|
CPU-Z isn't always very good. I'd check the sensors in HWInfo64. Here's what it shows for my i5-4670K at 4.2: Then when I scroll down:  My fins are dusty so it's a little hot right now but it's always been a more complete picture to me. You can also right click on an entry and add it to the system tray to keep an eye on it.
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 01:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 09:20 |
|
|
Thanks, I just installed it. I've been running prime95 for the past 40 minutes, and everything seems stable at 4.1ghz.  I think I'll just keep it here. It was running around ~40c without prime running. I haven't had to do anything with the voltage, I just turned turbo off and made sure my ram wasn't higher than 1333mhz. Thanks for the replies everyone
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 02:43
|
|
|
Excellent! My understanding is that X58 is the first generation where the memory controller can operate in mixed mode, using triple- or dual-channel where possible for the first bank and single-channel for the remainder. I'm not sure how many problems this has in practice, I never tried it. Previous generations were much more limited; even X48 allows you to get dual-channel only if the DIMMs in both channels add up to the same capacity. It's odd that the latest BIOS effectively wouldn't allow any overclocking, especially since it's not labeled as a beta. The DS4's final version or two were labeled beta and came with warnings, but I had to load the final one to get my X5660 working and haven't noticed any issues with it. It's interesting that your screenshot shows 21x as the max multiplier. Do you have turbo enabled? I think 21x might be the base multiplier; I'm able to hit 23x with all cores loaded and 24x with 1, using default settings. I couldn't actually find a way to remove the 1-core step without disabling turbo entirely and going down to 21x, but my BCLK wouldn't go high enough to get to 4.6GHz that way. I could get Windows to boot at 200 BCLK just fine and all the multi-core stress tests I ran seemed OK, but when I started running games I had cores popping up to 4.8 and giving me weird crashes. I had to turn down BCLK to 190 to get it really stable. Also, what does your motherboard set Vcore to at that speed? I have 1.375 set in BIOS and 1.36 showing in HWinfo. I'm keeping it reasonably cool and it seems like I should be safe, Sandy Bridge was on the same process and I ran a 2500K at 1.39 for years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2018 05:11
|
|
|
I'm trying to OC my 8700k w/ Asrock Extreme 4 to have all cores at 4.8 GHz (may go higher later), and am using adaptive voltage for the first time (0.1). After a short 20 minute Extreme Tuning Utility test my max voltage was 1.375, and temps had a spike of 71 degrees but an average of ~60-65 degrees per HWInfo. Are these values "good enough" to start testing with Prime95 and the like? It's been a while since I've overclocked (3570k) and I wanted to be sure I'm headed down the right path, or if I should mess with my fan curve, etc. I also have the power saving settings turned on (so it will underclock down to 0.8) - I'm reading mixed feelings regarding that, should I keep them on or turn them off?
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2018 13:23
|
|
|
Mr E posted:I'm trying to OC my 8700k w/ Asrock Extreme 4 to have all cores at 4.8 GHz (may go higher later), and am using adaptive voltage for the first time (0.1). After a short 20 minute Extreme Tuning Utility test my max voltage was 1.375, and temps had a spike of 71 degrees but an average of ~60-65 degrees per HWInfo. Are these values "good enough" to start testing with Prime95 and the like? It's been a while since I've overclocked (3570k) and I wanted to be sure I'm headed down the right path, or if I should mess with my fan curve, etc. I also have the power saving settings turned on (so it will underclock down to 0.8) - I'm reading mixed feelings regarding that, should I keep them on or turn them off? 1.375 is too high for all-core 4.8GHz, even with a poor chip. I'm not sure if this applies to Asrock boards too, but on Asus boards, adaptive voltage will never go below VID. The only way to lower voltage in adaptive mode is to set a negative offset, which has the effect of actually lowering VID. You should definitely keep C-states and power saving features on, disabling that is only for turbonerds on LN2. For comparison, I also have a 8700k, and it doesn't clock all that well. 4.8GHz all-core is what I run for a daily overclock (I could safely do 4.9, but I prefer lower temps and noise), using adaptive mode with a -0.03v offset and a medium LLC setting. Under heavy AVX loads like OCCT's small dataset stress test, I get ~1.36v VID and ~1.3v Vcore. This is pretty high for 4.8GHz, but since I've delidded it stays just under 65C at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2018 14:12
|
|
|
Alright, I thought that voltage was high. I can't seem to set an offset that isn't in increments of 0.1 positive or negative in the BIOS - I don't know if I'm missing a setting or if that's just the motherboard I'm using, though. I think I'll go back to manual voltage until I get a stable setup but it'll be nice to know that answer if I can get it if I decide to go back to offset.
