# Overclocking 3770K at stock voltage



## Octopuss (Jul 30, 2012)

*Lamer's 3770K overclocking jorney*

Anyone tried to play this way yet? I am somewhat puzzled about my results so far.
My 3770K seems to have 1.025V default vcore, and while it boots into Windows with as high as x42 at that vcore, Prime95 crashes almost immediately or rather soon (x41). x40 is better, but still doesn't hold longer than one or two hours, plus I'd get occasional random BSOD too.

I read about people who managed to do something like x42 at stock, or even x40 while majorly undervolted (like 0.9, wtf). I guess I might have been unlucky with slightly shitty piece, but am still only in the beginning of my tests.

If there are people here who tried the same, I could use a few tips how to improve stability when going this way. In a guide I read there's pretty much no need to change any other voltage but vcore. My board is GA-Z77X-UD3H.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Jul 30, 2012)

There should be no fixed vcore as in default but rather auto setting in which you vcore will fluctuate when your CPU is in different situations, idle, load or turbo. Under these circumstances the mobo should provide enough to allow you to increase the turbo ratio up to a certain point which should be above that measly x40 since by default your CPU will go as high as x39 in turbo.
So I would suggest to leave everything on auto and default and change only the ratio to x42 turbo. Also would be good to fill in your system specs.


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 30, 2012)

Ah I forgot to mention I never use Turbo, I disabled it right away.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 30, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> Ah I forgot to mention I never use Turbo, I disabled it right away.



SB and IVB clock best using Turbo, unfortunately, they are not like other Intel chips.

I got 4.45 GHz on stock volts.

"stock" is 4-thread load under Turbo, default multis.

Some boards automatically increase voltage when multi changes, F.Y.I.

Turn Turbo on, use it to OC.


----------



## Evolved (Jul 30, 2012)

So would 'Default' Vcore be better than manually set?

I am at 4.5Ghz @ 1.35v.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 30, 2012)

Evolved said:


> So would 'Default' Vcore be better than manually set?
> 
> I am at 4.5Ghz @ 1.35v.



woah, 1.35 V!!! too high, IMHO!

And yeah, you should be finding out default, then clocking at that voltage, manually set. Then increase as needed.

@ 1.35 V, heat might be affecting stability, causing you to use more voltage than is needed.

I hit 4.6 GHz @ 1.184 V!!! Second got 4.5 GHz @ 1.225 V. Either I picked an awesome first chip and got lucky, or the quality of these 3770K's are quite varied.

With two chips and 9 boards, I think I got 'em Figured out. IVB is quite a bit different from SB!


----------



## Evolved (Jul 30, 2012)

I am currently on Sandy Bridge; i7 2600K


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 30, 2012)

Evolved said:


> I am currently on Sandy Bridge; i7 2600K



Different story then, 1.35 V is fine. I am quite amaxed how different, yet similar, SB and IVB are. Unfortunately, OC rules for SB don't apply to IVB.


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 30, 2012)

Well, I just don't want anything to be set automatically. I want full control over the damn thing.
Turbo is out of question, because for that I would have to let the PC raise vcore to whatever it thinks is good. No way. I don't want any extra heat.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 30, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> No way. I don't want any extra heat.



It doesn't quite work that way, but enjoy what ya got anyway. Your method without lowering clocks on idle,makes for more heat than using Turbo would. You merely need to find out stock voltage, and then use OFFSET voltage to get the best of both worlds..low heat, plus high OC.

Let me put it to you thid way...the 3960X, Intel's flagship, CANNOT OC without Turbo. You either use Turbo, or you cannot OC with that chip.

Anyway, spend $25, insure the chip from OC damage, and quit worrying about it:



			
				Intel said:
			
		

> So what we are saying is this: Go ahead and push it, we've got your back.



http://click.intel.com/tuningplan/default.aspx

ASUS says this:



> CPU Voltage: There are two ways to control CPU core voltage; Offset Mode and Manual Mode.
> Manual mode assigns a static level of voltage for the processor.* Offset Mode allows the processor to
> request voltage according to loading conditions and operating frequency. Offset mode is preferred
> for 24/7 systems as it allows the processor to lower its voltage during idle conditions, thus saving a
> ...



