|
The 1060 only draws like 70 watts stock, which would be a lot for just the PCI-E slot, especially overclocked. The 1050 is about 50% smaller so uses even less power. Nvidia TDPs are the worst case scenario limits, limited by the bios which you usually only run into while overclocking. The TDP for the 1060 is 120 watts and the TDP for the 1050 is 75 watts, assuming the trend is kind of similar a 1050 probably uses about 40 watts stock, well within the PCI-E power limit. Binning is all kind of a lie, especially for Pascal. Many Pascals are hitting nearly 2GHz just from the factory auto overclocking and the pre overclocked cards are only like 1,800MHz or so at the most. It's more like they'll give you a return if somehow it doesn't hit those speeds, but there's no real difference between the stock and factory overclocked version. (Most of the time, sometimes there are different PCBs or bigger fans on some models) craig588 fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Aug 15, 2017 |
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 17:03 |
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:How much power can a PCIe slot push by itself? I thought it was 75 watts, which would preclude the 1050ti from overclocking, but manufacturers make overclocked 1050tis. The PCIe slot is only supposed to push 75 watts. The 1050ti is like the 750ti, where some are PCIe only, and some have supplemental power pins added, like this one: https://www.pny.com/geforce-gtx-1050-ti-4gb-xlr8-gaming-overclocked-edition?sku=VCGGTX1050T4XGPB-OC Edit: It seems like some 1050ti's can still overclock a lot when bound to the 75 watts though: http://www.legitreviews.com/overclocking-msi-geforce-gtx-1050-ti-4g-oc-pushed-to-the-max_187385
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Okay, thanks. I might have a line on a used MSI Armor 960, I'm considering that or a 1050ti. I figure the 960's warranty being out of warranty doesn't matter if I'm overclocking anyway, and it seems to have PCIe power connectors unless I'm reading specs for the wrong card. I just need to make sure it's the 4GB version.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
If they're around the same price I'd get a 1050 ti every time. It generally performs better and uses less power. Power use doesn't matter a whole lot maybe a couple dollars a year, but if it's the same price no reason not to go with the lighter one. Also being on a more recent chip means you're more likely to get longer driver support.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
Okay. I'll see if they are the same price, it seems like the 1050s just keep getting more expensive. Would minis have a problem with cooling when overclocked?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Been playing around with my 6700k as I just figured out I've been overvolting it to 1.42 for the past year nice and stable (forgot to change in bios when I was screwing around with OCing when I did the initial build). Might as well run this little bastard into the ground. What's weird is the chip is rock solid stable at 4.7ghz at 1.38 volts but is a little less stable at 4.7ghz at 1.42 volts.This is on a Noctua DH15S cooler. Huh? I thought these chips were supposed to crash hard if you didn't give them enough power? Am I just running into thermal throttling issues? For example, I get get through intel burn test just fine at 1.38 with no cores shooting up to 99C or just plain turning off, but weird poo poo starts happening at 1.42 where temps will spike to 99C, processor cores will gray out/shut off on HWinfo, and the mobo will not recognize any usb or headphone inputs for a brief moment or just blue screen. Same thing with Cinebench where scores are actually a few points better when running at a lower voltage. I've also noticed weird stuff going on in HWInfo when running at 1.42 volts where the Maximum Voltage will bump up WAY higher than the input maximum in the Asus board bios including all the way up to 1.47 or 1.48 volts. Same thing at 1.38 volts where there will be maximum reading spikes at 1.42, 1.44 volts, etc. Why the hell is this happening if the chip is set to run at a constant voltage? Is there some kind of voltage offset setting I'm forgetting to disable? Should I try to push the voltage down further? Little worried about what could happen if I under volt the chip.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
Avalanche posted:Been playing around with my 6700k as I just figured out I've been overvolting it to 1.42 for the past year nice and stable (forgot to change in bios when I was screwing around with OCing when I did the initial build). Might as well run this little bastard into the ground. Temperature affects stability as well. At the higher voltage it might be heating itself up a few C extra, increasing it's own resistance and hence lowering stability.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
1.5v seems pointless if you aren't getting 5ghz+ out of it. I'd set it to adaptive voltage, 4.8ghz, 1.4v boost and see if it plays nice, torch the current settings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