Mr E fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Jun 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2018 14:51
|
|
|
Mr E posted:Alright, I thought that voltage was high. I can't seem to set an offset that isn't in increments of 0.1 positive or negative in the BIOS - I don't know if I'm missing a setting or if that's just the motherboard I'm using, though. I think I'll go back to manual voltage until I get a stable setup but it'll be nice to know that answer if I can get it if I decide to go back to offset. 0.1v increments sounds weird. Can't you just type in whatever you want? I don't have that board, but on Asus boards, what you do in adaptive mode is you set what voltage you want in turbo mode and an offset. The turbo mode voltage only means something if it's actually higher than what the VID would normally be in turbo mode, so if you set, say, 1.2v while the CPU says it wants 1.35, it's going to ignore you completely. The offset on the other hand affects VID at all points of the voltage curve, so if you set it to a large negative number but have a big adaptive turbo voltage, you can end up being unstable under light loads but fine under high loads. Adaptive mode is thus a bit finicky to tune, but it's absolutely what you want to use for a daily overclock. I was actually inspired by your post to go check out my own settings since I know more now than I did when I first set this up, and one BIOS update and a bit of tweaking later it now looks like I have a stable 4.9GHz setting without actually raising voltage by too much!  Ended up with 1.33v under AVX, 1.34v under non-AVX loads at 4.9. Really not too bad, and I wonder if it might actually do 5.0GHz at 1.4v or below. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Jun 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2018 16:53
|
|
|
I'll have check it when I get home tonight, but last night I wasn't able to enter anything that wasn't in that increment which made no sense. Like I said, I'm going to mess with manual for now, but I'll have to look into that too eventually. EDIT: Alright, I backed my manual voltage all the way back to 1.3 w/ LLC to Level 3, and ran a short test again and got the below values. Look good or no? 
Mr E fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Jun 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2018 17:24
|
|
|
Now that I have a stable overclock with manual voltage (and speedstep), does it hurt the life of the processor at all to keep it manual, or do I absolutely need to start getting an offset set up? I assume the CPU will take the voltage it needs no matter what's being supplied from the mobo?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 00:26
|
|
|
Iirc the CPU pulls amperage. Wattage Is pumped into the CPU. If you have it at 1.35v it's always getting 1.35v
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 00:42
|
|
|
Mr E posted:Now that I have a stable overclock with manual voltage (and speedstep), does it hurt the life of the processor at all to keep it manual, or do I absolutely need to start getting an offset set up? I assume the CPU will take the voltage it needs no matter what's being supplied from the mobo? It would be more accurate to say that the CPU will take whatever voltage the mobo gives it and will brown out if that's too low or die if it's too high. To a certain degree it pulls whatever current it needs, but since current is a function of voltage even that can be tuned down by undervolting as long as you don't go too low and brownout. I don't know exactly how offsets work for you but if they allow the CPU to downvolt when it's not at max turbo then that's mostly a power savings feature. I think with CPUs depending on whether you're using LLC the voltage at idle may be higher than it is at load, but the thing to keep in mind is that long-term wear from electromigration will come from a combination of high temperature and high voltage. Without the temperatures that come from being under load, your wear from idling will be comparatively minimal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 00:43
|
|
|
Alright, that makes sense. I'm getting like 65 max (and only in Battlefield 1) so I think I'm probably fine with temps. I may set up an offset instead in the future, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
