Post your Cinebench R20+15+R11.5+2003 Scores **Don't Read The OP PLZ**

[Tech Wizard]

7 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

I would say 1250-1300 for that cpu.  If you do the tips from the op then that should get you a decent increase,  also if you look on the spreadsheet at the 2011 socket sheet you will see what other people are getting with similar cpus. 

I looked up 7 results from the spreadsheet with my exact CPU at different clocks. My CPU is not performing worse than theirs at same clocks. Will attack pic below.

5 minutes ago, arnavvr said:

4.7-4.8 should do it.  Also use W7 in Realtime and high performance mode for best results. 

4,5 is the highest I'm willing to go. Cooling holding me back. How can I run W7 in realtime? High performance mode is chosen in power savings

3 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

The cpu and cooling may not be good enough for that speed.  Running realtime,  closing programs and tuning primary ram timings should get 20-30cb extra. 

How can I run realtime? Thanks for the tip regarding software, will do another try later with all programs closed. I don't want to play with RAM, as I have no knowledge about it 

 

Here's my scores with at 4 different frequencies. Will re-do them all again tomorrow with all programs closed, and see if I get any higher:

 

[arnavvr]

Just now, Tech Wizard said:

I looked up 7 results from the spreadsheet with my exact CPU at different clocks. My CPU is not performing worse than theirs at same clocks. Will attack pic below.

4,5 is the highest I'm willing to go. Cooling holding me back. How can I run W7 in realtime? High performance mode is chosen in power savings

How can I run realtime? Thanks for the tip regarding software, will do another try later with all programs closed. I don't want to play with RAM, as I have no knowledge about it 

 

Here's my scores with at 4 different frequencies. Will re-do them all again tomorrow with all programs closed, and see if I get any higher:

 

Look on the first page of this thread. 

[Tech Wizard]

36 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

Running realtime,  closing programs and tuning primary ram timings should get 20-30cb extra. 

28 minutes ago, arnavvr said:

Look on the first page of this thread. 

Followed the video in the main post, without playing with ram timings. Closing all programs, running in realtime only gave me +10cb, from 1216 to 1226. Oh well...

 

[Jumper118]

6 hours ago, Tech Wizard said:

Followed the video in the main post, without playing with ram timings. Closing all programs, running in realtime only gave me +10cb, from 1216 to 1226. Oh well...

 

well 10cb is much better than nothing  

[Ray_]

22 hours ago, Jumper118 said:

 

I was talking about the v1 not the V3.

 

It seems you have not done enough research before building your PC or you have got your information from a bad source. 

 

You have a 6950x now so it's too late,  but basically it is the worst cpu for any solution at that price point. The only reasons to owe one is for extreme oc or epeen. By running it at stock you are making the value of this cpu even worse. 

 

Now you also being concerned about the cpu dying is also not an issue because 90% of the time a motherboard will die long before the cpu due to them having loads of things to go wrong. A cpu even overclocked to a reasonable voltage should last 8-10 years with no problems. If you wanted to cpu to last the longest possible time you would run stock speed,  but you would also lower the voltage. This would make your cpu last literally for ever and by the time it dies we will probably have 0.14nm cpus with 100 cores

 

An average 6950x on water should do 4-4.5ghz depending how good it is, this is a big improvement over stock. because you are using water cooling temps won't be an issue and the sweet spot overclock for a 6950x will be using around 1.3-1.4v.  This will give you  good lifespan,  temps and maximise the performance of the cpu. 

 

 

thanks a lot Jumper118
i appreciate all your efforts explaining all of this to me
so if i want to OC i should be looking between 1.3v - 1.4v
but if i want to decrease the voltage as you said , what numbers should i be looking at ?
i am having some issues about turbo boost and overclocking
if you have time check it out .

 

[Jumper118]

38 minutes ago, Ray_ said:

thanks a lot Jumper118
i appreciate all your efforts explaining all of this to me
so if i want to OC i should be looking between 1.3v - 1.4v
but if i want to decrease the voltage as you said , what numbers should i be looking at ?
i am having some issues about turbo boost and overclocking
if you have time check it out .

 

Well it's not a xeon so decreasing the voltage is fairly pointless because if you were looking to undervolting a xeon would go much lower.  6950x is binned to go fast. I don't understand where you got the idea that it will shorten the lifespan a significant amount. There are people running Q6600 for 2007 that have been overclocked since day 1 that are still running fine. 

 

Yes 1.3-1.4v is the range you should be looking at for a good performance /voltage/temps ratio. 

