i5 2500K @ 4GHz - Does this look good?

[Jman13]

EDIT: If you read the whole thread, you'll see I'm now running at 4.1GHz and 1.22V, and about 5C lower than in the OP. Thanks everyone!

Original Message:
So, I'm quite new to overclocking of this sort, that is, on a chip that dynamically changes speeds and voltages and such. I have overclocked chips for years, though always a mild OC due to chip life concerns...I've overclocked a Pentium 166, Athlon XP, Athlon 64 and Core 2 Duo (though eventually went back to stock due to stability problems after about 2 years).

I always try to stick to stock voltage. I was going to leave my 2500K at stock, but considering most people are easily getting 4.3 GHz, and most are getting 4.5+ with a little effort, I thought I'd try and jump it up to 4.0 GHz. I'm less concerned with shortening chip life with this processor than in the past, mainly because for 90% of its life, it'll be at 1.6GHz and 0.85V. Still, I don't think I'll go beyond 4.0 for now. That's plenty of speed, though if I start feeling like it's bogging down I might bump it up in a year or two (I usually keep my rigs for about 3 years, though I had my Core 2 Duo machine for 4.5 years....)

So, I just changed the multiplier to 40 in my BIOS and did absolutely nothing else (aside from running my RAM at the rated 1600MHz). So, voltage is set to auto (and lists 1.335V as default).

4.0 Seems very stable so far....ran an Intel Burn test at High with no issues, and Temps are at 71C absolute peak on one of the four cores, with the rest of the cores in the high 60s. CPUID is showing 1.29V (occasionally jumping to 1.308V) when at load. I'm using a CoolerMaster TX3 with two fans (can't fit a larger heatsink).

Do you think this looks good? Temps good (it's cooler than with the Intel HSF at stock speeds)? Should I just leave voltage as is, or can I even back it off a bit? If I do, would there be any real benefit?

Here's the temps/processor info during run 10 of IBT:

 

[Charlie98]

Backing the core voltage down helped to reduce temps, in my case approx 8-10C. Higher than required voltage and heat are not your CPU's buddies, it wouldn't hurt to go in and just reduce voltage a little and see how stable you are... I dropped mine .007v and that's where I'm at now with a 41x multiplier. Safe and stable.

 

[Jman13]

Is there a specific offset setting to change, or should I directly change Vcore?

 

[onelivinlarge]

u can get faster than that with less voltage just so u know. i have 4.4 at 1.276 vcore and my temps are much lower are u using the stock cooler? try switching to offset mode and doing -.010 and see if that lowers temps and if u stay stable

 

[Jman13]

Ok...Changed to -0.010, now running at 1.284V at full load. Temps seem about the same, maybe 1C lower (Intel Burn is peaking at 70C, while operating at 68-69C most of the time.

This is with a CoolerMaster TX3. Stock Intel HSF is nowhere near this cool, so you know...I was hitting 76C on stock cooling at 3.3GHz, and 82C on stock cooling at 3.6GHz. At 4, I'd imagine the stock cooler would run around 85-88C.

 

[Rvenger]

Your temps seem high and you should be able to get at least 4.2ghz out of 1.28v. Bump the multi up to 42x once you get that thing running about 10c cooler. I ran 4.2ghz at around 65c with a hyper tx3. Something is either up with your fan profile or you need to reapply your thermal paste.

I recommend both the Hyper 212+ and 212 Evo for long term overclocking.

 

[onelivinlarge]

Your temps seem high and you should be able to get at least 4.2ghz out of 1.28v. Bump the multi up to 42x once you get that thing running about 10c cooler.

im with you the op temps seem very high. i am running a h50 from corsair but i bairly hit 60 under itb high as the op is running and my times are significantly lower and im using less voltage and more multi than him

 

[Jman13]

Ok, I'm very confused. My temps are 'very high'? There are threads all over the place here that are saying that if you're under 70C at full load overclocked you're doing really well. Tons of threads on here saying anything under 80C is fine. Why all of a sudden is 70C 'very high'. I was getting 76C on full load with the stock cooler at stock speeds, 83C on full load at 3.6GHz.