Just keep in mind I get info direct from the OEMs, I take all info from all sources, and then compile a set of "rules" based on that info.

And based on that info, you are doing it wrong. No offense intended, as that's how everything pre-SB needed to be OC'ed, the way you are doing it, but SB, SB-E, and IVB are different beasts, and are best OC'ed using Turbo.

F.Y.I. Giga boards don't show CPU voltage in CPU-Z, so you'll need to use EasyTune, or an app like AIDA64, to get proper readings.


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 30, 2012)

I understand what are you saying, but if I do it the "proper" way, I'd get the CPU up to maybe 90°C under load (load being Prime95) because of the bloody auto settings, which is unacceptable. Doing it the way I am at the moment, temperatures on the cores are around 75-80°C, simply because vcore is low.

Btw AIDA is wrong as well, my current vcore is 1.030V and it reports 1.044V. CPU-Z reports the same though.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 30, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> I understand what are you saying, but if I do it the "proper" way, I'd get the CPU up to maybe 90°C under load (load being Prime95) because of the bloody auto settings, which is unacceptable. Doing it the way I am at the moment, temperatures on the cores are around 75-80°C, simply because vcore is low.
> 
> Btw AIDA is wrong as well, my current vcore is 1.030V and it reports 1.044V. CPU-Z reports the same though.



I hear ya. I think perhaps a setting or two was missed, perhaps. I've treid all OC methods with Z77, on 9 boards now, soon to be 10, and all behaved similarily. All OEMs relate similar info, as well.

Yes, some boards give more voltage than is needed(especially with my own chips), and that's why there is the option to apply a NEGATIVE offset if voltage is too high. For reviews posted now, I just manually set CPU voltage, VCCIO, and vDIMM, and that's it, but I have been doing som pretty extensive testing with other methods for upcoming review updates and guides. I just got an HD 7950 3 GB card to use for reviews this past Friday, so I'll be re-testing every board, Z77, X79, and some others, in the coming weeks. Out of that I'll be pulling info for OC guides and what not as well.

I even monitor power consumption and the like, I measure voltages using a Digital Multi-meter, etc, so I should have lots of info. I will be showing the method you are using as well, and the differences between each way of OC, too. If things change in regards to OC methods, which I do not expect, I'll let you know.


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 30, 2012)

The offset is interesting, but then again - it might not be stable under load when Turbo kicks in.
When I first ran some tests with just optimized defaults, I was getting slightly over 90°C, which is fairly horrible. Say I decide it's too hot that way, and apply some negative offset - the resulting vcore might suddenly not be enough for the cpu to run at those speeds.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 30, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> The offset is interesting, but then again - it might not be stable under load when Turbo kicks in.
> When I first ran some tests with just optimized defaults, I was getting slightly over 90°C, which is fairly horrible. Say I decide it's too hot that way, and apply some negative offset - the resulting vcore might suddenly not be enough for the cpu to run at those speeds.



That's why you need to start with a low multi, and then check the voltage given for each multi.

There's no magic here..any given voltage should lead to the same temps. You cannot change the current supplied to the CPU, only current limits, so nothing can account for the extra heat you are seeing, other than some other voltage also running higher.

Running a specific speed requires the same power, no matter what. I have tested boards that require more voltage, but that requirement of higher voltages was from board to board, not method to method. When clocking outside of reviews, I leave NOTHING on "AUTO", and set each setting manually. 

Personally, i think that possibly "PLL overvoltage" was leading to the higher temps when you were investigating.


Like, dont get me wrong, just trying to help ya get the best result possible.


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 31, 2012)

Ok I tried a couple times to understand how the hell does it work and still failed horribly.
I guess I will need some explanations for idiots.

1) I am not sure how does the offset(s) work. Are we talking about DVID here? Am I to understand the "proper" way is to set vcore to "normal" and then observe temperatures, and possibly apply negative DVID until it gets reasonable? And after that test stability in case I deducted too much?

2) How do I set Turbo? I never had this feature so I am a bit baffled here.
3) Shall I touch base multiplier at all?