[Ray_]

sync all cores to " 4000mhz " , 1.217v
2112 cb .

[Jumper118]

2 hours ago, Ray_ said:

sync all cores to " 4000mhz " , 1.217v
2112 cb .

That is a decent improvement. Remember to include cpuz in the screen shot please.  Which motherboard do you have? It is best to keep the cache ratio as close to the cpu frequency as you can.  I am not sure how well the cache overclocks on Broadwell e vs Haswell E but it does help a lot it also helps you get the most out of your quad channel memory. 

[DeanS]

13 hours ago, Jumper118 said:

That is a decent improvement. Remember to include cpuz in the screen shot please.  Which motherboard do you have? It is best to keep the cache ratio as close to the cpu frequency as you can.  I am not sure how well the cache overclocks on Broadwell e vs Haswell E but it does help a lot it also helps you get the most out of your quad channel memory. 

Slightly out of topic here, do we have an overclocking tutorial thread? Im stuck at 4.8 with i7 980x, would like to learn more if anyone would care to offer. Im sure ray would love to learn more about this topic as well, so just asking.

And thanks.

[Jumper118]

3 hours ago, DeanS said:

Slightly out of topic here, do we have an overclocking tutorial thread? Im stuck at 4.8 with i7 980x, would like to learn more if anyone would care to offer. Im sure ray would love to learn more about this topic as well, so just asking.

And thanks.

no there are just linus's guide which are fairly useless for any advanced users  also when they redid the forum they put the guides and tutorial section at the bottom and it completely died, there used to be a couple of active oc thread on there. 

 

I even asked for it to be moved up, but they said people post youtube tutorials in there that will compete with linus and he wont be able to fuel his lambo with that premium fuels to the shoved it down to the bottom where nobody can see it  

[Dabombinable]

Got an excuse for a new kit-had my good 1600 stick die, so I'm running single channel DDR3 1333. What kind of boost in Cinebench would I see with DDR3 1866 for example? BTW from my DDR2 tests, unless the latency is ridiculously high for the speed I won't worry about it too much, since DDR2 800 4-4-4-12 had significantly higher latency than DDR2 1066 5-6-6-16.

 

Edit: That stick of DDR3 was also responsible for all of the CTD I'd been having in games. So I think my 4790K results might be invalid.

[-CLASSIFIED-]

welp , maybe kinda have an x99 mobo on order lol ... not sure what cpu to pickup now.. 

[Jumper118]

1 hour ago, Dabombinable said:

Got an excuse for a new kit-had my good 1600 stick die, so I'm running single channel DDR3 1333. What kind of boost in Cinebench would I see with DDR3 1866 for example? BTW from my DDR2 tests, unless the latency is ridiculously high for the speed I won't worry about it too much, since DDR2 800 4-4-4-12 had significantly higher latency than DDR2 1066 5-6-6-16.

 

Edit: That stick of DDR3 was also responsible for all of the CTD I'd been having in games. So I think my 4790K results might be invalid.

Get some psc

18 minutes ago, TheGingerKid said:

welp , maybe kinda have an x99 mobo on order lol ... not sure what cpu to pickup now.. 

5820k or 5960x hands down. Best £/performance one that platform. 

[-CLASSIFIED-]

6 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

 

5820k or 5960x hands down. Best £/performance one that platform. 

I have one 5820k right now in my dads build , its a shit overclocker , kinda a shame. was thinking of a 6800k but from what I saw they don't really oc much. 

[Lays]

@Jumper118 do you have a winderps 7 skylake ISO that's stripped?

 

I want to see if I can do 5.2 cpu 5.1 cache 4133 12-11-11

[Jumper118]

7 minutes ago, TheGingerKid said:

I have one 5820k right now in my dads build , its a shit overclocker , kinda a shame. was thinking of a 6800k but from what I saw they don't really oc much. 

Wouldn't bother with Broadwell e at all.  A used Haswell E is the way to go but wait for zen to lower the price of the 5960x you might get one for $400-500

[-CLASSIFIED-]

3 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

Wouldn't bother with Broadwell e at all.  A used Haswell E is the way to go but wait for zen to lower the price of the 5960x you might get one for $400-500

hahahahaha yea theres no way in hell I can get a 6950x for that cheap here in Canada.. try more like 1300 used 

ill probably get another 5820k and hope its a gooder lol 

[Ray_]

19 hours ago, Jumper118 said:

That is a decent improvement. Remember to include cpuz in the screen shot please.  Which motherboard do you have? It is best to keep the cache ratio as close to the cpu frequency as you can.  I am not sure how well the cache overclocks on Broadwell e vs Haswell E but it does help a lot it also helps you get the most out of your quad channel memory. 

