Overclocking H67. What do you think?

Do you think H67 can overclock with a K CPU? (Please read first post before voting!)

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

PreferLinux

Senior member
Dec 29, 2010
420
0
0
I have downloaded and (partially) read the manuals for the Gigabyte GA-H67M-D2 and the MSI H67MS-E33. Both are the cheapest (based on the features) H67 motherboards from those two manufactures. (Asus does not have its manuals up yet.) BOTH support multiplier overclocking. As these are the cheapest, I do not think that it is a workaround in the BIOS or any thing like that (that's actually the reason I went for them).

http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/prodbrief/324586.pdf
Intel H67 Express Chipset also enables overclocking features of unlocked 2nd Intel Core processors.

What do you think? How do you interpret these? Which is correct? The reviews? The motherboard manuals of two different companies? Intel?
 

Hogan773

Senior member
Nov 2, 2010
599
0
0
I have downloaded and (partially) read the manuals for the Gigabyte GA-H67M-D2 and the MSI H67MS-E33. Both are the cheapest (based on the features) H67 motherboards from those two manufactures. (Asus does not have its manuals up yet.) BOTH support multiplier overclocking. As these are the cheapest, I do not think that it is a workaround in the BIOS or any thing like that (that's actually the reason I went for them).

http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/prodbrief/324586.pdf


What do you think? How do you interpret these? Which is correct? The reviews? The motherboard manuals of two different companies? Intel?


This would make a huge difference in people's evaluations w/r/t QuickSync.....we need to get the real answer on this ASAP! Intel what's the story???????
 

Avalon

Diamond Member
Jul 16, 2001
7,571
178
106
IDK, maybe they are referring to BCLK overclocking, even though it is extremely limited.
 

khon

Golden Member
Jun 8, 2010
1,318
124
106
This is a common misperception really.

It's not that the H67 can't overclock the CPU, it's that it can't overclock the memory.

It basically breaks down like this:

H67:
Integrated graphics
1x16 PCI-e
Max 1333MHz memory

P67:
No integrated graphics
1x16 or 2x8 PCI-e
Max 2133MHz memory

So if you want fast memory or SLI/Xfire, you need to get the P67. If you want integrated graphics and Quicksync, you need to get the H67.

They can both overclock the CPU.
 

Red Storm

Lifer
Oct 2, 2005
14,233
234
106
It would certainly be nice if you could OC with H67, but I don't think that manual is referring to multiplier OCing. I think Avalon is right in that it probably refers to the very limited BCLK overclocking that AT demonstrated in their review.
 

Hogan773

Senior member
Nov 2, 2010
599
0
0
Hmmm, Khon and Redstorm are saying 2 different things completely.

According to the quote from the Intel link, it says H67 supports the overclocking features of unlocked CPUs

Is it possible that the inability to OC the chip is just misinformation? Maybe the old-style BCLK overclocking is completely locked down on H67 but not the multiplier? Man, I'm confused.
 
Last edited:

PreferLinux

Senior member
Dec 29, 2010
420
0
0
IDK, maybe they are referring to BCLK overclocking, even though it is extremely limited.

It would certainly be nice if you could OC with H67, but I don't think that manual is referring to multiplier OCing. I think Avalon is right in that it probably refers to the very limited BCLK overclocking that AT demonstrated in their review.
The manuals are definitely referring to multiplier overclocking. Both have screenshots of in the BIOS setup showing the setting for the multiplier. And the Intel page is referring specifically to unlocked processors. So, I think that is incorrect.

Hmmm, Khon and Redstorm are saying 2 different things completely.

According to the quote from the Intel link, it says H67 supports the overclocking features of unlocked CPUs

Is it possible that the inability to OC the chip is just misinformation? Maybe the old-style BCLK overclocking is completely locked down on H67 but not the multiplier? Man, I'm confused.
I think the reviews must be incorrect. I think that one of Intel's slides seems to show that H67 does not overclock, so they say it does not, and leave it at that. I doubt Intel would have incorrect info on that PDF.
 

Red Storm

Lifer
Oct 2, 2005
14,233
234
106
Well I certainly do hope I'm wrong. But if H67 does allow multiplier overclocking then there's no reason at all why I would consider a P67 board.
 