I am quite lost in the order of steps when working on overclock on this platform. Feeling quite like an idiot :/


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 31, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> Ok I tried a couple times to understand how the hell does it work and still failed horribly.
> I guess I will need some explanations for idiots.
> 
> 1) I am not sure how does the offset(s) work. Are we talking about DVID here? Am I to understand the "proper" way is to set vcore to "normal" and then observe temperatures, and possibly apply negative DVID until it gets reasonable? And after that test stability in case I deducted too much?
> ...



Base multi...leave at default.

Turbo, enable, then set all 4 turbo ratios to what you want.

Ok, so what i do, is clear CMOS, every time i get a new board.

then, i install OS.

Then, i load up Prime95, and monitor voltage when prime is running.

that loaded voltage, with turbo enabled, is the starting point.

So, you can then use that, plus what you use already, to finds the offset you need.

For example, my CPU, ast stock, gets 1.175V, i set +025 V offset to get 1.2 V.

or i can set 1.2 V manually, but then voltage does not drop at idle. Either givces me the same result.

Listen, I just had surgery on my shoulder last monday, so I am kinda keeping it short as typing with one hand sucks. If you would like more info, I'm often in TS and can give more advice there easily.

In the future I should be posting some OC guides, because yes, this can be quite confusing. It is very different than in the past, but at least Intel is fully supporting OC now!

You can send me a pm at any time, and I'll hop in TS for a chat. Same goes for anyone on TPU.


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 31, 2012)

No problem with short answers. I try to keep questions short as well 
I feel for you - I had torn rotator cuff in my right shoulder and had surgery done 1.5 years ago. I think I didn't use PC few days at all. It hurt like fucker.

I wrote down a few numbers from within the bios:
Vcore with Turbo disabled=1.025V
Vcore with Turbo enabled=1.115V or 1.120V

I experimented a bit more and was almost ready to give up, because I set Turbo to x40 across the board, and under load I was getting 95° temperatures. Ouch.
I think I got confused by the fact there's no way to tell what the vcore will be when not set manually.
What I did was set vcore to normal, realizing I probably needed to set some negative offset, but I had no idea how it worked then. Apparently when Turbo kicks in, the voltage jumps up to horrible, unthought-of heights.
After a bit of thinking I changed the offset to -0.100V, which helped, temperatures are at 80-87°C right now with Prime95 running. It's still fairly shitty, maybe my piece is just bad luck - I mean I am still only at 4GHz. For now I am interested in finding the lowest stable offset.

Am I doing it right?

P.S. I hate the fact I can't get REAL numbers from any monitoring soft there is. I tried CPU-Z, AIDA64 (both produce same numbers btw), HWMonitor, HWInfo64, and something else I can't think off straight away.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 31, 2012)

yeah sounds like your doing it right.

try using EasyTune for monitoring..it's on the mobo disc or on Gigabyte's website.

And yeah, voltage being so high is normal for some chips, and hence the suggestion to just try at stock settings first, then work your way up.


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 31, 2012)

Well at first I thought I had good piece as others said theirs were like 1.140V or something by default (I assume that's with Turbo on)


Of course I might not have the ideal cooling, but almost everyone recommended the Hyper 212 +/EVO. The heatsink is not the biggest out there... Well, still the temperatures I am getting at x40 are something I saw mentioned in cases of x45+, heh. I will experiment further and see if I can bring it down a bit. CPU-Z reports vcore to be 1.092V right now. I will see if ET is any good for monitoring though.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 31, 2012)

ET is good, CPU-Z sometimes reports VCCSA or VCCIO on Gigabyte Z77 boards. If it is, that voltage is bit high as well, and is affecting your temps. if you are running less than 1866(or 1866) on memory, 0.950 V on VCCSA is fine, and VCCIO should be 1.05 V.


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 31, 2012)

I got everything but vcore on auto, and the others don't seem to change at all. They are on the default values I believe.
VCCSA=0.925V
VCCIO=1.05V
PLL=1.800V
Memory is exactly 1866.