You can typically get 4.7 from 1.35v - your issue is almost certainly overvoltage, not under. There's almost entirely no risk from undervolting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
So for the past few days I was running into stability issues with my old i5 3570k overclock, it was a pretty modest OC, 4.4ghz at 1.275v, but I'd randomly get hard freezes (and sometimes complete shutdowns) whenever my system was at idle. That's a really loving hard problem to solve, right? Why would it only ever crash at idle? I could play games that stressed the CPU for hours but never have an issue. Thing is though the voltage mode was set to fixed, so that voltage was set pretty much constantly, and I've had some CPU stability issues in the past that was mostly fixed by increasing the voltage slightly. On a whim I decided to switch the voltage mode to offset. Now it's stopped crashing entirely. Go loving figure. Everything I've read about overclocking has said that fixed is fine as long as you don't mind a bit more power draw.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 10:37
|
|
|
Maybe due to vdroop, your voltage at high load is actually lower than idle. And for some reason, your system hates the higher voltage even at no load? I dunno, hopefully you have no more issues though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
cat doter posted:So for the past few days I was running into stability issues with my old i5 3570k overclock, it was a pretty modest OC, 4.4ghz at 1.275v, but I'd randomly get hard freezes (and sometimes complete shutdowns) whenever my system was at idle. That's a really loving hard problem to solve, right? Why would it only ever crash at idle? I could play games that stressed the CPU for hours but never have an issue. That's a weird one. I don't know but I got really weird voltage behavior on my Asus board with the rev 1 bios (offset voltage values did absolutely nothing). Maybe it's a bios issue?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2017 05:51
|
|
|
Constellation I posted:Maybe due to vdroop, your voltage at high load is actually lower than idle. And for some reason, your system hates the higher voltage even at no load? I dunno, hopefully you have no more issues though. It's completely stable now, hasn't crashed since. CPU-Z was saying that the voltage was slightly lower at idle, but I don't know if its reporting is 100% accurate. GRINDCORE MEGGIDO posted:That's a weird one. I don't know but I got really weird voltage behavior on my Asus board with the rev 1 bios (offset voltage values did absolutely nothing). Maybe it's a bios issue? I really have no idea. The board appears to be up to date(it's an Asrock Z77 extreme 4), so if it's a bios issue I'm probably out of luck. Though I'm stable now so whatever!
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
As a close to this story I was able to bump the frequency from 4.4ghz to 4.7ghz since the instability appears to indeed have been the motherboard bug. That's pretty high for an ivy bridge CPU.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
A recommendation in the hardware thread was for me to overvolt since setting my Nvidia control panel settings to maximum performance actually made it worse. Is there a good guide to overvolting? I've never done anything other than slightly upping frequencies in Afterburner. I've got a Gigabyte GTX970 OC Mini if it makes a difference.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
The common wisdom is to not overvolt at all because it might raise you a bin, but it adds so much heat and power use for most cards it's not worth it and for a lot of people actually performs worse unless they have really good cooling to handle the extra heat. You sure they didn't mean raise the power, not the volts? As long as you've got the case airflow and power supply to deliver it maxing out the power target for every Nvidia card since Kepler is a very beneficial thing, almost improving performance directly proportionally to how much extra power you can give it. You should be able to return the GPU offset clock to stock and max out the power target in Afterburner and not even have to stability test it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Yep, my mistake. He mentioned more aggressive voltage in the context of the power setting, but suggested raising the power limit. I don't have great airflow, but I'll keep an eye on temps using Rivatuner. Is there a non-torture test program that I should run to test how hot it will get?
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:Yep, my mistake. He mentioned more aggressive voltage in the context of the power setting, but suggested raising the power limit. Run a torture test. Furmark will plot a temperature curve for you so you can see where it plateaus.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
Will that stop when and if the card gets to an unsafe temperature?
