Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«120 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Lockback
Sep 2, 2006

All days are nights to see till I see thee; and nights bright days when dreams do show me thee.


Endymion FRS MK1 posted:

I am extremely impressed by this cooler. I had the chip delidded by Silicon Lottery and during all of this stress testing temps never rose past 80C, even on the max heat Small FFT torture test... but the best part is the fact that I never heard the cooler unless I actively listened for it. I mean no its not like 0db or something stupid, just really smooth and quiet. Even with my case open and laying beside me (Weird circumstances caused this temporary setup) I had to put my hand behind the exhaust or the cooler itself to actually verify I was blowing hot air and not just on idle.

Edit: so people on Reddit are saying I lost the 8086K lottery. I thought 1.3v 5.0ghz was good for a 24/7 stable OC?

That seems pretty good to me, especially @ 1.3v. I suspect due to the nature of confirmation bias you get told it sucks if it's not top 10%. What are they saying the 8086k usually hits?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Endymion FRS MK1
Oct 28, 2011


Lockback posted:

That seems pretty good to me, especially @ 1.3v. I suspect due to the nature of confirmation bias you get told it sucks if it's not top 10%. What are they saying the 8086k usually hits?

This is the quote I got:

"r/overclocking would like to see what your 8086K can do. 1.3v is on the high side for 5ghz, you can probably lose the avx offset too. Highest we've seen so far is 5.4ghz."

I immediately thought it was BS since I watched Gamers Nexus' livestream where he pushed it high and he started with a 5ghz 1.3 baseline, so I figured that was average (for an 8086K). I think you're right.

Also troubling was getting a Kernel Power Event 41 reboot while playing Wolfenstein 2. I increased voltage by 10mv and I didn't have any problems the rest of the night

TheFluff
Dec 13, 2006

FRIENDS, LISTEN TO ME
I AM A SEAGULL
OF WEALTH AND TASTE


Slippery Tilde

Hot take: AVX offset is silly, don't use it. You're giving yourself a lot of trouble testing two configurations just to get some slightly higher numbers to impress strangers on the internet with. With AVX becoming increasingly common in mundane workloads, the AVX frequency is the one you'll be interested in stability testing the most anyway.

For 5.0GHz with no AVX offset 1.3v is very good though, at least for a regular 8700K. Mine needs 1.34v or so for 4.9GHz with no AVX offset.

Also, overclocking forum numbers should be taken with huge amounts of salt. They're heavily biased towards good results and a lot of the time the stability is questionable.

TheFluff fucked around with this message at Aug 30, 2018 around 16:44

mewse
May 2, 2006



TheFluff posted:

Also, overclocking forum numbers should be taken with huge amounts of salt. They're heavily biased towards good results and a lot of the time the stability is questionable.

Combined with reddit being a bastion of level headed commenters

Endymion FRS MK1
Oct 28, 2011


TheFluff posted:

Hot take: AVX offset is silly, don't use it. You're giving yourself a lot of trouble testing two configurations just to get some slightly higher numbers to impress strangers on the internet with. With AVX becoming increasingly common in mundane workloads, the AVX frequency is the one you'll be interested in stability testing the most anyway.

For 5.0GHz with no AVX offset 1.3v is very good though, at least for a regular 8700K. Mine needs 1.34v or so for 4.9GHz with no AVX offset.

Also, overclocking forum numbers should be taken with huge amounts of salt. They're heavily biased towards good results and a lot of the time the stability is questionable.

I need the offset though, it was still unstable at 1.36v, whereas non-AVX was steady at 1.3v. Why would it be silly though? It was only one simple setting, and it's totally automatic. Only one additional test.

TheFluff
Dec 13, 2006

FRIENDS, LISTEN TO ME
I AM A SEAGULL
OF WEALTH AND TASTE


Slippery Tilde

Endymion FRS MK1 posted:

I need the offset though, it was still unstable at 1.36v, whereas non-AVX was steady at 1.3v. Why would it be silly though? It was only one simple setting, and it's totally automatic. Only one additional test.

I'm very paranoid about instability so I don't declare my overclock stable until it passes 8-12 hours of stress testing of various kinds, but I'm also very lazy so doing those stress tests twice with and without AVX just to get 200MHz extra for some (but not all) workloads isn't worth it to me. It's just comforting to me to know that if it passes an AVX-enabled stress test it's also going to pass everything else I could care to throw at it. Also, as I said, with AVX instructions now being fairly common in mundane programs, you can end up not getting to use the non-AVX frequency that often because some random process is executing AVX instructions in the background.

TheFluff fucked around with this message at Aug 30, 2018 around 22:54

spasticColon
Sep 22, 2004

In loving memory of Donald Pleasance

Is MSI Afterburner still the application to use for GPU overclocking or is there something better out there now?