Interestingly ET6 reports the same vcore as CPU-Z, 1.092V. I gotta try with fixed vcore and Turbo off, but I suspect it would be off anyway (1.025 is being reported as 1.044 IIRC).

edit: hold on, there are two different vcores reported by ET!
One in HW Monitor, that's 1.092.
Other under Tuner, Advanced, Voltage: that one says Power on 1.190, Target 37501.5V (lol)


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 31, 2012)

CPU-Z may be correct, for sure, but often it isn't. If ET says the samne, then it's good.

Make sure "PLL Overvoltage" is set to disabled, too. You only need that at 45 multi or higher(each chip is a bit different for that).

1.190 sounds better, given your temps and cooling. try a negative offset, see where the readings go. I've seen similar, and at that point, i usually pull out my multimeter


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 31, 2012)

The offset is already -0.110V  Hopefully there is still some room.

Where do I find PLL overvoltage? It might be called differently... Shall I look under 3D Power Control?


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 31, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> The offset is already -0.110V  Hopefully there is still some room.
> 
> Where do I find PLL overvoltage? It might be called differently... Shall I look under 3D Power Control?



should be pretty obvious. Some boards do not have this setting. It's supposed to be automatic with IVB, anyway, but some boards enable too early for some chips.

I can run 1.65V PLL voltage, for example, on UD5H, but not without PLL Overvolt enabled on Maximus V Gene.

sounds like your board was setting 1.3 V for vCPU...wow! No wonder it seemed hotter! 4 ghz, 1.1V, or just below, should be MORE than enough.


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 31, 2012)

You're probably right. I am not sure what to think of my original experiment though - I set vcore manually to 1.025V, disabled Turbo, and set multi to x40, and it friggin' wasn't stable. On top of that, the temperatures were very slightly above 80°. I call that pretty crappy result


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 31, 2012)

yeah, seems heat is real issue for your chip. 1.2 V @ 4.6 GHz under H100 gets me 70C loaded, so for sure these chips "run hot". Your cooler should be more than adequate, and 80c is nothing, really. 105C max for these chips.

you know, if your CPU throttles under stock cooler, and stock speeds, and it sounds like it might, you can RMA for that.


----------



## Octopuss (Jul 31, 2012)

H100 is a bit more powerful though, isn't it. I also don't go wild with the fan on the cooler either, about 1k rpm as I hate loud stuff coming from under the table.
I will know more when I find stable voltage though.
Until then thanks a LOT for all the input


----------



## Xzibit (Jul 31, 2012)

Since reading this thread I became curious...

So I OC my 3770K 
C-States = Disable
Turbo = Disable
HT = Enabled
*Everything else is on AUTO

x44 @ v1.2 running Prime95 temp tops off at 73c

x45 running Prime95 crashes but windows doesnt.  I'll have to do some more reading see if i have to swith to manual settings.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 31, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> H100 is a bit more powerful though, isn't it. I also don't go wild with the fan on the cooler either, about 1k rpm as I hate loud stuff coming from under the table.
> I will know more when I find stable voltage though.
> Until then thanks a LOT for all the input


No problem. I'm here to answer questions the best I can, and I'm learning here as well! All of our experiences = more usable info. 

Xzibit, re-enable C-STATES and Turbo, try following the steps here.


----------



## Xzibit (Jul 31, 2012)

Its a no go for Turbo On and AUTO/Default settings

It just ask for too much juice v1.448 and Temps go into +90c with (-) Offset.

My chip is good at v1.06 stock. havent tried the v0.9 undervolt tho

Pretty sure it wants more juice at x45 than the v1.2. maybe v1.25 unless i overlooked something in the UEFI


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 31, 2012)

Xzibit said:


> Its a no go for Turbo On and AUTO/Default settings
> 
> It just ask for too much juice v1.448 and Temps go into +90c with (-) Offset.
> 
> ...



That's why you need to start at stock, find stock voltage, and then adjust the offset. Then check next multi up, make sure it isn't asking for more, adjust, change multi, adjust...


----------



## Xzibit (Aug 1, 2012)

Okay,

Unless i'm overlooking something my UEFI doesnt allow me to set a base voltage and then the offset -/+.  The only way to get the offset is to set base voltage on AUTO.  Manual unlocks the Offset but no base voltage option.

I did do some more test and this is what I got so far.