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Unless you flash the bios the card itself will stop itself from overheating. Furmark isn't a stability test, but it will test the worst case for power and cooling. It tests way too limited of a subset of the GPU to work as a stability test but it will let you know a worst case for power and temperature. You don't need to run it for a long time, it'll probably level out in less than 10 minutes, it makes heat like no game does.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
I got a 12% power limit boost out of Afterburner got to 78 and only hit 76% fanspeed. Am I right in thinking that if I set up a more aggressive fan profile I could probably get a good bit more performance? Or am I likely to hit power issues if all I can get is 12%? I'm not sure whether this is even relevant since I haven't tested in game performance yet, but I've been wondering this sort of stuff since I got the card.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
Comparing power limits between cards is meaningless because they're arbitrary and set by the manufacturer. As Maxwell bioses are cracked you could make one that allows less power at 200% as another allows at 100%. (Pascals still aren't and at this point in the cycle are unlikely to be and it's a major hold back for overclocking) I always tell people to max it out though because it's a predefined limit from the manufacturer, nothing should go wrong unless the card already was faulty and should be warrantied. Maxwells don't auto overclock nearly as well as Pascals, but speeding up the fan and cooling it down should still get you a bit more performance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
Every time I've adjusted my overclock, for years now, I've been wondering why my frequency has always been stuck at max and never speedsteps down. I got some advice on what to check but it never solved the issue. Turns out I had my Energy Settings in Win 10 set to "High Performance" this whole time, and apparently that pegs the frequency. I thought it only affected HDD/Monitor/Sleep times. On the other hand, now that my PC can throttle down to 800mhz from 4200mhz, it only seems to save like 3 watts, I'd have thought it would be a bigger deal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
I set up an overclock, but apparently somehow saved it in a profile without a power limit boost. It started artifacting and my game crashed. I'm guessing that was the power limit being too low? I've raised the power limit back to max and dialed back the overclock a bit. I'm wondering if I could still stably get my original overclock with the new power limit. Is Unigine Heaven a good test for just letting it sit a while and checking every few minutes to see if it crashed? I used an overclock some review site was using stably.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Newer versions use avx instructions which run the CPU very hot and are unlikely (at this time) to impact everyday stability. But I hope you get a second opinion as I've been doing this for years. Heaven isn't as intensive at stress testing the CPU as prime.  you mean GPU don't you
GRINDCORE MEGGIDO fucked around with this message at 12:30 on Oct 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 11:54
|
|
|
Before I start fiddling, does anyone know a safe voltage for a q6600? I'm running mine on a P965 platinum board, which from what I can see is notorious for being a poo poo overclocker, at 2.7ghz which is stable. I've had it up to 2.9ghz which boots to windows and desktop programs work fine, but games like Path of Exile crash constantly. I'd love to find a voltage that would let the 2.9 or higher overclock be stable, as the chip should be able to do much more I think. Maybe i just have a duff chip.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 14:01
|
|
|
I use a few wireless peripherals and I've noticed that my logitech ones all begin to suffer super poor performance/disconnections when I plug in usb storage devices or when there are simply "too many" usb devices plugged in. I'm telling this to the overclocking thread because I'm wondering if there's something something USB I can overclock or tweak to allow it to handle more devices without choking?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
The USB Host controller might be doing Too Much? You could try buying a $20 USB 3 PCI-E card and plugging some poo poo into that instead. That's what the VR nerds do when they have the same issues
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
GRINDCORE MEGGIDO posted:
Yep, sorry for being unclear. I ended up running it in game at the original overclocked with no problems for maybe six hours overall this weekend. I’ll do a stability test tonight too. This is the first time I’ve done real overclocking, I’m pretty happy with the results, even though I have to close Afterburner and re-open it after launching PUBG. Every time I try to launch with it open, the game fails o launch. Oh, early access.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