I got an 8700k that was binned by Silicon Lottery for 5ghz at 1.4v I tried it as 5ghz on all cores, at 1.35v, and it seems to be fine on everything, including Prime95 Blend, but the Prime95 "fft" stuff makes it crash instantly. Should I ignore that? I haven't seen any other crashes besides that one test. Also, for some reason when I run Prime95 blend, all the cores hit 4900mhz according to HWMonitor, but they won't touch 5000. If I set all cores to 4900 in Bios, they'll only hit 4800mhz in HWMonitor + Prime95, and so on. If I exit Prime95 and browse the internet or something, they'll go back up to full speed. What the hell is up with that? Some kind of Intel TDP limit or something?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 06:23
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:I got an 8700k that was binned by Silicon Lottery for 5ghz at 1.4v The reduction in frequency is the AVX offset, probably best not to worry about that too much. Or maybe increase the amount to stabilize Prime95. Llamadeus fucked around with this message at 06:39 on Jun 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 06:35
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:I got an 8700k that was binned by Silicon Lottery for 5ghz at 1.4v What version of prime are you using? If it is the latest and your log output says something about FMA3 then I’d ignore the crashes. You can add „CPUSupportsFMA3=0“ to the local.txt in your Prime95 folder and try again. Add „CPUSupportsAVX=0“ to disable AVX as well, though you generally want that stable on all cores. I would ignore prime and aim for stability in RealBench eames fucked around with this message at 07:16 on Jun 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 07:12
|
|
|
Llamadeus posted:Try increasing load line calibration/LLC if the heaviest stuff makes it crash (just to a medium setting, nothing extreme), and/or just bump up the voltage slightly. Hmm thanks, I changed the AVX from Auto to 0 and now it is using the correct frequency on Prime95 for a minute or two (instead of dropping by 100mhz instantly), but after that it lowers the frequency down to things like 4700, 4701, 4559, 4699, etc. It's strange that it seems to be aiming for 100mhz increments still, and takes them down even further now, but only after it's been grinding Prime95 for a few minutes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 07:27
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:Hmm thanks, I changed the AVX from Auto to 0 and now it is using the correct frequency on Prime95 for a minute or two (instead of dropping by 100mhz instantly), but after that it lowers the frequency down to things like 4700, 4701, 4559, 4699, etc. It's strange that it seems to be aiming for 100mhz increments still, and takes them down even further now, but only after it's been grinding Prime95 for a few minutes. What are temps like?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 08:27
|
|
|
There are three common reasons for the CPU to clock down after little while under a very power hungry load (like P95's small FFT's, OCCT's small dataset stress test, etc): 1. Thermal throttling of the CPU itself 2. Power limit throttling (you can adjust this in BIOS, even when you're overclocking this usually isn't unlimited - 2x stock TDP is generally considered "safe" for long term, so 190W for the 8700K, as long as you can cool it) 3. Thermal throttling of the VRM's. If you have a decent overclocking board with some airflow near the CPU socket this shouldn't be an issue. In HWInfo64 there's a long section of CPU sensors with names like "IA: Thermal Limit Exceeded" and values that are just yes/no. If any of those says "yes" in the max column, that's likely to be the culprit. Prime95's small FFT's isn't that useful as a stability test, by the way. It's good for stress testing cooling and power delivery since it's by far the most power hungry thing you'll ever run, but it's not really a realistic workload. It pretty much just stresses the AVX units and the cache to all hell and never really touches memory or anything else. If you want a quick check if you're stable under AVX workloads, I've found OCCT's small dataset test (which is almost as power hungry) to be a much faster way to find that out. To verify stability under realistic workloads, Asus RealBench, OCCT's Linpack test and/or OCCT's large dataset test are pretty good. For comparison, on my CPU, OCCT's small dataset test draws about 170W while Realbench doesn't usually exceed 140W. It's a pretty big difference. Realbench has an obnoxious tendency to make Nvidia's graphics driver hang though, even when nothing is wrong with the system. If you encounter that problem (usually in the form of the screen turning off and/or the event log getting filled with a message about "display driver stopped responding and has recovered"), you can try setting the registry key HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Control\GraphicsDrivers\TdrDelay to 8 (as a 64-bit word).
