[SOLVED] P8Z68-V PRO + 3570K - no over-clocking!

John Dime

Member
May 6, 2013
71
0
0
Howdy, folks.

I've been stalling my adhesion to the forums, often visiting in the meantime to read on several topics of my interest, often being pleased with the quality of many elaborations. Now, formalities aside, straight to what got me to actually register:

I recently acquired a P8Z68-V PRO ASUS motherboard and a i5-3570K CPU. Previously, I had a 775 socket-based system, which means this current method of over-clocking CPU's is new to me, in practice. I've however been reading on the topic for quite a while, out of curiosity and to ready myself for an eventual acquisition. As many of you can attest, there's not much to the task and after having installed the adequate drivers and deciding that my system was stable, I set out to give the old [new] over-clocking a go.

Of course, with this Turbo technology, there's a slight boost to the CPU clock, which in effect is an over-clock itself. The problem is, Turbo Boost or user defined clocks, have no effect on the actual clock. According to Core Temp, CPU-Z, Real Temp and Aida64, the higher clock the CPU reaches is ~3400 MHz.

As displayed here: http://www.freeimagehosting.net/iqa7r, CPU-Z reports a multiplier range of x16-x38, but the highest multiplier achieved (on any core, as I'm aware of how Turbo Boost functions) is 34. On the other hand, the clock is sensitive to BCLK changes: at ~103 MHz, it does give me ~3502 MHz, with the 34 multiplier.

What I've done:
- Flashed to previous BIOS (from 3203 on, as below 3570K isn't supported [currently on 3603]);
- Updated the ME firmware, as suggested per a couple of topics I've read over the days;
- Checked the chipset drivers one by one and to the best of my knowledge, updated them with the most recent versions;
- Flashed the latest and current BIOS with a modified one, despite the alterations having no association with the CPU, as far as I could tell;
- Cleared the CMOS;
- Checked the clocks on another installation of Windows 7 (same HDD, different partition);
- Attempted different RAM configurations;
- Changed the CPU Ratio on all 3 available areas to do so, for the sake of it (AI Tweaker, CPU Power Management and CPU Configuration), after resorting to guides produced no desirable effect;
- Attempted to over-clock the CPU without the discrete GPU installed;
- Enabled and disabled the Turbo technology, along with the C-states and EIST, in various configurations overall;
- Checked the clocks in safe-mode;
- Resat the CPU and heatsink;
- Used fixed and offset CPU voltages;
- Turned the TPU and EPU switches on and off (all four configurations attempted) and quite possibly, covered other options that may now escape me.

I'll make a note on the following: with versions previous to BIOS 3603, I have to resort to the iGPU, as the motherboard doesn't POST with the GPU installed and the BIOS set to recognize automatically a video source (PCIE selected doesn't work either; I have to select iGPU, on the respective BIOS panel). Consequently, the attempts at over-clocking with previous BIOS versions were made with the iGPU serving as the video source. Otherwise, on 3603 version, the GPU is utilized and both it and the motherboard work normally.

Over-clocking and older BIOS versions not allowing the GPU to be used aside, everything else appears to be working quite fine. Given that it's a z68 motherboard, I can justify the GPU incompatibility to an extent (I'm ignorant as to whether there could be any issue given that reason, but wouldn't be surprised if so) and frankly, it's not crucial if the over-clocking issue gets solved under 3603. Device Manager doesn't accuse anything and where heat is concerned (as to dismiss throttling behavior), I'm using a Swiftech H220 to cool the CPU, which does a proper job.

Regarding the other components and let me mention the motherboard was a second-hand purchase, whilst the CPU is a brand new piece, I have three DDR3 1333 MHz DIMMS, which I was using on my previous motherboard (they're a pair of Kingston units and a Corsair loner, working fine and tested on different configurations, as mentioned), a HD 5850 and since I'm on it, a SATA2 500 GB HDD.

