Seeking 50% overclock

[porina]

It is often said as a joke "you don't play 3DMark" but recently I think I am... picked up a key in an earlier Steam sale and working on getting all the achievements. There's 4 left for me to get, but the one I'm not sure about is to overclock a CPU 50% over stock. The problem is... the few overclockable systems I have start at a high enough base clock for this to be unrealistic.

 

The i5-5675C has a base clock of 3.1 GHz, so I'd need to hit 4.65 GHz. In my past plays it was already close to the wall at 4.2 GHz and I ran out of thermal headroom at that point anyway. Even if going bench stable, I can't see hitting 4.6+ on it.

 

There's the 6600k but the higher base of 3.5 GHz would need 5.25... nope. And the 6700k is a big pile of nope.

 

What if I were to get new toys to play with? The Pentium G3258 at base clock of 3.2 needing 4.8 GHz... is this realistically attainable? That's still not a trivial overclock on Haswell.

 

What about AMD side? I'm totally out of the loop there.

[RS2007GOD]

Not sure but disabling cores can help overclocks, the ln2 boys do it

[Imakuni]

Did you try disabling all cores and leaving only 1 active to increase thermal headroom? I mean, sure, scores are going down. But just for the sake of an achievment, that could be an option.

[Electronics Wizardy]

7 minutes ago, porina said:

The i5-5675C has a base clock of 3.1 GHz

That sucker doesn't oc well at all.

 

g3258 is probaly the easyest modern cpu.

 

If you willing to get a older cpu, theere are many cpu's that will oc that far.

 

q6600 should be that hard to hit 3.6 with

 

 

[TheRandomness]

My friend's G3258 hit 5GHz on the stock cooler at 1.35v....

[porina]

10 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

That sucker doesn't oc well at all.

I noticed...

 

10 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

g3258 is probaly the easyest modern cpu.

I'm eyeing a few on ebay. Don't really want to pay much for one if I go this route at all.

 

10 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

q6600 should be that hard to hit 3.6 with

Got rid of all my Q's last year... I have some E's left but they are not on OC platforms.

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, porina said:

I noticed...

 

I'm eyeing a few on ebay. Don't really want to pay much for one if I go this route at all.

 

Got rid of all my Q's last year... I have some E's left but they are not on OC platforms.

Also depending on how this is checking, you could probably fake this oc in a vm very easily 3d mark probably wouldn't notice.

[porina]

2 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Also depending on how this is checking, you could probably fake this oc in a vm very easily 3d mark probably wouldn't notice.

I'm not up to speed on tinkering with VMs in this way, and not sure if it needs to be validated or not since they do check for cheating. I'd rather go hands on hardware.

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, porina said:

I'm not up to speed on tinkering with VMs in this way, and not sure if it needs to be validated or not since they do check for cheating. I'd rather go hands on hardware.

A 10000% OC might be suspicous.

 

1MHZ stock

 

3ghz current clock...

[Imakuni]

8 minutes ago, porina said:

I'm not up to speed on tinkering with VMs in this way, and not sure if it needs to be validated or not since they do check for cheating. I'd rather go hands on hardware.

Oh yeah, you could do it like I did ages ago. I have a locked A6 3500 at 2,4 ghz. HOWEVER, I've updated my Bios to the latest version and schazam!, it unlocked my multiplier. It was still hardware locked within the chip itself, so even if I put 40 as a multiplier, the CPU was still running at those 2.4ghz and getting the same scores...

 

... but 3D Mark didn't know that 

[LeStringMan]

5 hours ago, porina said:

It is often said as a joke "you don't play 3DMark" but recently I think I am... picked up a key in an earlier Steam sale and working on getting all the achievements. There's 4 left for me to get, but the one I'm not sure about is to overclock a CPU 50% over stock. The problem is... the few overclockable systems I have start at a high enough base clock for this to be unrealistic.

