Hello, I'm looking to build an i5-2500K config, with just some casual overclocking to the CPU just for the sake of trying it out since I'm quite new to the overclocking scene. My question is, without buying a separate HSF and using the stock one, how much overclocking can I expect, without risking overheat and damage to the CPU?
Overclocking i5-2500K with Stock HSF
- Thread starter timoseewho
- Start date
LOL_Wut_Axel
Diamond Member
- Mar 26, 2011
- 4,310
- 8
- 81
You should be able to get it to 3.8GHz on stock voltage with only a 1-2C increase in load temps, which is safe. If you're thinking of over-volting, though, I recommend you get a cheap air cooler like a Corsair A50 or a Cooler Master Hyper 212+. At the same time, if you're not, you could've gone with the i5 2400 instead and saved some money. It can OC to around 3.8GHz, too.
LOL_Wut_Axel
Diamond Member
- Mar 26, 2011
- 4,310
- 8
- 81
It can be over-clocked using the Turbo Boost multiplier. It's limited to 3.8GHz on four cores and 4.1GHz on one core, but it can be done. If you're not doing 4GHz+ OCing there's really little point in getting the unlocked (K) CPUs.
what about setting the turbo to 4.0ghz is this possible with the 2500k and stock fan? I have heard most of these chips will do 4.2ghz on stock volts?
LOL_Wut_Axel
Diamond Member
- Mar 26, 2011
- 4,310
- 8
- 81
The max you set Turbo to is gonna be for when only one core is in use. Each core you add into the equation, it's one bin lower in clock speed. For example, if you choose 4GHz, it's gonna be 4GHz for one thread, 3.9GHz for two, 3.8GHz for three, and 3.7GHz for four. This is all for the locked CPUs that have Turbo Boost, though. If it's unlocked you just set whatever multiplier you want.
4.2GHz on stock volts is not guaranteed, and could definitely cause instability. Also, 4.2GHz will result in another ~2C increase in temps over 3.8GHz. The most I recommend going on these with stock voltage is 4GHz. Since the stock cooler is pretty crappy, if you want to go over 3.8GHz I recommend a custom heat sink. Heat is one of the worst enemies of CPUs.
toyota
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2001
- 12,957
- 1
- 0
if you guys want to oc your cpu then spend 20-30 bucks and do it safely. the stock heatsink is not really set up for overclocking and doing so will just cause you to have temps 15-20 higher than with any decent aftermarket cooler. and really why would you buy a 2500k and saddle it with the stock cooler if you were planning on ocing in the first place??
LOL_Wut_Axel
Diamond Member
- Mar 26, 2011
- 4,310
- 8
- 81
Pretty much. If you just want a basic OC then a normal Core i5 with stock heat sink will do. If you're gonna get an unlocked Core i5 then you pretty much owe it to yourself to get a custom heat sink and OC to 4GHz or higher. Otherwise, what's the point? The Core i5 2400 can reach 3.5-3.8GHz, too.
toyota
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2001
- 12,957
- 1
- 0
i would not even do a basic oc on the stock cooler. even at stock speeds I hit 72C pretty quick in Intel burn test even on standard settings. with most games of course it should be fine but at 3.8 or 4.0 you will hit pretty close to 80C during testing especially if you leave voltage on auto which seems to go a bit too high.
Last edited:
LOL_Wut_Axel
Diamond Member
- Mar 26, 2011
- 4,310
- 8
- 81
Up to 80C seems to be the most you want to put on Sandy Bridge safely. If you're worried about long-term effects (in 5+ years), then you should definitely get a custom heat sink. But moderate OCing on the stock cooler and voltage for a temporary period until you get a custom one it's fine.
Oh my word, more temperature paranoia. This is really really starting to bug me. Any temperature is reasonably safe on stock volts.
Hell, my furnace of a 920 got to sweat it out with the stock cooler for nearly a year and a half at 4.0Ghz with a slight overvolt of 1.3V. It would deviate between around 2 and 10 degrees from TJMax during this time. Linpack would throttle it almost instantly, but I kept it at 4Ghz because it was the only program that would.