I've been searching and inspecting several threads over the Internet (often bumping into the same ones at this point) and although I haven't yet found any with precisely the same characteristics as in my situation, the solutions normally appear to be BIOS updates/rollbacks or a return of the motherboard, myself having excluded the latter. Speaking of which, if this is deemed Motherboards sub-forum material, please relocate it.

Feel free to evaluate the case and make a suggestion - it'll be appreciated. Thanks for your time!

JD
 
Last edited:

John Dime

Member
May 6, 2013
71
0
0
For further clarification, here's an image of the aforementioned monitoring programs displayed, while running Prime95 v27.7: http://www.freeimagehosting.net/q3tgk. As you can see, this time the ratio is at x40, set by me on the AI Tweaker tab of the BIOS. Again, to no avail as any of the four programs display a top speed of ~3400 MHz.

In the meantime, I noticed I didn't have the latest firmware and driver version for the Intel Management Engine, which I proceeded to update. Now using versions 8.1.30.1350 and 9.0.2.1345 respectively. I have no accurate account that this does indeed affect over-clocking, but I've seen it being implied - or at least, it seems to have an implication, stability and/or performance wise. So far, it hasn't hurt either.

I reiterate that everything runs perfectly fine otherwise, under the latest 3603 BIOS; I haven't experienced any BSOD thus far. I'd rather encounter a solution for this problem than to return the motherboard, for the sake of future reference, in case someone happens to stumble upon a similar endeavor and for the sake of time, as ordering another motherboard would take its time. Furthermore, I have no need to over-clock the CPU, but given that I intend to keep this system for a long while, it may eventually be valuable to possess said feature, without flaws.

I'll keep on investigating and will report back if I find any solution.

Update: I've associated the no-POST issue with the fact that my HD 5850 (voltage locked) had been flashed with the BIOS from a HD 5870. The GPU was supposed to run stable at 850/1200 and 1.125V (default clocks and highest state voltage for the 5870 BIOS), but instead needed to be set back to 800/1200 MHz not to exhibit artifacts on Crysis 3 (quite the GPU stability tester). Incidentally, I decided to flash the BIOS back to the previous one the card was sporting and not only did I manage to set the clocks at the same values, but it's now consuming slightly less energy and producing slightly less heat as well - 1.125V -> 1.088V. Me writing you this however, is intended to demonstrate that all 3 BIOS previous to 3603 (all other 3 that support the 3570K), won't allow the motherboard to POST with a flashed GPU.

I've also considered the possibility of the OS not recognizing certain BIOS parameters, thus preventing applications from accurately illustrating the real CPU clock (even though CPU-Z does show the correct manually set and/or default multiplier). With that in mind, I ran IBT and while I don't consider it the most exact meter where CPU speed is concerned, a multiplier of 35 achieved a higher score of GFlops than a multiplier of 43, thus disproving my theory, when it should have been the other way around by a margin of circa 20%.

That wrote, I'm still looking for an input capable of shedding clarity on the matter. Let me know if you come up with any idea before I definitively deem this motherboard defective.

P.S.: I didn't mention it earlier; my PSU is a Antec 620W High Current Gamer and was previously handling a far less energy-efficient system, without having ever complained. No pickle there.

JD
 
Last edited:

John Dime

Member
May 6, 2013
71
0
0
My, oh my!

After reading 128 pages on another forum, without any seeming glimpse of a solution, I go back to Google searching and I encounter this: http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.php?showtopic=194535.

RealTemp, the culprit! It wouldn't cross my mind that RealTemp could limit the over-clocking ability of a CPU, but I have checked and not only every monitoring software is now displaying the correct clock speed, there is also a difference performance-wise in IBT. I'm sure many would have been aware of this detail, but it was the first time I came across this wee pebble in the shoe, which ended up being the culprit.

There you have it, days of investigation and the nth Google search with the right wording eventually turned out the enlightening result!

Hopefully, this thread can now be of service to someone else experiencing a similar ordeal. Thanks for reading!

JD