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 11:06
|
|
|
Is there a BIOS profile different than the default I should set on my new Crosshair X470 for my 2700X? I just manually set RAM frequency to their 3200 instead of "Auto". I prefer a silent PC, but I obviously don't want to leave free performance gains on the table either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 11:46
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:Hmm thanks, I changed the AVX from Auto to 0 and now it is using the correct frequency on Prime95 for a minute or two (instead of dropping by 100mhz instantly), but after that it lowers the frequency down to things like 4700, 4701, 4559, 4699, etc. It's strange that it seems to be aiming for 100mhz increments still, and takes them down even further now, but only after it's been grinding Prime95 for a few minutes. It's thermal throttling. AVX benchmarks are not a realistic benchmark (even for stress testing) for most user activities. I would set your AVX offset to 3 and your other stability tests seem to indicate you are in good shape. The AVX offset won't hurt your performance in any meaningful way unless you are doing some heavy duty video effects editing. AVX is used in some web-browser activity but extremely lightly (so the offset won't be used for very long). Some games might use AVX in the future, but again I would expect the usage would be a very small % of the CPU instruction set.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 14:58
|
|
|
Note that Silicon Lottery runs their tests with an AVX offset of 2.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 15:01
|
|
|
Lockback posted:The AVX offset won't hurt your performance in any meaningful way unless you are doing some heavy duty video effects editing. Have you tried this? I found that even letting Firefox minimized in the background will reduce my 8700K CPU performance in non-AVX benchmarks by the amount that the offset is set to. Admittedly those few hundred MHz aren't noticeable in day-to-day use but almost any non-synthetic load (including most games) seems to trigger the offset on my Asus Maximus X Hero. Some say it's a bug, some say it's the Nvidia drivers using AVX. I got around it by setting the AVX offset to zero and long-term TDP limit to 145W, that way it only throttles under extended AVX loads.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 15:36
|
|
|
Yeah, lots of completely regular programs are compiled with AVX enabled these days, and any single one of them being active in the background is enough to make the CPU clock down. I personally don't use AVX offset mainly because I'm too lazy to stability test two configurations, but I think going forward it's going to be increasingly hard to actually use the non-AVX frequency that much. I really like eames' idea with the long term TDP limit - absurd AVX stress tests like P95 and OCCT small will draw like 20% more power than any realistic workload. Wish I had thought of that one myself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 15:41
|
|
|
GRINDCORE MEGGIDO posted:What are temps like? ~70c at all-core 100% 100-watt load, way better than it has any right to be. I'm using a really dinky SSF heatsink, the Cryorig C7 Copper: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cryorig-releases-full-copper-c7-heatsink,36908.html Between that and Silicon Lottery having delidded the CPU and replacing the TIM with liquid metal, the temps stay between 60-70 and only rarely approach 80. I've never seen it hit 90-100, even using HWMonitor's "max temp" to track it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 20:52
|
|
|
eames posted:Have you tried this? I found that even letting Firefox minimized in the background will reduce my 8700K CPU performance in non-AVX benchmarks by the amount that the offset is set to. I haven't seen this myself, but I don't use firefox which I think has the most AVX-compiled features. Alternatively, as you mentioned, you can just leave the offset to 0 (or the minimum of 1 which some ASRock boards don't let you go below for some reason) and make sure your thermal throttling is sane.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
Thanks all, I feel like I'm learning a lot of interesting things: - I didn't know what the AVX offset was before, but I figured it out, it clocks down during AVX. I set it to -2 and Prime95 Blend was stable, but Prime 95 FFT tests still weren't. - I went in and set the "long term TDP" from auto to 180 watts. Then when I run FFT tests, the system will actually pull ~170 watts instead of the usual max of ~100 watts. It appears that solved the clock speeds wavering by large 100mhz increments. FFT is stable for about 60 seconds while the CPU slowly climbs up to 100c. Once it hits 100c the FFT tests started to fail, but I ended Prime95 before the whole system crashed since I don't want to have my CPU at 100c for more than a few seconds. - Someone said Firefox will clock down with an AVX Offset, but that isn't my experience. I am posting from Firefox now and use it exclusively, and the system is happily locked to 5000mhz all cores. - HWMonitor also reports that the motherboard's "TMPIN3" hit 99c, are those the VRMs or something? Other motherboard temps show 109-127c, but the max and min temps are the same and don't budge so I assume those are false readings. Ultimately I decided that even though 5000mhz is a nice round number, 4900 is a billion times easier to manage; I can drop voltage by 0.1 and keep AVX at -2 and it is stable on everything including 15 minutes of RealBench, with a lot less power and heat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 06:15
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:Ultimately I decided that even though 5000mhz is a nice round number, 4900 is a billion times easier to manage; I can drop voltage by 0.1 and keep AVX at -2 and it is stable on everything including 15 minutes of RealBench, with a lot less power and heat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 07:10
|
|
|
I've seen a lot of people get really weird readings from HWMonitor, and all the pro nerds use HWInfo64 as far as I can tell, so that's what I use too. Far from all motherboards have temp sensors on the VRM's though.
