3570K Overclock, have no clues.

[Muyoso]

My 3570k is kinda crazy.
Auto vCore settings:
4.2Ghz - 1.188v at load
4.3Ghz - 1.188v at load
4.4Ghz - 1.368v at load
4.5Ghz - 1.368v at load

A MASSIVE jump from 4.3Ghz to 4.4Ghz. Just installed the Noctua NH-D14 and at 1.368v I have to almost immediately stop Intel Burn Test because it hits over 100c. Now I am wondering if its worth it to spend hours getting 4.5Ghz to work or if I should just leave everything on auto and 4.3Ghz. . . .

 

[BrksEverything]

Well, I'm probably the last person you want to take advice from, but I'll throw my 2 cents in: It's my understanding that auto voltage is useless once you approach the 4.5+ mark, because it's beyond Intel's spec, and they didn't want/need to put accurate voltage references on there for a frequency >99.9% of users would never use. That is, they aren't going to overclock for you.

So knowing that the 4.5 auto voltage is wildly inaccurate, why not at least just use the previous voltages leading up to it as a guide, turn on manual voltage control and give it a shot? I don't think it will take hours to get 4.5 up and running, rock-hard stability will require some trial and error, but I don't think there's any reason you shouldn't be able to get 4.5 without ever touching 1.3 volts.

 

[Muyoso]

Well, I'm probably the last person you want to take advice from, but I'll throw my 2 cents in: It's my understanding that auto voltage is useless once you approach the 4.5+ mark, because it's beyond Intel's spec, and they didn't want/need to put accurate voltage references on there for a frequency >99.9% of users would never use. That is, they aren't going to overclock for you.

So knowing that the 4.5 auto voltage is wildly inaccurate, why not at least just use the previous voltages leading up to it as a guide, turn on manual voltage control and give it a shot? I don't think it will take hours to get 4.5 up and running, rock-hard stability will require some trial and error, but I don't think there's any reason you shouldn't be able to get 4.5 without ever touching 1.3 volts.

Yea, I am absolutely going to try. Gonna take a lot of research on wtf half the things in my bios are.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

My 3570k is kinda crazy.
Auto vCore settings:
4.2Ghz - 1.188v at load
4.3Ghz - 1.188v at load
4.4Ghz - 1.368v at load
4.5Ghz - 1.368v at load

What reporting tool are you using? (ATM, I'm running F@H. CPU-Z is reporting 1.056v, and Core Temp is reporting 1.14v. So clearly, some applications are less accurate than others - although I have no idea which is actually telling the truth.)

That's a big jump though - not sure how much this should vary. What motherboard do you have?

A MASSIVE jump from 4.3Ghz to 4.4Ghz. Just installed the Noctua NH-D14 and at 1.368v I have to almost immediately stop Intel Burn Test because it hits over 100c.

lolwut? Reinstall your cooler. You probably used either too much thermal compound, or not enough. Easy mistake to make. Or... is the fan on the HSF actually working?

Either that or your case has no airflow to speak of.

Now I am wondering if its worth it to spend hours getting 4.5Ghz to work or if I should just leave everything on auto and 4.3Ghz. . . .

 

[Muyoso]

What reporting tool are you using? (ATM, I'm running F@H. CPU-Z is reporting 1.056v, and Core Temp is reporting 1.14v. So clearly, some applications are less accurate than others - although I have no idea which is actually telling the truth.)
That's a big jump though - not sure how much this should vary. What motherboard do you have?
lolwut? Reinstall your cooler. You probably used either too much thermal compound, or not enough. Easy mistake to make. Or... is the fan on the HSF actually working?

Either that or your case has no airflow to speak of.

I have a Gigabyte UD5H Z77 motherboard and a case with ridiculously good airflow. Using CPU-Z for reporting of the vCore. I am fairly certain that I installed the Noctua D14 very well without using too much or too little paste. I think that I just have a pretty crappy 3570k. Won't even boot at 4.5Ghz unless I bump up to 1.29v with LLC at "Extreme". Would probably help though if I had any clue what I was doing. . . .

Should a Noctua D14 be able to keep a 3570k at 1.368v below 100c when running Intel Burn Test? It handles Prime95 like its nothing, but IBT just kills it.

IDK if it makes a difference but I am overclocking by adjusting the Turbo values. Running Prime95 right now on my 3570k clocked at 4.5Ghz at 1.368v and temps are like 74-84c. If I ran IBT, I would hit 105c within 10 seconds on at least one of my cores. IBT is ridiculous.

