110ca CPU: i7-8750H (0.125V core & cache, 50mV SA undervolt) GPU: GTX 1060 6GB Mobile (+80/+450, 1650MHz~1750MHz 0.78V~0.85V) RAM: 8+8GB DDR4-2400 18-17-17-39 2T Storage: 1TB HP EX920 PCIe x4 M.2 SSD + 1TB Seagate 7200RPM 2.5" HDD (ST1000LM049-2GH172), 128GB Toshiba PCIe x2 M.2 SSD (KBG30ZMV128G) gone cooking externally Monitor: 1080p 126Hz IPS G-sync

 

Desktop benching:

Cinebench R15 Single thread:168 Multi-thread: 833 

SuperPi (v1.5 from Techpowerup, PI value output) 16K: 0.100s 1M: 8.255s 32M: 7m 45.93s

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
29 minutes ago, pizapower said:

I think you don't use the AVX version

I am trying to find out what happened now. I just downloaded a random IBT v.2.54, I do not know if it's the AVX version, or its too much RAM slowing it down.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
9 minutes ago, pizapower said:

I don't know how safe or shady this site is but I uploaded my IntelBurnTest here https://easyupload.io/0agbob

When I run it, it says "Linepack binary stopped unexpectedly. This could be a result of missing executables, unstable system, or a software bug." So is this caused by insufficient voltage?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
8 minutes ago, Xg64 said:

When I run it, it says "Linepack binary stopped unexpectedly. This could be a result of missing executables, unstable system, or a software bug." So is this caused by insufficient voltage?

It even won't work at 5.0Ghz for 1.25V and 1.3V. Quits right awat. Probably its not a voltage problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
1 hour ago, pizapower said:

Your GFlops are very low.

I decide not to worry about it as long as the clock and temperature is fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
On 11/18/2019 at 2:58 AM, pizapower said:

What's your CB15 score?

Sorry I was out of town for a while. The CB 15 score is 2157

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP

I went higher as Karath suggested, it was stable at 5.1Ghz at1.26V, highest temperature sits at 86℃. I am pretty happy with this result and would not go higher. I just ran IBT again for stability test, but the GFlop is still around 117 at 5.1Ghz.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2019 at 9:53 PM, pizapower said:

You should use ''IntelBurnTest v2.54(AVX version)'' @ very high to test your CPU stability.

There is no AVX Version.  This Intel Burn test uses obsolete Linpack binaries.  There is no version of this ancient stress test that supports AVX.  It was developed during the Core 2 days.

 

If you want the AVX version use:

1: LinX 0.9.6 (35000 sample size is good)

Or

2: Linpack Extreme 1.1.1 (with the /residualcheck or /residualscheck command line switch to check for wrong residuals).

 

If your residuals do NOT match (this is a math equation--the solution should be identical on each loop) then it means you are not stable in this test.

Protip:
If you have hyperthreading enabled and you get LOWER GFLOPS in LinX 0.9.6 (or LinEX) than hyperthreading disabled, your RAM timings are messed up (notably TFAW, TRRD_S and TRRD_L).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×