Endymion FRS MK1
Oct 28, 2011


I remember seeing EVGA's tool being thrown around a lot too

spasticColon
Sep 22, 2004

In loving memory of Donald Pleasance

Endymion FRS MK1 posted:

I remember seeing EVGA's tool being thrown around a lot too

Well my video card is an EVGA GTX1070 SC so would EVGA precision be a better choice?

craig588
Nov 19, 2005



EVGA Precision, MSI Afterburnerer, Asus GPU Tweak, Zotac Firestorm, etc all are the same program with a different skin, choose the one you like the look of the most. I use MSI Afterburner despite not owning a MSI card in nearly a decade.

Lockback
Sep 2, 2006

All days are nights to see till I see thee; and nights bright days when dreams do show me thee.


spasticColon posted:

Well my video card is an EVGA GTX1070 SC so would EVGA precision be a better choice?

Doesn't matter. Use whichever you like functionally they are identical.

LRADIKAL
Jun 10, 2001

A Very Useful Person

Fun Shoe

Co-worker of mine decided to try overclocking again.

2550K @ 5.0ghz stock voltage, wtf!? It's apparently been stable and isn't melting. (noctua d14 or something along those lines)

http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/10912951

VelociBacon
Dec 8, 2009



So the new Precision X1 GPU OC tool is out in beta. Anyone tried it yet?

https://www.evga.com/precisionx1/

e: NVM looks like it's only RTX supported at this time.

Zero VGS
Aug 16, 2002
"It has gunfights and shit!"


Lipstick Apathy

LRADIKAL posted:

Co-worker of mine decided to try overclocking again.

2550K @ 5.0ghz stock voltage, wtf!? It's apparently been stable and isn't melting. (noctua d14 or something along those lines)

http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/10912951

Sheesh, my delidded 8700k can't do 5ghz at stock voltage.

VelociBacon
Dec 8, 2009



Zero VGS posted:

Sheesh, my delidded 8700k can't do 5ghz at stock voltage.

If you turn it into a 2500k by turning off cores etc it might :v

LRADIKAL
Jun 10, 2001

A Very Useful Person

Fun Shoe

Huh, he lied (was incorrect)

He's got an automatic voltage adjustment going on.



1.48v, probably won't burn it out, I think he's running Prime95 in the background here.

mewse
May 2, 2006



LRADIKAL posted:

Huh, he lied (was incorrect)

He's got an automatic voltage adjustment going on.



1.48v, probably won't burn it out, I think he's running Prime95 in the background here.

With those temperatures I doubt he's running prime95, it looks like he has WoW in the background.

craig588
Nov 19, 2005



Prime would be much hotter than that and 1.49v is very high. I'd try to see what it does under 1.4v and not breaking 75C in Prime.

LRADIKAL
Jun 10, 2001

A Very Useful Person

Fun Shoe

It's certainly WOW, but you may be right that he's not running prime in the background. Hard to get consistent details without sitting at the machine myself.

Powershift
Nov 23, 2009

My name's ralph and i'm a bad guy. I'm 9 feet tall, i weigh 643 pounds. I'm a wrecker, i wreck things.




realtemp and coretemp there both suggest it's only at 31% load.

forkbucket
Mar 9, 2008

Magnets are my only weakness.


This is probably a super dumb question, but here goes nothing. This is my first time overclocking something and I set my Intel Core i7-4790K at 110.06 MHz in my BIOS (I think this is scaling of some sort?), which resulted in a clock speed of 4403 MHz (it's been running at a flat 4000 MHz before this). When I ran Prime95 the cores were mostly sitting at 78 degrees C with one spike up to 81 degrees for a split second on one core. Normal use has been stable so far and I haven't seen temps like that outside of Prime95. Does that seem OK or did I overdo it? I figured now was as good a time as any to get off my rear end and overclock it, finally, but I don't want to break anything...

VelociBacon
Dec 8, 2009



forkbucket posted:

This is probably a super dumb question, but here goes nothing. This is my first time overclocking something and I set my Intel Core i7-4790K at 110.06 MHz in my BIOS (I think this is scaling of some sort?), which resulted in a clock speed of 4403 MHz (it's been running at a flat 4000 MHz before this). When I ran Prime95 the cores were mostly sitting at 78 degrees C with one spike up to 81 degrees for a split second on one core. Normal use has been stable so far and I haven't seen temps like that outside of Prime95. Does that seem OK or did I overdo it? I figured now was as good a time as any to get off my rear end and overclock it, finally, but I don't want to break anything...

