|
beejay posted:I think I'm maybe really dumb or something. I got a 3570K processor, Hyper 212 evo cooler, and an Asus P8Z77-V LX motherboard, thinking I would look up an overclocking guide or something and it would be really simple. And from what I can tell, it is pretty simple... but every guide seems to be written for max speeds at all times. I just want to boost up the "turbo" speed so it runs fast when it needs to, but slow and cool when it can, and meanwhile not kill my chip. That sounds pretty typical to me, if nothing is breaking or crashing during an extended P95 test then you're good to go. My idle voltage is from 0.88-1.00V doing nothing on the desktop or browsing, etc. If you increase the multiplier you might want to test it in P95 again though, because it's probably going to need a tiny bump in voltage for that. On my own 3570k I have turbo set for 4.6GHz which requires around 1.28V to remain stable under load, this differs between chips and boards. An Unoriginal Name fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Mar 15, 2013 |
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 20:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:33 |
|
|
So then I would need to increase the offset, correct?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
beejay posted:So then I would need to increase the offset, correct? I took a look at your mobo manual and I can't tell if you have a separate "turbo voltage" like my Asrock board does, which allows me to set a separate offset only when the turbo function is in use (basically anything over 3.4GHz). So yes, in your case you would increase the offset voltage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
Back when I got my i5 I was under the impression clock speed > more cores for gaming, because of information I found about the other cores not being properly utilized by most modern games, so I bought a dual-core instead of a quad-core. Apparently this was not a smart decision. So, I'm thinking about getting a 3570K. My motherboard supports it, though it required me to update the BIOS. My question is, is using an Ivy Bridge on a Z68 motherboard a wise idea? Will there be much lower performance or anything like that? I'm posting here because I plan to overclock this time around, and there may be something about overclocking with a Z68 on an Ivy Bridge I don't know about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 13:32
|
|
|
Should I be concerned about what HWInfo says my VID is? I understand from the OP what VID means but I had been paying more attention to vcore than the VID... and while I like my vcore numbers, the VID is kinda high, and I'm not really sure if I can even do anything about it. Sorry if this is a dumb question.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 15:57
|
|
|
Benjamin Black posted:So, I'm thinking about getting a 3570K. My motherboard supports it, though it required me to update the BIOS. My question is, is using an Ivy Bridge on a Z68 motherboard a wise idea? Will there be much lower performance or anything like that? I'm posting here because I plan to overclock this time around, and there may be something about overclocking with a Z68 on an Ivy Bridge I don't know about. beejay posted:Should I be concerned about what HWInfo says my VID is? I understand from the OP what VID means but I had been paying more attention to vcore than the VID... and while I like my vcore numbers, the VID is kinda high, and I'm not really sure if I can even do anything about it. Sorry if this is a dumb question. Post a screenshot of HWiNFO with those figures & the min/max/current fields.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 16:47
|
|
|
Ok here goes - the VID got up to as high as 1.3010 in HWInfo, also the 76.0C is the highest temperature I've seen so far, running IBT at Very High just once so I could get these screenshots. Anything to be worried about here? I still think I possibly need to re-seat my 212.  
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
1.3V isn't going to cause instant damage, especially not for the brief time a voltage spike will last. I wouldn't give it another thought.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
Ok, thank you. Although it seems a little disappointing it needs to be that high for 4.2ghz when I keep hearing people talk about 4.5 and beyond. I have my offset at +0.01 because prime95 and IBT both crashed at +0.005. Edit: Don't get me wrong, I appreciate that I can overclock it as much as I have, just saying. beejay fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Mar 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 18:09
|
|
|
grumperfish posted:As long as you have 1.5V RAM or lower you should be fine with a Z68 board.  http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231468
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
Benjamin Black posted:Uhh, hm. It says 1.5 - 1.6.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
Alright, gonna pull the trigger on getting a 3570K. Now, while there are heatsink recommendations in the OP, they seem to focus on performance/price, but I'm concerned about noise. Is this still the heatsink to get? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103099 And is it quiet?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 09:09
|
|
|
It's pretty quiet, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 09:19
|
|
|
Good "I don't give a poo poo about money but I like quiet" heatsinks would also be something like a Thermalright Archon or a Noctua DH14. Bigger, slower spinning fans cooling a larger fin array. Set something up like that with a fan profile and you'll never hear it You'll still hear a 212 when it starts going, though it is by no means bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 14:30
|
|
|