TheFluff fucked around with this message at 13:29 on Jun 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 13:23
|
|
|
Anyone got anywhere clocking ryzen+? I wonder how well the asrock x470 itx handles ram speeds. I have some ddr4 4000 to try in it. It runs 3466 at 1.35 volts on a not great z170. What voltages do I need to goose to help ryzen like fast ram? GRINDCORE MEGGIDO fucked around with this message at 13:46 on Jun 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 13:43
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:Ultimately I decided that even though 5000mhz is a nice round number, 4900 is a billion times easier to manage; I can drop voltage by 0.1 and keep AVX at -2 and it is stable on everything including 15 minutes of RealBench, with a lot less power and heat. This is basically exactly where I landed. I was able to get it stable at 5GHZ, but I found keeping an "Everyday" OC at all cores 4.8 was way cooler and used way less power.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
Zero VGS posted:
You could play around with your long and short term TDPs to stop your CPU from ever hitting 100°C. CPUs consume more power the hotter they run and this can result in some sort of runaway effect with elevated voltages at high temperatures. I can't give you exact numbers but 145W long, 180W short and a 15 sec duration should work well for a delidded CPU with good air cooling. That way the CPU will run at max. 180W for 15 seconds and clock down to max. 145W if the load lasts longer than that. It will dynamically throttle frequency and voltage to reach those power targets. If your CPU still hits 100°C during the first 15 seconds because the cooler heatsoaks fast you can shorten the window (in seconds) or drop the short-term power (in watts) a bit. This can allow you to run high frequencies in short/bursty everyday loads that wouldn't be safe to run during long stress tests. It's pretty standard for laptops to throttle like this but it also works well for desktop computers at the edge of their cooling capacity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
Just built a new i7 8700k system with 16gb 3200mhz ram and I have the Cryorig H5 cooler. So I enabled xmp to get my 3200 memory speed but I'm not sure what else I need to do for the cpu. It's running at 4.7 ghz but it feels too hot at 40C idle and in games to about 60-75 range. I have the z370-a mobo, should I disable the MCE option? I disabled it but not sure if I noticed anything. Also updated the bios to the latest version. I don't know what my question really is. I guess I'm happy with 4.7 ghz default setting but I also want to be careful about temps. Should I enable turbo mode on the fans? I'll get voltage info in a couple minutes and update this post.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
Social Animal posted:Just built a new i7 8700k system with 16gb 3200mhz ram and I have the Cryorig H5 cooler. So I enabled xmp to get my 3200 memory speed but I'm not sure what else I need to do for the cpu. It's running at 4.7 ghz but it feels too hot at 40C idle and in games to about 60-75 range. I have the z370-a mobo, should I disable the MCE option? I disabled it but not sure if I noticed anything. Also updated the bios to the latest version. 40C idle and 60-75C load is perfectly normal temps without a delid and nothing to worry about whatsoever. The CPU won't even start throttling itself down until it reaches 100C, and most people who do overclocking tend to stop pushing when the average temp under load is over 80C. Not because it's harmful to the CPU, but because if you keep pushing you'll need higher voltages to keep it stable, which will make it hotter, etc. Just keep MCE on and use the XMP setting and you'll be perfectly fine. If you want to, you can try undervolting it using the vcore offset mode. Enabling XMP probably also raised VCCIO and VCCSA much higher than they really need to be with 3200MHz RAM, so you can lower those two back to like 1.1v too if you want. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Jun 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:40C idle and 60-75C load is perfectly normal temps without a delid and nothing to worry about whatsoever. The CPU won't even start throttling itself down until it reaches 100C, and most people who do overclocking tend to stop pushing when the average temp under load is over 80C. Not because it's harmful to the CPU, but because if you keep pushing you'll need higher voltages to keep it stable, which will make it hotter, etc. Just keep MCE on and use the XMP setting and you'll be perfectly fine. Thanks for the info I'll turn MCE back on. So speaking of voltage I noticed after going to 3200 the voltage for memory shows 1.376 V. It looks like it's set for 1.353 but it fluctuates up to that 1.376 number. Is that alright? The bit of research I did online made it seem like anything over 1.36 is bad. The core voltage for CPU is 1.136 V but obviously this is just the min right? I'll turn MCE back on and try setting VCCIO and VCCSA to 1.1v and give it a test drive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
Social Animal posted:Thanks for the info I'll turn MCE back on. So speaking of voltage I noticed after going to 3200 the voltage for memory shows 1.376 V. It looks like it's set for 1.353 but it fluctuates up to that 1.376 number. Is that alright? The bit of research I did online made it seem like anything over 1.36 is bad. Overvolting DDR4 is almost completely harmless as far as I know*. Also keep in mind that software voltage readings presenting three decimals of accuracy to you are a big fat lie. They're usually based on some 6- or 8-bit counter where each discrete step is supposed to be 0.0125 volt or something like that, and that's presuming they're reading all that accurately in the first place. Take them with at least 0.02v of salt. Usually they'll read high for safety though - Buildzoid did some experiments with some lower end Gigabyte boards recently and that's what he found, they read about 0.02v too high. * Der8auer (who is probably the authority on this) said recently: quote:That's another thing: a lot of people are afraid of high voltages on the memory. There's this myth still from Gulftown, when people said that you cannot increase your memory voltage past 1.65V or it will kill your IMC. That's so wrong. You can ramp up your memory voltage to 2V. It does not kill your IMC. We do this on a daily basis and I've never seen an IMC die over this. We're even using like 2.2V on the memory for a very long time and it doesn't hurt the CPU. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Jun 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 21:45
|
|
|
Dude that is great stuff man thanks. I’m learning a lot from this and feel a lot better with this build now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
How necessary is delidding to get an 8086K to all core 5ghz? The last thing I overclocked was a 3570K so I'm very out of practice
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 02:38
|
|
|
Endymion FRS MK1 posted:How necessary is delidding to get an 8086K to all core 5ghz? The last thing I overclocked was a 3570K so I'm very out of practice I'd strongly suggest it, the temperature difference is stark. Many people report a 20 celsius drop under load.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 02:42
|
|
|
I’ve got a 7700k at 4.9ghz on an Asus Z170-A that peaks around 80c under gaming loads. I’m running adaptive core voltage at 1.325v. Any lower and USB acts funny (devices they are plugged in won’t show up). At 1.325v I’m rock solid though. I’m using an nzxt Kraken x61 for cooling and was happy with it on my 6600k that didn’t get nearly as hot at 4.7ghz. Case has great airflow and video card is an EVGA SC2 hybrid 1080ti. I have windows set to balanced power plan and I idle around 25-30c. I also have AVX offset set to -2 I know 80c is “safe” but sometimes I see individual core temps around 95 and I’d much rather have lower temps. I’ve reseated the cooler and reapplied paste, and nothing has really helped other than lowering voltage and switching to adaptive (I was on fixed 1.350v before. Is this a good candidate for delidding? Any other settings I can look at that might lower my temps? Delidding seems extreme but nothing else I’m doing is bringing temps down. GutBomb fucked around with this message at 05:56 on Jul 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 03:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 09:20 |
|
|
Delidding my 8700k was shockingly easy, but I was able to 3D print delid and relid tools. Kaby delid tool Kaby relid tool The nice thing about the delid tool is that it just needs a vise. I used a small 3-inch clamp-on vise from amazon. It does feel tense when you are waiting for the pop, but it works as advertised. Clean-up of the stock TIM is easy, alcohol swabs help. I used a tip from some youtube video and masked a rectangle on the IHS using scotch tape. Made the application of the liquid metal really easy. Apply it to the die of the CPU as well. Conductonaut comes with a black q-tip that helps. The silicone for re-sealing is really just an adhesive to stick the IHS back on. The stock seal has a deliberate gap so it's not even meant to be airtight. Just use a minimal amount and stick it back on. Without the relid tool, you could use the socket of the motherboard to line up the IHS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2018 05:01
|
|