Overclocking with Nvidia cards since the 680 is practically the safest it could be. Your limits are predefined in the bios and starting with Pascal the bioses are locked so you can't even soft mod cards anymore. You can max out the power target and as long as you have the case airflow and power supply capability it's going to be perfectly safe and stable. Each card has different and arbitrary limits, one card's 200 could be lower than another's 100. Check the apply on startup box and you won't have to open afterburner ever again. I overclock my Nvidia cards on launch day and then ignore them forever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
Is there a reason not to just have the max stable OC on all the time? Am I wearing out the card faster than doing the same stuff at a lower clock speed? I have Afterburner on because I like having Rivatuner to tell me what sort of temp and fps numbers I'm looking at. I don't have very good airflow, so I check once in a while to make sure my CPU isn't going significantly over 60. On the other hand, maybe that's unnecessary after I've been running a particular OC for a while without problems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:Is there a reason not to just have the max stable OC on all the time? Am I wearing out the card faster than doing the same stuff at a lower clock speed? You'll buy a new card before that becomes an issue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
So I started messing around with my 8600k overclock last night using Intel burn test. I've managed to get it stable at 5.1 ghz with 1.44V, but I got the highest gflops at 4.7 ghz at 1.225 V. I'm using a thermaltake water 3.0 360 mm cooler for it, but CPU temps still keep spiking. Max 90 °C at 5,1 ghz, 75°C at 4,7, so I figure that I'm getting throttling because of the temperature spikes which is causing the poorer performance at higher multipliers. I'm guessing that delidding is the solution to this problem? Struensee fucked around with this message at 14:30 on Oct 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2017 11:12
|
|
|
Do you need to keep Afterburner running after it applies the power and temp limit increases, or overclocks? I couldn't find a definite answer on this from a quick search, but I've been leaving Afterburner running all of the time mainly out of worry that those things would stop working if I close the program. I'm not even overclocking manually at this point, I'm just trying to make sure the regular "GPU Boost" on my 1060 is allowed to max out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
Nope, check apply on startup and never look at it again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
Wait, so if I have that "apply at startup" setting checked, I don't even need to have Afterburner also "start with Windows" to apply any of this? If so, cool. Another thing I can remove from the things that run at login.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
OK, seeing some odd behavior. I have a 8700k and a Noctua nh-D15 on an ASRock Extreme4 board. Temps have been very good, usually they don't go above 65C even under normal stress tests, but I have had clock speed issues. I've been trying to run a 4.7-5.0GHZ OC. I have had the voltage kinda high (1.4 or so) but I haven't been very stable lower than that and the temps haven't been much of a problem so I wasn't too worried about the higher voltage. The problem is that I can keep that speed with the CPUID stress test, but if I do Prime95 it drops to 3.3GHZ across all 6 cores, even though the temps are fine. I ran userbenchmark.com and scored below average for my CPU and it looks like the CPU just didn't ramp up: http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/5626353 Am I hitting some thermal throttling? It does this while the max temp reads 64C, which should be plenty of headroom. The MB won't update the Bios, so is it a problem there or with the CPU? Or am I missing some other setting? It's otherwise been pretty stable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2017 14:40
|
|
|
What are you using to read the temps? Realtemp is quite reliable. I’m not familiar with Asrock BIOS but it sure sounds like something is throttling somewhere. Do the VRM heatsinks get hot under load? Maybe check and make sure their thermal pads contact the mosfets.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
I was using HWMonitor Pro, which has been reliable for me in the past. I'll try realtemp tonight. I agree, it sounds like thermal throttling except for the readouts. I am tempted to turn off the throttling in the Bios and run it old-school for these tests, but I wanted to try some less riskier options first.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 17:03 |
|
|
Ok, figured it out. The extreme 4 Z730 has a MASSIVE default AVX offset, to the tune of 800-1.4GHZ MHZ clock drop. And it doesn't cleanly release it after the AVX test is done. Apparently setting it to 0 sets it to "Auto"(aka, 800MHZ+), and the lowest you can set it to is 100MHZ. That seems really frickin dumb and I just spent several hours chasing down potential power and thermal throttling.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2017 02:13
|
|