And, I think that only 10C over a watercooling rig is pretty darn good, frankly. I would also expect you to have times faster than mine when you're running at a faster speed.

The TX3 is about 20C lower than the Intel stock HSF overall in my system. I can't use the 212+, because it won't fit in my case. I'm also not planning on overclocking more than this at the moment. My case is likely a bit warmer than what most of you have...it's a smaller case with three hard drives, in a warmer room in the house.

 

[Hulk]

That's not a bad result but I'm getting 4.2GHz at the same voltage with lower temps. Low 60's max.

 

[Jman13]

That's not a bad result but I'm getting 4.2GHz at the same voltage with lower temps. Low 60's max.

That's not out of line then, given my cooler. In reviews, the TX3 is about 7 degrees warmer than your HSF at load. Since my temps are high 60s (with one core occasionally hitting 70C), that would put your HSF in my system at around 62, with some peaks to 63.

I'm also wondering about "onelivinlarge"'s IBT times. I'm wondering if you're remembering your standard times, which for me average about 15.8 seconds. On IBT Standard, I peak temperature wise at 70C for the hottest core, with an average peak of 67.5C across all four cores.

Anyway, I'm stable right now at 1.272V, though no real impact on temperatures.

I guess the big question I have, since I am not planning on overclocking higher, is: Is this safe for 24/7 running (especially since under normal loads I almost never break 60C), and since with the intel stock cooler I was running at 75C load and a slightly higher voltage, am I actually going to have better than stock lifetime at 4GHz, 1.272V and 70C absolute peak temperature vs 3.3GHz, 1.29V and 75C load temps?

 

[kalrith]

I get 4.3 GHz at 1.24v max load voltage. That's with LLC 2 and -.04v offset (I think).

You should try some lower voltage to see if it's still stable.

 

[Jman13]

Yeah, I'm working through the lower voltages now. At 1.26 right now (-.03 offset), and it's working fine. That dropped temps by about 2C, so I'm peaking at 69C now on the hottest core, though it's typically running at 68. Average across all 4 cores is now 65C. I'll keep going lower....

Ok, so when I rebooted at -.03, instead of rebooting, it shut off. Then it wouldn't come on again, so I turned off the power supply, hit power and booted, didn't think much of it, and dropped to -.04. It booted fine, ran IBT for a while and was fine. I wanted to just check rebooting, so I did, and then the OS failed to load...hung on boot. So I hit reset, and it went into a power cycle loop...fans would spin up for two seconds, then shut off, over and over, until I shut off the power supply again and waited a second. When I got back to BIOS, I went back to -.02.

Now I'm going to run Prime95 for a while to make sure at -.02 it's stable. At -.04, when running IBT, it was at 67C, with peaks of 68, average of 64. Still, having a computer that fails to boot every so often is not so good.

If I don't go higher, are these temps OK?

 

[Puppies04]

Ok, I'm very confused. My temps are 'very high'? There are threads all over the place here that are saying that if you're under 70C at full load overclocked you're doing really well. Tons of threads on here saying anything under 80C is fine. Why all of a sudden is 70C 'very high'. I was getting 76C on full load with the stock cooler at stock speeds, 83C on full load at 3.6GHz.

And, I think that only 10C over a watercooling rig is pretty darn good, frankly. I would also expect you to have times faster than mine when you're running at a faster speed.

The TX3 is about 20C lower than the Intel stock HSF overall in my system. I can't use the 212+, because it won't fit in my case. I'm also not planning on overclocking more than this at the moment. My case is likely a bit warmer than what most of you have...it's a smaller case with three hard drives, in a warmer room in the house.

Let me clarify what I think people are trying to say...

Your temps are very high for a 4ghz OC. Yes 70C isn't bad in the grand scheme of things and if you were at 4.2-4.4 it would be about right but you should (depending on your chip) be able to lower the voltage further and still stay stable. Keep nibbling at that vcore and testing until you find it becomes unstable then bump it back up a tick or 2.

For a point of reference my chip (which isn't a golden sample by a long shot) will happily hit 4ghz just under 1.2v.