I'm not saying that my case is guaranteed representative of every 920 in existence and that overvolting on the stock cooler is fine, I just have a problem with people making random thresholds of temperature that should never be crossed: 80*C in this thread. Let me ask you where you guys got that number from? Do you work at Intel in the "no one listens to me and I think TJMax should be 80*C" department?
The limit for overclocking on stock voltage has and probably always will be the thermal throttling limit. I'll even extend that to only the programs you use. If Linpack throttles your stock voltage overclock, but isn't a program you would otherwise use, it doesn't matter as long as the programs you need the overclock for don't throttle.
I will say that temperature ends up becoming very important once you start upping the voltage however.
Hell, my furnace of a 920 got to sweat it out with the stock cooler for nearly a year and a half at 4.0Ghz with a slight overvolt of 1.3V. It would deviate between around 2 and 10 degrees from TJMax during this time. Linpack would throttle it almost instantly, but I kept it at 4Ghz because it was the only program that would.
I'm not saying that my case is guaranteed representative of every 920 in existence and that overvolting on the stock cooler is fine, I just have a problem with people making random thresholds of temperature that should never be crossed: 80*C in this thread. Let me ask you where you guys got that number from? Do you work at Intel in the "no one listens to me and I think TJMax should be 80*C" department?
The limit for overclocking on stock voltage has and probably always will be the thermal throttling limit. I'll even extend that to only the programs you use. If Linpack throttles your stock voltage overclock, but isn't a program you would otherwise use, it doesn't matter as long as the programs you need the overclock for don't throttle.
I will say that temperature ends up becoming very important once you start upping the voltage however.
toyota
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2001
- 12,957
- 1
- 0
hell you can run it at whatever temp you want to and that's fine by me. I am pretty sure MOST people would consider 80C to be pretty damn hot for a cpu though. and me being one of those many people have no intentions of running it that high. if you have a problem accepting that then I do not care one bit.
LOL_Wut_Axel
Diamond Member
- Mar 26, 2011
- 4,310
- 8
- 81
Different CPUs are designed to take different temperatures. Looking at it objectively, the most you want to heat up something like a Phenom II X6 is 60C, the most you want to heat up a Core i5 or Core i7 is 80C, and then the ballpark changes completely for mobile CPUs. A 2630QM, for example, will have no problems running at 90C at full load.
Most of the temperature paranoia comes from the argument from degradation, but the fact is that over-volting has a MUCH, MUCH higher roll in degrading a CPU than over-clocking alone. A CPU running at higher temps will degrade a bit sooner, but there's nothing wrong with using the stock cooler temporarily as long as you replace it with a decent heat sink later on.
But why would one like to have the chip throttle when you can put a cheap aftermarket cooler on it and be done? I use a Cooler Master Hyper TX3, push-pin mount like the stock Intel, it's 20$ and gets the job done exceptionally well for reasonable OC.
toyota
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2001
- 12,957
- 1
- 0
what cpu are you using that on and have you tested to see what temps you get? I think that is what I am going to get for my 2500k. its cheap, easy to install and looks like it will actually not hit my memory. I still cannot figure out why these P67 boards have memory so close to the cpu.
I have the 2500K. Use it at 4.2 GHz turbo, just upping the multiplier, everything else default. 28-30C idle, handbrake full load on all cores 52-54C, fan set at around 60% programmed to raise speed after 60C on CPU. This never happenes. CM 690 II Advanced case with stock three fans, one intake front, two exhaust back and up.
one core turboed to 4ghz is fine with me, but I agree that 80c is the top temps you want to see. My old system was a phenom II so I am used to keeping it around 60c or lower anyway. I will for sure buy a better heatsink and fan down the road, but I didn't want to spend the extra money on it right now, and I used a hyper 212 on my last build and wasn't that impressed with it to be honest. I didn't like how the bottom of it wasn't really flush, and I want something that is ALOT quieter, but still outperforms the oem unit, so I need to research what i want to buy, so for a month or two I will run the stocker. I definately do NOT want something with push pins, that much I do know.