 

The i5-5675C has a base clock of 3.1 GHz, so I'd need to hit 4.65 GHz. In my past plays it was already close to the wall at 4.2 GHz and I ran out of thermal headroom at that point anyway. Even if going bench stable, I can't see hitting 4.6+ on it.

 

There's the 6600k but the higher base of 3.5 GHz would need 5.25... nope. And the 6700k is a big pile of nope.

 

What if I were to get new toys to play with? The Pentium G3258 at base clock of 3.2 needing 4.8 GHz... is this realistically attainable? That's still not a trivial overclock on Haswell.

 

What about AMD side? I'm totally out of the loop there.

Your best bet is probably the G3258, on the AMD side it would be hard to do because they already have such high clockspeed out of the box, realistically though you could do it with a FX-6100 3.3ghz, or even 6300 3.5ghz, so long as you get a good chip. I had a PGS FX-6300 (PGS is the best bin, basically all of them can hit 5ghz) that would do 4.945 ghz on 4 cores with only 1.425 volts, and air cooling (1.55 is your max safe voltage on AMD side.). Other bins like PGN are really hit and miss in terms of breaking 5ghz mark.

Spoiler

 

[Morgan MLGman]

16 minutes ago, LeStringMan said:

Your best bet is probably the G3258, on the AMD side it would be hard to do because they already have such high clockspeed out of the box, realistically though you could do it with a FX-6100 3.3ghz, or even 6300 3.5ghz, so long as you get a good chip. I had a PGS FX-6300 (PGS is the best bin, basically all of them can hit 5ghz) that would do 4.945 ghz on 4 cores with only 1.425 volts, and air cooling (1.55 is your max safe voltage on AMD side.). Other bins like PGN are really hit and miss in terms of breaking 5ghz mark.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

How do you determine whether the FX CPU is PGS or PGN?

[i_build_nanosuits]

i used to have a Q6600 CPU which had a stock clock of 2.4ghz and i had that overclocked to 3.6ghz stable...so that was exactly a +50% overclock...

 

33 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

How do you determine whether the FX CPU is PGS or PGN?

i believe the FX-8370/9370/9590 are the best bin...all the others are...well..you know :p

[Morgan MLGman]

6 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

i used to have a Q6600 CPU which had a stock clock of 2.4ghz and i had that overclocked to 3.6ghz stable...so that was exactly a +50% overclock...

 

i believe the FX-8370/9370/9590 are the best bin...all the others are...well..you know

Well, my 8350 was a great overclocker, achieving 4,5GHz at 1,36mV...

 

What I mean is, there was no 8370 earlier before it released, only 8320 and 8350, so the 8350 was the "best" bin then

[i_build_nanosuits]

2 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Well, my 8350 was a great overclocker, achieving 4,5GHz at 1,36mV...

 

What I mean is, there was no 8370 earlier before it released, only 8320 and 8350, so the 8350 was the "best" bin then

no, they had the FX-9370 and FX-9590 that came along the 8350...those were the hand picked chips...for the 8320/8350 that was the same bin, it was just a matter of luck of the draw...you got the FX-8350 you overpaid...i was smart and i got the FX-8320...both of us got lucky...4.5ghz is good...mine was doing 4.6 though

 

In india they were also selling the FX-8300 and to OEM as well..and those i believe were the handpicked garbage chips that couldnt sustain 4ghz.

[LeStringMan]

36 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

How do you determine whether the FX CPU is PGS or PGN?

is my spoiler picture not working?, as @i_build_nanosuits said 9370/9590/ and some 8370 (I have seen a few PGN) are PGS, the 8370E and the 8320E are also almost always PGS, although you can find PGS bins of any FX chip, its on the heatspreader under the part number, a lot of the newer production chips are PGS, my 8300 is a PGS, and like I said my 6300 was as well. Most 8350/8320 were PGN, and like I said those are realllllly hit or miss some will only do 4.5ghz and some can go well into 5ghz.