thank you , i am using Asus x99 A II , I will make sure to include cpuz next time . i haven't tried overclocking the cash yet , but i will ,
i have a question and seems like you know a lot and you have a lot of experience

my cpu have turbo boost 2.0 : up to 3500 mhz on all cores
and turbo boost 3.0 : up to 4000 mhz which should affect only 1 core for single threaded performance .
 

i found an option in my motherboard called
sync all cores , which turns out to be applying 4000mhz to all cores at the same time not just to one core .
and while rendering i checked and all cores were truly running at 4000mhz .
but in the bios in the info tab the speed still say 3000 mhz !
 

i got back one more time to the bios and this time  i selected " by specific core "
i did a render and all cores were running at 3500mhz except core #9 was running at 4000 mhz , went to the bios and in the info tab the speed is still 3000 mhz .
 

it's obvious what's happening in here
sync all cores pushes all the cores to 4000 mhz
by specific core pushes only 1 core to 4000 mhz
but in both situations the speed in the info tab in the bios still say 3000mhz .
if it was considered as an overclock it should display 4000 mhz in the speed tab .
at least when i choosed sync all cores and they all were running at 4000 mhz .  
 

so i am not sure what can i call this ,
is it  overclocking of my CPU ?
or is it more like an extra option that let my motherboard apply the turbo boost 3.0 to all my cores instead of 1 core ?
 

note that when i choose sync all core
i got the option to add a specific number " multiplier " for core #0
but i left it to auto ,  it decided to be 4000mhz not me .
and i know that if it was an overclocking i have to set it myself
 

that what got me thinking its might be enabling turbo for all cores , not an overclock ,
especially that in the sync all cores tab it say
target cpu turbo mode frequency : 4000
target cpu @ atx frequency : 4000
it doesn't say target cpu clock speed it said turbo , so that was so confusing
 

so what do you think ?
is it an easy way of overclocking my cpu ?
or is it a special option in the motherboard that let me enable the turbo boost 3.0 to all
cores not just one and it have nothing to do with overclocking ?
 

peoples were splitted in half
some are saying this is OC , others are saying it's just enabling turbo 3.0 for all cores .
so i couldn't get an obvious answer

you can watch a video if you like : https://youtu.be/O8sRVplInHs
 

[Jumper118]

6 hours ago, Ray_ said:

thank you , i am using Asus x99 A II , I will make sure to include cpuz next time . i haven't tried overclocking the cash yet , but i will ,
i have a question and seems like you know a lot and you have a lot of experience

my cpu have turbo boost 2.0 : up to 3500 mhz on all cores
and turbo boost 3.0 : up to 4000 mhz which should affect only 1 core for single threaded performance .
 

i found an option in my motherboard called
sync all cores , which turns out to be applying 4000mhz to all cores at the same time not just to one core .
and while rendering i checked and all cores were truly running at 4000mhz .
but in the bios in the info tab the speed still say 3000 mhz !
 

i got back one more time to the bios and this time  i selected " by specific core "
i did a render and all cores were running at 3500mhz except core #9 was running at 4000 mhz , went to the bios and in the info tab the speed is still 3000 mhz .
 

it's obvious what's happening in here
sync all cores pushes all the cores to 4000 mhz
by specific core pushes only 1 core to 4000 mhz
but in both situations the speed in the info tab in the bios still say 3000mhz .
if it was considered as an overclock it should display 4000 mhz in the speed tab .
at least when i choosed sync all cores and they all were running at 4000 mhz .  
 

so i am not sure what can i call this ,
is it  overclocking of my CPU ?
or is it more like an extra option that let my motherboard apply the turbo boost 3.0 to all my cores instead of 1 core ?
 

note that when i choose sync all core
i got the option to add a specific number " multiplier " for core #0
but i left it to auto ,  it decided to be 4000mhz not me .
and i know that if it was an overclocking i have to set it myself
 

that what got me thinking its might be enabling turbo for all cores , not an overclock ,
especially that in the sync all cores tab it say
target cpu turbo mode frequency : 4000
target cpu @ atx frequency : 4000
it doesn't say target cpu clock speed it said turbo , so that was so confusing
 

so what do you think ?
is it an easy way of overclocking my cpu ?
or is it a special option in the motherboard that let me enable the turbo boost 3.0 to all
cores not just one and it have nothing to do with overclocking ?
 

peoples were splitted in half
some are saying this is OC , others are saying it's just enabling turbo 3.0 for all cores .
so i couldn't get an obvious answer

you can watch a video if you like : https://youtu.be/O8sRVplInHs
 

you need to look at what its is on cpuz under load when you are in windows, it is clearly running faster than before, this is why its important to show cpuz in the screenshot! you should have all cores sync then they are all running the same speed and its easier to tell what speed they are running at. 