Dogen posted:Good "I don't give a poo poo about money but I like quiet" heatsinks would also be something like a Thermalright Archon or a Noctua DH14. Bigger, slower spinning fans cooling a larger fin array. Set something up like that with a fan profile and you'll never hear it It won't be a top performer due to the fin density/size (that said it'll get you up to 4.6-4.8ghz just fine), but it has high clearance for RAM and you'll barely need any airflow at all for overclocking because of the wide fin spacing. edit: Are Noctua parts similar to Thermalright in that you can remount the heatsink without removing the board? Seems like it'd be pretty common nowadays since even the 212+'s allow for it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
The newer ones do. I think the older one was more of a pain. Easier than the weird scissor bracket and tightening nut thing that my original Archon uses (I think Thermalright made some improvements for the later revisions)
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 22:30
|
|
|
Dogen posted:The newer ones do. I think the older one was more of a pain. Easier than the weird scissor bracket and tightening nut thing that my original Archon uses (I think Thermalright made some improvements for the later revisions) edit: It may be the case with Noctua that they released modern mounts that are compatible with their older heatsinks too. future ghost fucked around with this message at 06:54 on Mar 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 06:48
|
|
|
They did starting with the 2011 compatible ones I think. My Archon does have the system you describe, I am just not a fan. I think they have changed it up to make it better since then, new revisions of the Archon and some others are out early this year.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 15:32
|
|
|
edit: disregard
The Man From Melmac fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Mar 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 21:13
|
|
|
edit: I'll edit this since it seems you got it. Hope it works out for you, the 212 is nice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 21:22
|
|
|
beejay posted:edit: I'll edit this since it seems you got it. Hope it works out for you, the 212 is nice. Yeah I didn't realize at first that it fits on sideways.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2013 21:24
|
|
|
Okay, that had to be the most pain in the rear end cooler installation I've ever seen. Hell on my back, but it's in. Even with all the screws tightened, you can still get it to rotate slightly from side to side. I'm not sure if there's anything you can do about that. Pouring over the instructions, I didn't see any way to get the retention plate to 'lock on' to the cooler and I just assumed it when you tightened the screws over it, you wouldn't be able to move it anymore. I'm pretty sure I applied the thermal paste correctly, with the tower on its side on a flat surface I just dabbed a bit of thermal paste on top of the processor, about the size of a BB. It got spread around quite a lot though because it was difficult to put that cooler on perfectly straight even as I carefully lowered it. So, I THINK I'm done, but feel free to tell me if I've done something horribly wrong by mistake. After I reset my BIOS settings I made sure to go to the manual DRAM voltage and change it to 1.5.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
There is nothing wrong with it being able to rotate on the cpu as long as its making good contact. You arn't trying to crush the cpu.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 15:32
|
|
|
Don Lapre posted:There is nothing wrong with it being able to rotate on the cpu as long as its making good contact. You arn't trying to crush the cpu. Just wanted to make sure I installed it correctly is all. So, before I move forward with any overclocking...  Is there anything off about my system? My BIOS settings were all reset when I put in the new CPU, you see. Pretty much the only thing I changed after the reset was hard drive mode back to AHCI and memory voltage to 1.5. For some reason the Cores keep constantly jumping back and forth between 1603 Mhz and 3600-3800 Mhz rapidly, not sure if that's normal behavior. The Man From Melmac fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Mar 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 15:36
|
|
|
That is exactly normal behavior - Turbo Boost and Enhanced Intel Speedstep Technology (EIST, or just Speedstep), to be specific. Over short periods of time and when all cores aren't needed, they'll kick up a limited amount above stock speed to do the work more quickly. In fact, what you'll be doing by overclocking is telling the CPU to Turbo all the time at an outrageous frequency (compared to stock, at least). Clocking down to 1600 MHz is EIST, and it's meant to save power when idle or when loads are very light. Is that SSD plugged into one of the Intel SATA ports? If it's not, it really should be. Otherwise, looks fine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:Is that SSD plugged into one of the Intel SATA ports? If it's not, it really should be. Otherwise, looks fine. Intel SATA ports? Not sure what you mean.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
Uh... hm. Okay, I just looked up the specs for your board, and how do you have three drives listed at 6 Gbps speed with only two 6 Gbps ports? Anyway, the SSD should be plugged into one of the white ports.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:Uh... hm. Okay, I just looked up the specs for your board, and how do you have three drives listed at 6 Gbps speed with only two 6 Gbps ports? Yeah, it is. And I'm guessing it's listing them at the speed they can run at rather than the speed that they are running at. I originally had a RAID setup when I put together this computer and I had all sorts of problems with it, lots of weird hangups it was not supposed to have, and I came to realize it was junk compared to what a SSD could offer me. So one of those big 6gbps hard drive is now used for media files now. Music, videos, etc. So no big loss there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