[i_build_nanosuits]

3 minutes ago, LeStringMan said:

is my spoiler picture not working?, as @i_build_nanosuits said 9370/9590/ and some 8370 (I have seen a few PGN) are PGS, the 8370E and the 8320E are also almost always PGS, although you can find PGS bins of any FX chip, its on the heatspreader under the part number, a lot of the newer production chips are PGS, my 8300 is a PGS, and like I said my 6300 was as well. Most 8350/8320 were PGN, and like I said those are realllllly hit or miss some will only do 4.5ghz and some can go well into 5ghz.

you have a good chip in an FX-8300?! really?
wow that's a first cause all the ones i've talked to were litteraly garbage silicon...some of them would even fail prime 95 AT STOCK

[i_build_nanosuits]

Lol it's funny this guy is right when you go into google image and ask for FX-8320 or FX-8350 processor it always says PGN on the heatspreader but if you check for FX-8320E or FX-8370/9590 for example they are all PGS...FX-8320E is usually one if not THE cheapest FX you can get in the line up...and technically it's as good as an FX-9590 and should overclock very well...

 

Here is an FX-8320E

 

[LeStringMan]

2 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

you have a good chip in an FX-8300?! really?
wow that's a first cause all the ones i've talked to were litteraly garbage silicon...some of them would even fail prime 95 AT STOCK

Yea a lot of the early ones were PGY, if you look on ebay a lot of them are actually PGS, obviously these must be newer production, and if you think about it, how much different could it be from the 8320e? the 8320e is 95w 3.2 ghz with 4.0 turbo, and the 8300 is 95w 3.3ghz 4.2 turbo, if you look at reviews of the 8320e when it launched, some would do 5ghz easy, and some were absolute garbage for overclocking.

[Morgan MLGman]

20 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

no, they had the FX-9370 and FX-9590 that came along the 8350...those were the hand picked chips...for the 8320/8350 that was the same bin, it was just a matter of luck of the draw...you got the FX-8350 you overpaid...i was smart and i got the FX-8320...both of us got lucky...4.5ghz is good...mine was doing 4.6 though

 

In india they were also selling the FX-8300 and to OEM as well..and those i believe were the handpicked garbage chips that couldnt sustain 4ghz.

I bought it second hand, I paid less than for a Haswell i3 here in Poland

I had it at 4,5gHz at 1,36V, which is almost stock I could have easily pushed more, as it didn't even reach 50 degrees C under my beefy aircooler, I just didn't feel like stressing the mobo so much.

[i_build_nanosuits]

8 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

I bought it second hand, I paid less than for a Haswell i3 here in Poland

I had it at 4,5gHz at 1,36V, which is almost stock I could have easily pushed more, as it didn't even reach 50 degrees C under my beefy aircooler, I just didn't feel like stressing the mobo so much.

1.36v oh yeah you had lots of headroom...i used to run mine at 1.48V lol...needless to say, it was manageable in gaming....but i had seperate profiles for when i was doing overnight downloading for example i would load a profile where only 2 modules were active with only 3ghz at stupidly low volts and then another one for video rendering where i was running 4.2ghz with 1.4v or something like that so that the CPU would not get to 70c after 3 minutes of rendering lol

[TheSuspect]

A G3258 and some silicon luck would be your answer. Disable one of it's cores if you have to. Play with the thermals and voltage and hope for the 4,8Ghz mark.

[SteveGrabowski0]

7 hours ago, porina said:

What if I were to get new toys to play with? The Pentium G3258 at base clock of 3.2 needing 4.8 GHz... is this realistically attainable? That's still not a trivial overclock on Haswell.

4.8 GHz might be doable on the G3258. On mine I can run 4.4 GHz stable at 1.18V in a cheap H81 board on the stock cooler. Maybe under water and with a better board (so you could dump 1.4V) it could get those extra 400 MHz.