What is your source for these numbers? If the 2600K processors follow the same trend as EVERY other processor on Ark.Intel, its Tjunction is roughly 100*C. Either chip will have no problem running 1 unit away from Tjunction for AT LEAST three years strait. 99 degrees in this case. I have never ever seen an 80*C number mentioned by Intel in regards to an i7 processor.
The 2600k has a Tcase of 72.6*C. Every other processor sharing a Tcase of 72 has eventually ended up having a TJunction of 100 when all the numbers have been published.
Its impressive how ignorant people are with processor temperatures. Its not entirely the end users fault however. I downloaded the four main temperature monitoring programs I can think of: RealTemp, CoreTemp, HWMonitor, and Speedfan. Every single one of them was wrong on a two year old, well published processor.
The TJunction of a i7 920 is only 95 as has been published directly by Intel.
In retrospect I can see how you could have seen my statement directed at you. It wasn't and I have no problem with how you stated your 80*C number. It was how Axel said 80*C is the max SB can safely run, which is absolutely untrue. Hopefully we can drop hostilitiestoyota said:
Keeping in mind that the Tcase of SB is 72.6*C:
Basically what this means is Intel WANTS to keep SB at a Tcase of 72.6 at all times. Unfortunately they can't implement this because there is no way currently to measure Tcase and keep the cooling solution running at 100% efficiency. The DTS cannot be used to predict Tcase because it is too inaccurate for units much above 0. *Cough Cough*
LOL_Wut_Axel
Diamond Member
- Mar 26, 2011
- 4,310
- 8
- 81
Yeah, perhaps you forgot about the fact I was talking about long-term use. If you don't want the chip to degrade in 5+ years, it's better to keep it at lower temps.
Iv ran both my 2500k and 2600k on stock cooling with closed case and they hit 83-85c linx and ibt.
Temps dont degrade the chip,voltage does.I used to keep upping the voltage to get more and more out of them and now they need more and more voltage to get the same clocks.
stay under 1.425 fully loaded if you want your chip to last a long time,mine have seen way over 1.55 and hit 5400mhz doing bench runs and work just fine at 4.7ghz now.They need like 1.6 volts now to hit those same high clocks as before tho.
Temps dont degrade the chip,voltage does.I used to keep upping the voltage to get more and more out of them and now they need more and more voltage to get the same clocks.
stay under 1.425 fully loaded if you want your chip to last a long time,mine have seen way over 1.55 and hit 5400mhz doing bench runs and work just fine at 4.7ghz now.They need like 1.6 volts now to hit those same high clocks as before tho.
AdamK47
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 15,678
- 3,531
- 136
I've seen many i7 9xx 45nm CPUs running in the mid 80C with stock cooling and stock speeds. It's still within Intels thermal specifications. The chips still run fine today with zero stability issues. The posting trend I see with LOL_Wut_Axel is that if it's not his way then it's the wrong way.
exactly.if the chip dosnt shut it self down its within its safe range.
I just did 3 passes of intel burn test and hit 86c and Im at only 1.375 volts!
I can easily run this chip at 1.44-1.46 and get another 200 mhz out of it(im at 4.7ghz 24/7 now)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/3
According to AnandTech (and Anand himself did the review), they got 4.4GHz with just the stock low-profile cooler. Anand further goes on to say that with better coolers, you may get 4.5-5GHz.
Take that for what it's worth.
I opened a 2500k box to see the smallest hsf ever made.
I threw the 2500k in the garbage and used the largest hsf from a 65nm c2d which is twice as tall with a copper base just to run off this 2500k before putting it in a case.
Now about this Tcase and SB 72.6*C: thing when your cores reach higher temps of 73c you will start to get errors sooner or later which in turn limit your oc.
Now the the people here with the highest oc have there temps below 74c for 24-7 use.
I threw the 2500k in the garbage and used the largest hsf from a 65nm c2d which is twice as tall with a copper base just to run off this 2500k before putting it in a case.
Now about this Tcase and SB 72.6*C: thing when your cores reach higher temps of 73c you will start to get errors sooner or later which in turn limit your oc.
Now the the people here with the highest oc have there temps below 74c for 24-7 use.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter