Bonzai- I'll try setting the RAM to 1600 again. I had received a memory crash at one point and assumed it was RAM related, but it also could have been a generic instability crash. I'll also enable C1E and EIST again, I had disabled all three as usual. I see now that Gigabyte was pretty stoked about their dynamic vcore when it was released, so this may be the only way for me to interact with my voltages due to some reading I've done on dynamic vcore. I'll give the DVID method of OC a try.
Schmide-
From what I've read of the PLL is that I could lower it to possibly reduce my CPU temps. However if I understand the math, by reducing my internal phase lock loop (PLL) then I would have to boost my BLCK to achieve the same overclock frequency. Stock is 1.8v, and Intel states 1.89v maximum. Not a lot of leeway. I'm not sure my kung fu is good enough for this yet. :'(
Charlie98- I've not added any voltage, as the voltage supplied has been done automatically by the Serial VID, which is supposed to scale to the appropriate amount of power needed at a certain frequency multiplier. When changing the vcore manually the SVID feature should be deactivated and the vcore input taken instead. This however is not occurring and all of my attempts to directly change the vcore are ineffective.
Going reset the mobo, lock in the RAM, and attempt the DVID method of overclock then will report back with the findings. Thanks for the assistance everyone.
Again, there could be differences between Z68 boards of different manufacture. But there has long been a general consensus that you should be able to get reasonably high clocks with a PLL Voltage set to ~1.70V.
You shouldn't need PLL-Overvoltage enabled unless you're trying for 4.7 Ghz or higher, and on the right chip (and I seem to have two as 2600K and 2700K respectively) 4.7 Ghz doesn't require enabling PLL Overvoltage.
VID vs VCORE and the Monitored values: I don't see anything out of whack in any of the three monitoring programs. CPUZ reports the VCORE; both VCORE and VID are reported in HWMonitor, and the CoreTemp value of VID is consistent. Nor should I be irritated here that you're using a fixed voltage approach to this, but it will easily transition to enabled EIST, C1E and "offset/dynamic" mode.
Also, there should be a newer version of HWMonitor (such as the one I'm using) which reports more information.
Again -- There is absolutely no reasonable need to leave the C3/C6 Report items of power-saving enabled. I say this because you may even experience idle-level instability -- often so infrequent that it defies easy troubleshooting -- with those items enabled. After that, make sure you disable "hybrid sleep" in Windows, but you can use basic Sleep and Hibernate. With the C3/C6 Disabled, idle power consumption may be a few Watts higher: it could make the difference between 4W and 10W. You've already done enough for the "Green" cause without the drawbacks of C3/C6, so . . .
Further, you might try adjusting and testing your overclock settings with Spread Spectrum disabled, but you should be able to Enable Spread Spectrum, re-test -- and then find that both idle and load voltage variation has been slightly attenuated -- a good thing.
Again -- I looked through the BIOS screens for that board, and I think they were shown in an Anandtech review. I couldn't find "Extra Voltage for Turbo," but do another look-see to find it. With both an vOffset setting and this "Extra V for turbo," you should be able keep a lower positive offset value and address your turbo clock stability with the latter.
Folks who overclock with Offset alone -- maybe because they have to do so -- need to "mind" their LLC setting, just to assure that idle voltage doesn't drop too low. I'd say if idle voltage doesn't vary too much below 1.000V, you're "good to go." That's with EIST and C1E enabled, by the way.