Dirty move by Intel

[stconquest]

12 minutes ago, MageTank said:

 

I highly recommend using windows 10 pro. If you do not have windows 10 pro, there are other ways to try to defer the updates, but they are not 100% full proof. Set your connection as metered, and windows will not download updates. However, if you accidentally connect to another network, be prepared for a world of hurt. You can try to manually add group policy editor to windows 10 home (like people did with 8.1) but its very sketchy, and can break windows if done incorrectly. Point is, you are going to need to stop automatic updates if you want to ensure your overclock remains untouched. 

 

Not updating your bios, and not letting a microcode be forced upon you through windows update are the two ways to 100% guarantee that your non-K overclocking will remain functional. That's Intel's only possible methods to stop it. Some ASRock boards even mock Intel's new update, by allowing you to choose the microcode that loads on your CPU within the BIOS itself. I know the OC Formula board has this option. 

You don't need an aftermarket cooler to overclock the i3 though. Non-K overclocking disables AVX by default, which means the "super scary extremely hot prime95 killer" instruction set no longer exists during the OC. This means even when running Prime95, it will be less hotter when overclocked, than what it would be at stock. Using the stock cooler on my i5 6600T in an ITX case, I only hit 82C at 4.5ghz running 48k FFT prime95. That's with 4 real cores, instead of 2 cores with HT. An i3 would run cooler, and no normal gaming load would equate to 48k FFT prime95. 

 

Besides, Z boards offer way more price:performance. Memory speed alone can increase minimum FPS anywhere from 10-20% depending on dGPU and your CPU overhead. Seeing as 2800mhz DDR4 memory is rather cheap (and manual overclocking is free) it adds up to quite a bit of performance once you factor in both CPU and memory overclocks. 

 

 

Those i3 OC/RAM OC numbers were impressive.  The Witcher 3 was the only title that seemed a bit disturbing with a 20 FPS (80 [i56600KRam2666] vs 60 [i36100OC/RAMOC], minimums) difference at times.  Other games had as big a difference at times but were well into the hundreds for both CPUS.

 

Quick question, are you able to push the OC on these CPUs, or do you pick a safe number and test for stability?  I ask simply because the temperature monitor goes wonky.

[MageTank]

Just now, TJCINC said:

I just asked him if he looked into it yet, he said the same as you, about gpedit and win 10 pro then moving to say oh, you dont have that,  do you think he re read my comment or just typed to say something. as he did several times, I thanked him for his help the first 4 times.   You provided actual information which is more appreciable  so thank you.   I did stop the auto update service from starting and it seems to be effective, the tool that you can download to check and hide updates wont even work but without gpedit, its a small stopgap.  In this case its preferable to break an install than a cpu.  are you looking for this update yourself? could you post here if it appears? 

The update does not exist yet. It's merely paranoia at this point. Basically, just keep checking for microcode 0x76. If that appears within any of the Windows Updates, then you avoid it like the plague. If I see it, I will warn everyone about it. It's big enough news that it might even end up in the Tech News section, as it did back when the G3258 was stopped in the same method.

 

1 minute ago, stconquest said:

Those i3 OC/RAM OC numbers were impressive.  The Witcher 3 was the only title that seemed a bit disturbing with a 20 FPS (80 [i56600KRam2666] vs 60 [i36100OC/RAMOC], minimums) difference at times.  Other games had as big a difference at times but were well into the hundreds for both CPUS.

 

Quick question, are you able to push the OC on these CPUs, or do you pick a safe number and test for stability?  I ask simply because the temperature monitor goes wonky.

Plenty of people have gone beyond my personal overclock. I use an ITX case, and now, an ITX cooler. It is harder for me to push higher overclocks due to thermal limitations (This CPU is going to be in a case that is only 2 inches thick, so a 45mm CPU cooler will struggle to keep up). I am personally backing my CPU down to 4.4ghz, and my memory to 3260mhz CL14-14-14-28-CR1. That is where i will stop with my non-K overclocking. Others have taken their locked CPU's to 4.5ghz on average, with the highest I have seen being 4.8ghz, though they did not provide a 24/7 stability validation. I was able to take my Pentium G4400 to 4.8ghz in my same ITX case, on the stock cooler. Under water, or high end air cooler, there is no doubt that I could push 5ghz on that chip. It just overclocked so well.

 

When you lose the CPU thermal sensor upon non-K overclocking, your best bet is to use the PECI sensor. It is extremely, extremely accurate (being off by only 0.5C in my personal tests). The only thing is, you will no longer be able to monitor the specific temperature differences of each core, so knowing if you need to delid or not will be difficult. 

[Biggerboot]

20 minutes ago, stconquest said:

Those i3 OC/RAM OC numbers were impressive.  The Witcher 3 was the only title that seemed a bit disturbing with a 20 FPS (80 [i56600KRam2666] vs 60 [i36100OC/RAMOC], minimums) difference at times.  Other games had as big a difference at times but were well into the hundreds for both CPUS.

 

Quick question, are you able to push the OC on these CPUs, or do you pick a safe number and test for stability?  I ask simply because the temperature monitor goes wonky.

Faulty temp monitoring can be it's own issue, but with an i3 you're actually probably a bit safer because less cores means less heat (at higher loads I believe, don't quote me on that or lean on that hypothesis).

 

Temp monitoring is important whether or not your overclocking as it allows your CPU and fans to throttle depending on the workload.

[X_X]

Temperature can still be monitored with the right software but don't expect thermal throttling to work, only thermtrip at ~125C to 130C.

 

When people buy a cheaper Windows OS that artificially limits memory, not due to technical reasons but licensing with a soft limitation do they complain or try to hack it to allow as much as the more expensive versions? At least with the more expensive chips one would hope the binning process means they are better overclockers.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but it was the board manufacturers that advertised non-k bclk overclocking, not Intel. Seems to me the fault lies with the board manufacturers unless Intel gave them permission to use the hack.

[Biggerboot]

1 hour ago, X_X said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but it was the board manufacturers that advertised non-k bclk overclocking, not Intel. Seems to me the fault lies with the board manufacturers unless Intel gave them permission to use the hack.

If that's the case then fine (I'll have to do some article digging).  

The g3258 situation still escapes me though.  Nobody may care about that chip anymore but it was news to me.

 

I still hope Intel eventually gets away from the idea of locked/unlocked processors again, because it really doesn't help anybody - the same people are going to buy the same chips (OEMs vs. Enthusiasts).  Price/performance wise I get more for my dollar with a locked chip because of having to pay for more cooling and a higher end mobo.  I'm only considering it now because an i3 is good for 90% of my workloads and if I can get a little more out of that platform along with the OC'd RAM I'd be really into it, while having a solid upgrade path later on.  Or what I'd really like to see is an unlocked i3 6300 priced right below the i5 6400.  C'mon intel, there's a market there... I know that's a bit offtopic, but you get my point.