PreferLinux

Senior member
Dec 29, 2010
420
0
0
IF H67 supports multiplier overclocking, which I think it must, the only reason to go for P67 would be for Crossfire/SLI, and even then, some manufacture could add a NF200 splitter to enable/improve that.
 

Minjin

Platinum Member
Jan 18, 2003
2,208
1
81
H67 definitely seems like the way to go to me. Even if I decide to go with some crazy expensive video card, I will never buy two of them. With P67, you are shutting down half of your $200 CPU and simply not using it. With H67, at least we have a chance to get benefits from a discrete and integrated at the same time. There seems to be lots of speculation on this. I guess we'll have to wait till the 9th to find out.
 

scrubman

Senior member
Jul 6, 2000
696
1
81
I think that it does not support multiplier overclocking but I feel like that may change. Either with a hack or maybe the Z68.?!?.
 

hendermd

Member
Aug 11, 2007
69
2
71
IF H67 supports multiplier overclocking, which I think it must, the only reason to go for P67 would be for Crossfire/SLI, and even then, some manufacture could add a NF200 splitter to enable/improve that.

The thing is that this quote from the review seems so definite.

"While H67 allows for memory and graphics overclocking, it doesn’t support any amount of processor overclocking. If you want to overclock your Sandy Bridge, you need a P67 motherboard."

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/4
 

PreferLinux

Senior member
Dec 29, 2010
420
0
0
Yes, but Intel's PDF says that it does (unless I'm interpereting it wrong, but I don't think so), and seems pretty definite as well. I wonder if the reviewers have tired overclocking on a H67 board, and found they couldn't? I have seen other places saying H67 does not support memory overclocking too.
 

scrubman

Senior member
Jul 6, 2000
696
1
81
I'm not sure but I think maybe the Intel PDF is just referring to the "k" editions of the SB and their ability to overclock the embedded GPU.
 

scrubman

Senior member
Jul 6, 2000
696
1
81
ok then I dont really know how to interpret that PDF where it says "Intel H67 Epress Chipset also enables overclocking features of unlocked 2nd generation Intel Core processors." :(
 

hendermd

Member
Aug 11, 2007
69
2
71
I found a review that should settle this.

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.p...k=view&id=632&Itemid=69&limit=1&limitstart=15

"Overclocking the DH67BL

With the release of the Sandy Bridge platform, Intel has severely limited, even crippled, the ability for most entry- or mid-level users to overclock. In their press documents, Intel announced that "performance tuning" would be limited to only the P67 and Z68 chipsets. The Z68 chipset isn't set to release until the 2nd quarter of 2011, so for now, users are stuck with getting the enthusiast level P67 motherboard if they want to try their hand at overclocking.

The funny part about all this is that the Intel DH67BL motherboard that I received for testing came with the Core i5-2500K processor. The K series of processors come with an unlocked multiplier specifically for overclocking. The i5-2500 is the same processor with a "limited" unlocked multiplier. Even so, only the P67 motherboards can be used to overclock either of these CPUs, so getting a K series processor with an H67 motherboard is a waste of time."
 

PreferLinux

Senior member
Dec 29, 2010
420
0
0
Unless it was copied from the P67 version of that page, and changed to H67 rather than removed.

But then you get this: http://www.liquidnitrogenoverclocking.com/news_09.shtml. The end of the page. It is using a H67 supposedly. If it's true (no idea, no offense meant if it is true). That has been around for a while.

That link is interesting. At least it was actually tested. So it seems Intel has simply messed up with their PDFs.
 
Last edited:

hendermd

Member
Aug 11, 2007
69
2
71
Unless it was copied from the P67 version of that page, and changed to H67 rather than removed.

But then you get this: http://www.liquidnitrogenoverclocking.com/news_09.shtml. The end of the page. It is using a H67 supposedly. If it's true (no idea, no offense meant if it is true). That has been around for a while.

I wonder if the difference is onboard video being turned off.

[GIGABYTE Super Overclock Series GV-N460SO-1GI GeForce GTX460 video card]
 

Hogan773

Senior member
Nov 2, 2010
599
0
0
Hey guys - read further into the Benchmark article. This all sounds incorrect....we know that you CAN OC on P67 beyond just turbo. And it looks like he was able to change the multiplier on the H67, but he said it "didn't do anything"

Read these paragraphs and I question the overall conclusions that this author would make....


+++++++++++++++
Now, the term unlocked multiplier may sound like it means you can tune to the multiplier up as high as you want (I think the K series CPUs go up to x54). Well, that's not exactly true either. The Intel Core i5-2500K starts with a multiplier of 33 and Turbo Boost 2.0 allows for one core at a time to be overclocked automatically to a multiplier of 37. In the DH67BL BIOS I can set the base multiplier of the i5-2500K to whatever I want, but it doesn't do anything at all. I can also change the Turbo Boost multiplier, but as soon as I do, the system becomes unresponsive. In the P67 motherboards, apparently only modifying the Turbo Boost multiplier has any effect on overclocking, and that's still regulated by Intel Turbo Boost 2.0, meaning you'll only see gains if and when Turbo Boost decides to allow it.
So after trying to overclock the DH67BL, I found that if I changed any RAM or CPU settings that would actually cause a change in the system (since modifying the base multiplier of my K series CPU did nothing), the entire system would become unresponsive. I could change GPU settings, and I'll take about that in a second.
When I say the system became unresponsive, I mean it just wouldn't work. The system fans would start up, run for about a second, then quit, then try again three or four times before the system shut off and I had to remove power from it to start it up again. The only way to recover from this is to reset the CMOS. Before you try that, however, beware that Intel has changed the age-old method of resetting the CMOS. Rather than moving the CMOS jumper from the 1,2 pins to the 2,3 pins the putting it back to reset the CMOS, you have to move the jumper to the 2,3 pins and leave it there while you boot the system. This will allow you to reset the BIOS to default settings and start the computer again.
Intel_DH67BL_GPUZ.png
As far as the GPU is concerned, H67 chipset users are allowed to play with the GPU core multiplier. On the Core i5-2500K, the GPU core is the 3000 version, giving us an 850MHz base clock with a Turbo Boost up to 1100MHz. Just like the CPUs on the P67 chipset, though, you can't mess with the base clock for the GPU. You can only adjust the maximum Turbo Boost multiplier. The GPU Turbo Boost multiplier starts at 22 and the formula is multiplier X 0.5 X bus speed, for a total of 1100MHz. I was able to increase this multiplier up to 30 before the system became unstable. This would give me a supposed Turbo Boost max clock speed of 1500MHz for the GPU. That would be quite impressive, but it's still controlled by the Turbo Boost function. None of my aftermarket programs were able to measure the clock speed (even idle) of the Intel HD Graphics, so I couldn't tell if they ever hit that 1500MHz mark. It's pretty unlikely, however, since I never got more than a 1% increase in performance out of my overclocking endeavors.
The end result of all this frustration is that I am severely disappointed with the lack of tinkering Intel is allowing the end-user with the Sandy Bridge platform. Only enthusiasts purchasing the P67 or Z68 chipsets will be able to overclock the CPU at all, and even then it will be regulated by Turbo Boost. The same is true with the ability to overclock the GPU with the H67 platform. I feel like we have gone back in time.
 

PreferLinux

Senior member
Dec 29, 2010
420
0
0
I noticed that too. And that behaviour when adjusting the multiplier sounds just like my locked P4. I almost wonder if it was not a K CPU!
 

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
8,686
3,787
136
Officially - You can't, though H67 offers unlocked graphics multipliers. You need the P67 chipset for memory and processor multiplier change, regardless of the CPU. Oh, and "K" means unlocked processor multiplier. Even non-K CPUs have fully unlocked memory multiplier, and power limits.

Unofficially - Maybe. There has been cases where Intel has set a chipset limit but 3rd party manufacturers getting it working with chipsets that's not supposed to work(and I'm not talking about the heroic attempt ones, I mean everyone except Intel). Perhaps that's how Gigabyte's board supports overclocking with the H67 chipset. Unless that's a typo. Then you are screwed if you want overclocking and the graphics. Or wait for the Z68.
 

PreferLinux

Senior member
Dec 29, 2010
420
0
0
Well, I have emailed Asus asking about this, and will email Gigabyte; and will post what they say.