grumperfish posted:That will work. You might need to run it closer to 1866mhz or 1600mhz to pin it at 1.5, but it should be fine (also performance won't be affected either way). I'm curious about this statement. It seems like all I had to do was manually set the voltage to 1.5 in my BIOS. Am I missing something? Also, curious about the 1866mhz/1600mhz remark. My memory is running at around 800mhz according to the screenshot above. Is it working appropriately? Sorry for all the questions, but my previous experiences with overclocking have been pretty disastrous.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2013 09:50
|
|
|
Benjamin Black posted:I'm curious about this statement. It seems like all I had to do was manually set the voltage to 1.5 in my BIOS. Am I missing something? You've manually set the RAM at 1.5V and 1600mhz effective speed, which is fine. Any performance difference between 1600mhz and higher RAM speeds will be marginal to nonexistent as you're not going to be limited by memory bandwidth. You don't need to do anything else to the RAM.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
grumperfish posted:You have fast RAM that can run at higher speeds (at 1.65V), but your CPU requires running closer to 1.5V to avoid frying the memory controller. I didn't manually set 1600mhz, I just set the RAM to 1.5V. I'm not sure if that causes the RAM to go to 1600MHz by itself or what. I assume 1600 is derived from 800 * 2 (the 2 being dual-channel)?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2013 11:42
|
|
|
800 MHz * 2, because DDR literally means double data rate. It transfers data two times per clock cycle. Dual-channel is something else, using two channels of RAM (arranged as pairs of DIMMs) to be accessed at the same time, on top of the 1600 Megatransfers per second of 800 MHz * 2 transfers/clock.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2013 12:36
|
|
|
Im going to delid my 3570k! I've already delidded a few celerons as practice. This should be interesting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2013 13:21
|
|
|
amp281 posted:Im going to delid my 3570k! I've already delidded a few celerons as practice. This should be interesting. Practice:  topless i5  Result was only about a -5*C reduction at load but my i5 ran cooler than most anyway. It had less factory thermal paste under the lid then most of the pictures I have seen. I replaced it with Coollaboratory Pro. I clamped the processor in a vice upsidedown by its lid and hit the pcb with a hammer and a block of wood. Removes the lid in under a minute and much less risky then razor blade. amp281 fucked around with this message at 12:51 on Mar 29, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 12:46
|
|
|
amp281 posted:I clamped the processor in a vice upsidedown by its lid and hit the pcb with a hammer and a block of wood. Removes the lid in under a minute and much less risky then razor blade. It makes me glad to see someone else finally using that method because it's my preferred way to go and no one believes how fast and reliable it is. The razor blade way just sounds like a nightmare and so many people do it like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 14:07
|
|
|
Okay, so, my 3570K has been going strong for about a week, and now that I know it's working properly, it's time for me to finally start overclocking. I'm using a Biostar TZ68A+. There were a lot of options in the O.N.E. section of the BIOS which is meant specifically for overclocking, but I didn't want to touch anything without knowing what I was doing. I attempted to Google a TZ68A+ overclocking guide, but it doesn't seem there are any guides for this specific motherboard, which is really annoying. I did find out, however, that there is overclocking software that Biostar puts out that works with this motherboard called TOVERCLOCKER, and it even has a hardware monitor that shows me the temp. Right now my CPU temp is at 40C. I have no idea if that's good or not. Here are the controls the program has:    So should I be using this? And if so, what should I be setting everything to? I have a Hyper 212 EVO cooler successfully installed on it for what it's worth, so it's better than stock cooling. I would like to start with something "safe", something that has a very high chance of being stable. Maybe like 4GHz? Any suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
Benjamin Black posted:I would like to start with something "safe", something that has a very high chance of being stable. Maybe like 4GHz? Any suggestions? Skip the lovely utility and overclock from BIOS. Don't touch the VCC/SA voltage setting, and raise your DRAM voltage to 1.5v manually. Leave everything else on auto. Set the CPU multiplier to 40 and see how voltages look. Run Intelburntest on maximum and see if it remains stable. Use HWInfo64 for temp/voltage monitoring and make sure per-core temps stay below 70C.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 22:24
|
|
|
grumperfish posted:I would've suggested not buying a Biostar board, but it's too late for that now. grumperfish posted:Skip the lovely utility and overclock from BIOS. Don't touch the VCC/SA voltage setting, and raise your DRAM voltage to 1.5v manually. Leave everything else on auto. Set the CPU multiplier to 40 and see how voltages look. Run Intelburntest on maximum and see if it remains stable. Use HWInfo64 for temp/voltage monitoring and make sure per-core temps stay below 70C. This particular board got a pretty good review here: http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/biostar_1155_tz68a_review/10 Ok, got the Hwinfo64 temps working. The Man From Melmac fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Mar 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
I don't have a CPU multiplier setting in my bios. Do you mean the CPU ratio? Because that only goes up to 38 for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 00:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 18:33 |
|
|
Yes, that's what we mean. And if it's only going up to 38x, well, something is amiss because that's only the top turbo multiplier. You should be able to turn it much higher.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 00:29
|
|