Sounds like you're changing your bus speed or something - try to instead overclock by changing the multiplier - it'll be either 40 or 44 by default which correlates to 4.0GHz or 4.4GHz(I can't remember if the BIOS shows the base or boost clock). What is your cooling solution? Temps under 80 are fine.You want to stay under 1.3v vcore also. You should use some software like HWinfo64 to see your clocks and vcore and show us a screencap if you aren't sure if what you have is safe.

To reiterate, the 4790k boosts to 4.4GHz so it shouldn't have been running at a flat 4000MHz before. It should also have been scaling itself down to idle lower than that when not under load.

e: For example here's my 4790k which idles at 800MHz @~0.8v and under load goes to 4.6GHz at ~1.24v.

VelociBacon fucked around with this message at Sep 24, 2018 around 22:45

forkbucket
Mar 9, 2008

Magnets are my only weakness.


VelociBacon posted:

Sounds like you're changing your bus speed or something - try to instead overclock by changing the multiplier - it'll be either 40 or 44 by default which correlates to 4.0GHz or 4.4GHz(I can't remember if the BIOS shows the base or boost clock). What is your cooling solution? Temps under 80 are fine.You want to stay under 1.3v vcore also. You should use some software like HWinfo64 to see your clocks and vcore and show us a screencap if you aren't sure if what you have is safe.

To reiterate, the 4790k boosts to 4.4GHz so it shouldn't have been running at a flat 4000MHz before. It should also have been scaling itself down to idle lower than that when not under load.

e: For example here's my 4790k which idles at 800MHz @~0.8v and under load goes to 4.6GHz at ~1.24v.



I think I messed up some settings at some point in the distant past, because the variable clock speed wasn't enabled and neither was the turbo boost as far as I could tell. After enabling those it seems to vary all the time. There's a good chance I adjusted the wrong thing tbh! I'll go back and reset it to the flat 100.0 it was at and tweak the multiplier instead. I've been using CAM from NZXT to monitor temps and stuff, but I'll grab HWinfo64 instead and do some testing tomorrow.

Thanks for the tips so far

Edit: My cooler is a Noctua NH-U12S that I got primarily to look into overclocking a bit, then promptly forgot!

VelociBacon
Dec 8, 2009



forkbucket posted:

I think I messed up some settings at some point in the distant past, because the variable clock speed wasn't enabled and neither was the turbo boost as far as I could tell. After enabling those it seems to vary all the time. There's a good chance I adjusted the wrong thing tbh! I'll go back and reset it to the flat 100.0 it was at and tweak the multiplier instead. I've been using CAM from NZXT to monitor temps and stuff, but I'll grab HWinfo64 instead and do some testing tomorrow.

Thanks for the tips so far

Edit: My cooler is a Noctua NH-U12S that I got primarily to look into overclocking a bit, then promptly forgot!

It sounds to me like you should reset your BIOS to default settings (to undo whatever else you might have hosed up and forgot about) and then set your voltage to manual, something like 1.2v or so, set your multiplier to 44, do some testing and see what you're at for temps and stability. It should be fine but it's good to start low. Next I'd move your multiplier up by 1 until it's not stable in testing and then add voltage in
0.05 increments until it is stable or your temps >80 or you reach 1.28v.

This is all just my opinion, err on the safe side etc. Just enabling the boost on the cpu is going to give you the biggest 'gains'.

e: forgot to add that once you've found a point where you're happy you'll want to change the voltage mode into something like offset (so that it idles properly not at full voltage) and adjust the offset until you get the voltage-under-load that you had at manual setting. Or maybe your motherboard will be set up to properly turn down the voltage and clocks when on manual voltage - mine wasn't. Make sure your c-states are enabled but they will be from the factory once you reset the bios.

VelociBacon fucked around with this message at Sep 24, 2018 around 23:06

forkbucket
Mar 9, 2008

Magnets are my only weakness.


VelociBacon posted:

It sounds to me like you should reset your BIOS to default settings (to undo whatever else you might have hosed up and forgot about) and then set your voltage to manual, something like 1.2v or so, set your multiplier to 44, do some testing and see what you're at for temps and stability. It should be fine but it's good to start low. Next I'd move your multiplier up by 1 until it's not stable in testing and then add voltage in 0.05 increments until it is stable or your temps >80 or you reach 1.28v.

This is all just my opinion, err on the safe side etc. Just enabling the boost on the cpu is going to give you the biggest 'gains'.

That's solid advice! Thank you very much, I'll get on that tomorrow!

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

VelociBacon
Dec 8, 2009



forkbucket posted:

That's solid advice! Thank you very much, I'll get on that tomorrow!

All good! I added a bit there in my post that you quoted about changing the voltage mode maybe so it idles lower than max.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«120 »