5930k 4.6GHz

Shmee

Memory & Storage, Graphics Cards Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
7,381
2,415
146
So I got my 5930k to 4.6GHz, with a +.225 vcore offset. Cache is currently running at 3.6 GHz, though I am not sure how much difference that will make. Vcore in CPUz reads ~1.25V under load. I played several hours of SWBF, and ran a few benchmarks and some ZCash mining at these settings, so far good, but time will tell.
 

Shmee

Memory & Storage, Graphics Cards Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
7,381
2,415
146
Just ran it and got 1331. I looked up the render score and it is on par with other Haswell E chips at similar clocks. Interestingly, it is also comparative to dual 1366 Xeons with 24 threads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Timmah!

Justinus

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2005
3,167
1,509
136
It would be interesting to know the rest of your setup. My 5960x at 4.5 with cache at 4.375 and memory at 3000 scores 1867, which after a little math is 7.5% faster per clock.

There is some performance to be had from cache and memory overclocking. The downside is it can require higher core voltages and make your temps unreasonable. I have to have vcore at 1.343 to pass an 8 hour realbench while if I clocked the cache down to 3.75 or 4.0 I could get away with closer to 1.25 volts
 

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,635
3,095
136
That's a nice solid clock speed. Is it really under a hyper 212 evo? How's that working out?
 

Shmee

Memory & Storage, Graphics Cards Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
7,381
2,415
146
My RAM is at 2666, and cache at 3.6GHz. RAM isn't rated for any higher; I couldn't get it stable at the 2800 profile, but cache may or may not go further. The 212 evo works well enough for now, I have it on push pull, temps get around 60-70 C under benching, mining or moderate stressing.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,226
9,990
126
It would be interesting to know the rest of your setup. My 5960x at 4.5 with cache at 4.375 and memory at 3000 scores 1867, which after a little math is 7.5% faster per clock.

There is some performance to be had from cache and memory overclocking. The downside is it can require higher core voltages and make your temps unreasonable. I have to have vcore at 1.343 to pass an 8 hour realbench while if I clocked the cache down to 3.75 or 4.0 I could get away with closer to 1.25 volts

What's the realistic upper frequency limit of the cache / uncore, for Haswell K, Haswell-E, and Skylake-K?

The reason that I ask is, I can clock my G4400 Skylake dual-core to 4.62, using 140 BCLK, and 1.400V, and it will even pass 10 minutes of OCCT:CPU. But then, within an hour or two, it will throw a "watchdog_clock_timeout" BSOD.

My working theory is, that with a BCLK OC, both the core clock and the uncore / cache clock multipliers are set to max possible (33x, in the case of the G4400), and then you OC using BCLK, which can tend to push the cache faster than it can handle, even though the CPU core(s) themselves could go higher.

I saw mention of a 6700K OC in a guide, that they had their cache / uncore multi at 41x, when they pushed their core clock multi to 47x, at 1.408V vcore.

So I think that the cache / uncore, doesn't really want to go up to 4.5Ghz or beyond.

My G4400 has been happy for nearly / over a year now, at BCLK 135.0, 4.45Ghz, vcore 1.300V.
 

Justinus

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2005
3,167
1,509
136
What's the realistic upper frequency limit of the cache / uncore, for Haswell K, Haswell-E, and Skylake-K?

The reason that I ask is, I can clock my G4400 Skylake dual-core to 4.62, using 140 BCLK, and 1.400V, and it will even pass 10 minutes of OCCT:CPU. But then, within an hour or two, it will throw a "watchdog_clock_timeout" BSOD.

My working theory is, that with a BCLK OC, both the core clock and the uncore / cache clock multipliers are set to max possible (33x, in the case of the G4400), and then you OC using BCLK, which can tend to push the cache faster than it can handle, even though the CPU core(s) themselves could go higher.

I saw mention of a 6700K OC in a guide, that they had their cache / uncore multi at 41x, when they pushed their core clock multi to 47x, at 1.408V vcore.

So I think that the cache / uncore, doesn't really want to go up to 4.5Ghz or beyond.

My G4400 has been happy for nearly / over a year now, at BCLK 135.0, 4.45Ghz, vcore 1.300V.

I avoid all bclk overclocking that isn't an exact strap. It not only gives me instability but also causes stuff like my M.2 slot to revert to PCI-e 2.0 speeds hampering my SSD.

In my personal testing, I have not been able to get 4.5 GHz on the uncore stable no matter what. 4.375 runs all day long but if I up the multiplier once more to 4.5 it doesn't even post. My 4770k won't go over 4.1 uncore.

I have seen reports of 6700K's wth 4.5/4.6 GHz cache, but I'm not sure if it was actually a stable clock speed or just for testing. My brother's 6700k hit 4.6 core/4.4 uncore.
 

Timmah!

Golden Member
Jul 24, 2010
1,395
602
136
Just ran it and got 1331. I looked up the render score and it is on par with other Haswell E chips at similar clocks. Interestingly, it is also comparative to dual 1366 Xeons with 24 threads.

Nice. And yeah, the Westmere Xeons score is interesting, they are not that bad otherwise, but the low clocks are killing them. If you could OC them though to comparable clocks, it would be different story.

BTW, my score with 6850k at 4GHz is 1253. I would have to be super lucky to have a chip capable of going up to 4,6Ghz, since clearly BW-E is no HW-E, but i have to wonder what score would it get at those clocks.
 

Shmee

Memory & Storage, Graphics Cards Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
7,381
2,415
146
I backed down to 4.5 GHz and raised vcore a tad more. Was getting occasional app crashes in SWBF