6 hours ago, TheGingerKid said:

hahahahaha yea theres no way in hell I can get a 6950x for that cheap here in Canada.. try more like 1300 used 

ill probably get another 5820k and hope its a gooder lol 

i said 5960x not 6950x  

[Ray_]

14 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

you need to look at what its is on cpuz under load when you are in windows, it is clearly running faster than before, this is why its important to show cpuz in the screenshot! you should have all cores sync then they are all running the same speed and its easier to tell what speed they are running at. 

here are 3 readings , all cores are running at 4000 mhz at the same time
the main question was
am i overclocking the cores by 500 mhz each ?
or am i applying the turbo boost 3.0 " 4000 mhz " to all cores instead of 1 core ?
because some considered syncing all cores just like overclocking them
others said its normal , you are pushing the cores to the max limit without OC
so what do you think ?

[Jumper118]

13 minutes ago, Ray_ said:

here are 3 readings , all cores are running at 4000 mhz at the same time
the main question was
am i overclocking the cores by 500 mhz each ?
or am i applying the turbo boost 3.0 " 4000 mhz " to all cores instead of 1 core ?
because some considered syncing all cores just like overclocking them
others said its normal , you are pushing the cores to the max limit without OC
so what do you think ?

 

 

 

intel chips work by using turbo speed to up the multi, if you disable turbo your cpu runs at stock speed even if you set the multi to 40x   does your cpu really do 4ghz under load at 1.217v only? that is quite a good chip i think. it should do 4.3ghz on 1.3ish volts 

[Ray_]

1 minute ago, Jumper118 said:

intel chips work by using turbo speed to up the multi, if you disable turbo your cpu runs at stock speed even if you set the multi to 40x   does your cpu really do 4ghz under load at 1.217v only? that is quite a good chip i think. it should do 4.3ghz on 1.3ish volts 

yes i made a list
when all cores set to 4000 mhz , the max voltage is 1.217v
when all cores set to 3900 mhz , the max voltage is 1.190v
when all cores set to 3500 mhz , and core #9 to 4000 mhz ,the max voltage is 1.084v

what is the max 100% safe voltage ? ,

you really encouraged me about overclocking stuff ^^ thanks to you .
i hope i won't regret it , since i am not planning to upgrade my WS before 6 years at least

[Jumper118]

9 minutes ago, Ray_ said:

yes i made a list
when all cores set to 4000 mhz , the max voltage is 1.217v
when all cores set to 3900 mhz , the max voltage is 1.190v
when all cores set to 3500 mhz , and core #9 to 4000 mhz ,the max voltage is 1.084v

what is the max 100% safe voltage ? ,

you really encouraged me about overclocking stuff ^^ thanks to you .
i hope i won't regret it , since i am not planning to upgrade my WS before 6 years at least

1.4v is probably the safe limit. anything under that is extra safe really. 1.3-1.35v would probably be the best performance to voltage ratio. 

[Jumper118]

12 minutes ago, Ray_ said:

yes i made a list
when all cores set to 4000 mhz , the max voltage is 1.217v
when all cores set to 3900 mhz , the max voltage is 1.190v
when all cores set to 3500 mhz , and core #9 to 4000 mhz ,the max voltage is 1.084v

what is the max 100% safe voltage ? ,

you really encouraged me about overclocking stuff ^^ thanks to you .
i hope i won't regret it , since i am not planning to upgrade my WS before 6 years at least

also like i said stuuf on the motherboard tends to fail 1st. i was running my 3930K on a rivf for a lot of benchmarks and the motherboard memory slots died before the cpu. the cpu still works great even though its had 1.7v pushed through it multiple times. Motherboard have a lot to go wrong with all the different slots and chips on them a cpu does really have much on it that will fail. 

[Ray_]

2 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

also like i said stuuf on the motherboard tends to fail 1st. i was running my 3930K on a rivf for a lot of benchmarks and the motherboard memory slots died before the cpu. the cpu still works great even though its had 1.7v pushed through it multiple times. Motherboard have a lot to go wrong with all the different slots and chips on them a cpu does really have much on it that will fail. 

1.7v !!! you have to go to prison for doing that lol  .
what is the highest overclock you have ever achieved ?