 

[BrksEverything]

What reporting tool are you using? (ATM, I'm running F@H. CPU-Z is reporting 1.056v, and Core Temp is reporting 1.14v. So clearly, some applications are less accurate than others - although I have no idea which is actually telling the truth.)

I could be wrong on this, but at least MY version of coretemp doesn't report the voltage you're currently using.

The voltage Coretemp gives you is the VID, which is the voltage the chip is telling the motherboard to supply at a given frequency, but not necessarily the one that's being given, unless you're on auto voltage, and, at higher frequencies, nor is it likely the correct one for stable operation.

The VID is useful for getting some idea of what your offset voltage might be at a given frequency, but to do that you first need a stable Vcore for that frequency (obtained from a previous manual OC) from which to subtract the VID, giving you a starting point for offset.

 

[Vectronic]

The voltage Coretemp gives you is the VID

Fact.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Ah, well that explains the difference.

 

[Vectronic]

It's the same as RealTemp, HWiNFO (Core # VID, though it does display it accurately as VCore), HW Monitor Pro is "semi-accurate" in that it displays the right voltage, but only to two decimal places, and doesn't update as often as CPU-Z.

AIDA64 is another good one, but it's huge and displays/does all sorts of other things so it's a bit bloated if all you are after is Temp + Voltage.

I use CPU-Z for voltage/clocks, and RealTemp for temps, specifically this version of RealTemp.

 

[Muyoso]

Looks like I am able to overclock to 4.4Ghz at 1.272v fully stable with all of the cores around 70c after an hour of Prime95. Its really amazing how much more stress Intel Burn Test throws on a CPU compared to Prime95. Its like 15c difference. Also weird is that I was able to pass a 2 hours Prime95 torture test on slightly lower voltage, but 5 minutes in Skyrim and I got a BSOD.

Don't know if I will try for a 4.5Ghz overclock. I really need to bump up voltages well into the 1.3's for that to be stable, and temperatures, while fine in prime95, reach mid 90's or more in IBT.

 

[2is]

Usually on most 3570K's you can get to 4.2Ghz stable just changing your Turbo to 42 on all cores and keeping your voltage on Auto. On most chips, anything higher you will need to add voltage either to your base or offset.

Leaving voltage to auto DOES add voltage as you overclock. Often times more than you actually need, BUT if you're new to OCing, it may be best to leave it at AUTO, at least initially.

 

[BrksEverything]

Looks like I am able to overclock to 4.4Ghz at 1.272v fully stable with all of the cores around 70c after an hour of Prime95. Its really amazing how much more stress Intel Burn Test throws on a CPU compared to Prime95. Its like 15c difference. Also weird is that I was able to pass a 2 hours Prime95 torture test on slightly lower voltage, but 5 minutes in Skyrim and I got a BSOD.

Don't know if I will try for a 4.5Ghz overclock. I really need to bump up voltages well into the 1.3's for that to be stable, and temperatures, while fine in prime95, reach mid 90's or more in IBT.

Well, depending on the various features available in your BIOS, and the performance of your motherboard, there are quite a few variables available to modify that can determine what voltage is necessary for stability at any given frequency.

Just as discussed in this thread, disabling C3/C6 states, and I'm GIVEN to believe *(not certain) that multicore enhancement, spread spectrum, and a few other "features" should be disabled as well for stability.

Speaking more generally, it's tempting to boil down overlcocks to Frequency X at Voltage Y, but that's not nearly the whole picture. There are many variables in play, and you should look for a tutorial or detailed guide for your specific motherboard, if at all possible. It may be that you just have a bum chip, or unlucky setup that is preventing you from reaching 4.5 while staying below 1.3v (less than optimal power supply is just one hardware aspect that can cause this, for example), but I don't realistically think that's the case, but take all my advice with a chunk of salt.

By all means, stay within your comfort zone, and don't push your computer more than you're comfortable/capable, since the result of failure can be expensive! I'm just saying don't get discouraged if this is something you're interested in - there's always more to learn, and the more you do, the more tools you will have available to get performance out of your machine.

 

[Muyoso]

Had to up the voltages a bit. Was getting WHEA errors in Event Viewer like crazy, even though the system otherwise was perfectly stable. Definitely got a bum 3570k. That sucks. Nearly hitting 1.3v just to make 4.4Ghz stable while reading about others hitting 4.5Ghz at 1.21 or less definitely is annoying. At least its stable with all of the power saving features enabled though other than CPU thermal monitoring, and temps are very good. I am sure if I disabled all of that stuff I could bring voltages down a little, but still probably a bum chip.