 

[Jman13]

Ok, I see.

So, I've been running P95 for a while now at 1.272V, and it seems fine. Reboots at this level seem fine too, so I'll probably keep it there, since the issues started at around 1.26V. So, I know this may not be the coolest rig in the world, but am I correct that there should be no long term issues with these temps and this voltage?

Am I correct that:

4GHz, 1.272V, 34C idle, 69C IBT max, 61C 3DMark is better than:

3.3GHz, 1.296V, 36C idle, 76C IBT max, 72C 3DMark (fully stock: what I was getting when I first built the machine with the stock Intel HSF).

Or, does the higher clock speed negate the lower voltage and temperature for the long haul? (Most people have said that voltage is what reduces lifespan, rather than clock speed.)


Ultimately, 4GHz is more for 'hey, I've got a 4GHz chip' than for any real need for the extra speed (though a little extra speed is nice). I just need the chip to last a fair amount of time and be very stable.

 

[Puppies04]

Voltage and heat reduce lifespan, you are running lower on both counts so there is nothing to worrk about.

 

[onelivinlarge]

Let me clarify what I think people are trying to say...

Your temps are very high for a 4ghz OC. Yes 70C isn't bad in the grand scheme of things and if you were at 4.2-4.4 it would be about right but you should (depending on your chip) be able to lower the voltage further and still stay stable. Keep nibbling at that vcore and testing until you find it becomes unstable then bump it back up a tick or 2.

For a point of reference my chip (which isn't a golden sample by a long shot) will happily hit 4ghz just under 1.2v.

^^^ what he said

Ok, I see.

So, I've been running P95 for a while now at 1.272V, and it seems fine. Reboots at this level seem fine too, so I'll probably keep it there, since the issues started at around 1.26V. So, I know this may not be the coolest rig in the world, but am I correct that there should be no long term issues with these temps and this voltage?

Am I correct that:

4GHz, 1.272V, 34C idle, 69C IBT max, 61C 3DMark is better than:

3.3GHz, 1.296V, 36C idle, 76C IBT max, 72C 3DMark (fully stock: what I was getting when I first built the machine with the stock Intel HSF).

Or, does the higher clock speed negate the lower voltage and temperature for the long haul? (Most people have said that voltage is what reduces lifespan, rather than clock speed.)


Ultimately, 4GHz is more for 'hey, I've got a 4GHz chip' than for any real need for the extra speed (though a little extra speed is nice). I just need the chip to last a fair amount of time and be very stable.

that seems fine your temps still seem a little high but if your case doesnt have crazy good cool air flow in a cool room id say its not bad

 

[Puppies04]

Quick question.

3.3GHz, 1.296V, 36C idle, 76C IBT max, 72C 3DMark (fully stock: what I was getting when I first built the machine with the stock Intel HSF).

Are you sure this is correct. I have just set mine back to stock because I had a hunch the voltage looked a bit high and mine sits at 1.22V max in CPUID hardware monitor at stock. 1.296 seems an awful lot higher.

 

[Jman13]

Quick question.



Are you sure this is correct. I have just set mine back to stock because I had a hunch the voltage looked a bit high and mine sits at 1.22V max in CPUID hardware monitor at stock. 1.296 seems an awful lot higher.

It might have been....I know mine defaults to 1.296 at 4GHz...I was actually assuming the same for 3.3....

But 'stock' as identified by my motherboard is 1.34, so it's below that in any case.

 

[Puppies04]

It might have been....I know mine defaults to 1.296 at 4GHz...I was actually assuming the same for 3.3....

But 'stock' as identified by my motherboard is 1.34, so it's below that in any case.

Your cpu has an internal lookup table that specifies what voltage it requires at any given speed. If it is asking for 1.296 @4ghz it is probably close to the 1.22v I saw @ stock when running at 3.3.

I decided to see if I can replicate some of your numbers so I set my CPU multi at 40 set LLC to medium and dialed in -0.7v offset voltage. I am just about to finish a 20 run very high intel burn test and my max temps for my cores in CPUID HW monitor are recorded as 51C 53C 56C 54C (it is pretty warm in here tonight aswell thank to the Mrs having the heating on high). Max voltage showing in HW moniotor is 1.25v and i'm certain I can get lower than this stable lowering the temps even further. My cooling setup might be a bit better than yours but can you see why people were commenting on your temps being a little high....

Edit.

Completed test without a hitch. Not really got much time to tweak it further tonight asd I have work early in the morning (i'm in the UK) but I will be around for the next half an hour or so if you have any comments or questions

 

[Jman13]

I'm also wondering if my motherboard is one reason it isn't as stable at the lower voltages as some others...it's a very basic z68 board. Reading a few reviews, they say it's a good solid board for budget conscious, but it won't be good for major overclocking. They were saying it tops out on the i5-2500K at around 4.4GHz, while the same CPU on a more enthusiast board has been able to easily hit 4.9. I'm fine with that (if I weren't, I'd have gone for a more serious MB and gotten a wider case to fit a bigger heatsink.

If I can get a safe 4GHz overclock to run for the life of the chip, I'll be quite happy.

One real world note...I'm encoding a DVD to MP4 right now (which is just blazing fast coming from my C2D...taking 18 minutes for a 2hr 20minute movie, averaging 180fps), and temps are maxing out at 62C, with the average among the four cores right at 60, at 100% load.

 

[Puppies04]

I'm also wondering if my motherboard is one reason it isn't as stable at the lower voltages as some others...it's a very basic z68 board. Reading a few reviews, they say it's a good solid board for budget conscious, but it won't be good for major overclocking. They were saying it tops out on the i5-2500K at around 4.4GHz, while the same CPU on a more enthusiast board has been able to easily hit 4.9. I'm fine with that (if I weren't, I'd have gone for a more serious MB and gotten a wider case to fit a bigger heatsink.

If I can get a safe 4GHz overclock to run for the life of the chip, I'll be quite happy.

One real world note...I'm encoding a DVD to MP4 right now (which is just blazing fast coming from my C2D...taking 18 minutes for a 2hr 20minute movie, averaging 180fps), and temps are maxing out at 62C, with the average among the four cores right at 60, at 100% load.

I highly doubt you are going to hurt the cpu with those temps and voltages. I was just showing you what a similar (I know my components are a bit different) system can achieve to see if you could push the voltage down a bit more. Is it possible to add another case fan or 2, or are all the fan bays filled and are you sure the TIM is applied correctly and the cooler is fastened down correctly. Also you could adjust the fan profile which might shave a few degrees off peak temps.

Once more, I am not saying you are running too hot just that it might be possible to run cooler which will prolong the life of your chip and keep things quieter.

 

[Jman13]

Fans are full up (actually just recently added an additional 120mm intake fan, which has dramatically reduced overall inside case temperatures.) I can increase the speed on my second CPU cooler fan, which is a three speed Antec fan (the one is PWM, the second is just plugged into the system fan header), currently set to medium output. Turning it on high shaves another degree or two, but it is silent at medium and emits a high pitched hum at high, which is objectional to my ears. I have an even higher output 92mm fan that I can use, but it sounds like a fighter jet.

TIM is applied properly. This is my first direct heat pipe heatsink, but I carefully followed the instructions on the Benchmark reviews site for best coverage and application on these types of heatsinks. Cooler is locked in tight.

Thanks for the advice, everyone!

 

[LagunaX]

You'll be on Ivy Bridge in 2 years - have some fun!

Anyways have this one set on offset voltage 0.085v so it idles most of the time at 0.92-1.02v on cpu-z and tasks up to 4.8ghz but gets no where near 80c unless under linX or P95. Under intense video encoding it hangs in the 60's.

Go for 4.6ghz - you'll see a different beast...

 

[Jman13]

I'll save the crazy OCing for later. I do note that in video encoding I'm maxing at 62...typical use in photography (what I primarily use my machine for) I'm lucky to break low 50s.

Ran p95 for 2 hours and still was at 68C.

 

[LagunaX]

Yeah I see - probably no more than 4.2ghz with the CoolerMaster TX3.
The Hyper 212 Evo would give u a little more headroom for $40 in the future...