I ran Prime95 for 30min to do a quick stability check

x35 @ v0.910 (53c max temp)
x40 @ v1.030 (60c max temp)
x45 @ v1.230 (79c max temp)
^This is with C-States and Turbo Disabled
*Since activating them the base voltage is v1.2xx and temps are much higher at 73c max

Out of curiosity I did check what the highest clock with the lowest voltage i can get.
x28 @ v0.800


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 1, 2012)

Xzibit said:


> my UEFI doesnt allow me to set a base voltage and then the offset -/ .



None do. This is individual to each CPU, and can be found by the steps I mentioned, enabling all default CPU features including C-States and Turbo, and loading the CPU on all cores with evrything set to "stock"(with P95, for example).

The voltage supplied to your CPU under those conditions is your "base" voltage. It only occurs when Turbo is enabled. It is set by Intel at the factory when they bin the CPU.

C-States will have the CPU drop to a lower voltage and frequency on idle, or low-load scenarios, and this is the major factor for power-saving, lower heat, and a longer-lasting lifespan for the CPU. Turbo enables almost instantly, so no performance is lost, either, and then you are not pushing as much current on idle to maintain the higher clock.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 1, 2012)

wow my cpu is shitty. Still x40 only, and had to go easier on the offset because Prime95 kept disappearing again (that's right, the window simply disappears instead of an error; I never experienced on my older system). So currently I am testing -0.140V. CPU-Z claims vcore to be 1.068V. I don't think I can hit any good speeds with reasonable volts with this :/


----------



## Crap Daddy (Aug 1, 2012)

Can you try leaving voltage on auto, turbo, C-states enabled and change only the turbo ratio on all cores to 40? This should automatically provide enough voltage for your CPU to sustain the aforementioned frequency when under load. Run prime and check voltage. Regardless of the fact that it will pump more voltage than needed the system has to be fully stable since what you're saying is that whatever you do you cannot run prime at higher turbo freq than stock.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 1, 2012)

I tried that already, temperatures were going up to 98°C or so. No way I am trying auto again.I don't want to fry the thing.
Absolute maximum I will tolerate is 85° on any core.

How the hell do people manage 4.5GHz at 1.2V without going over 100°?


----------



## Crap Daddy (Aug 1, 2012)

Then there is definitely wrong either with your cooler or with the motherboard supplying too much voltage. When you did this on auto, but remember only turbo multi upped, what was the voltage as shown in CPU-z?


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 1, 2012)

40 is only one multi above the stock turbo multi of 39. Your CPU should not get that hot. Quite a few boards will run all cores at x39 anyway, even though x39 is ingle-core only on stock turbo settings...

Have you tried flashing to the most recent BIOS?

Also, if you check my G1.Sniper review, you'll see what I had to change to get 4.6 GHz, with a Noctua NH-C14. It was not alot:

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/G1_Sniper_M3_review/6.html


----------



## Xzibit (Aug 1, 2012)

Soarted it out...

C-States and Turbo Enabled

x35 w/ 4core Turbo @ x45
(+)0.070 Offset = v1.232

On a side note...
Is there a known "more" accurate temp software reading for Ivy-Bridge?  I noticed there is a discrepency of up-to 20c between differant softwares.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 1, 2012)

Xzibit said:


> Soarted it out...
> 
> C-States and Turbo Enabled
> 
> ...



Try AIDA64. seem reliable to me, did check TjMax with it looking for throttle, confirmed 105 C. I've noticed the same thing, but i think it might just be different polling intervals. Plus, having more than one temp app open screws with the reported numbers as well.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 1, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> 40 is only one multi above the stock turbo multi of 39. Your CPU should not get that hot. Quite a few boards will run all cores at x39 anyway, even though x39 is ingle-core only on stock turbo settings...
> Have you tried flashing to the most recent BIOS?


I got the latest beta bios F12j.
With DVID -0.130V (the last I was testing) and Prime95 running Small FFTs, CPU-Z reported 1.068V vcore. Temps were on average 80-85-85-78. Bleh!



Crap Daddy said:


> Then there is definitely wrong either with your cooler or with the motherboard supplying too much voltage. When you did this on auto, but remember only turbo multi upped, what was the voltage as shown in CPU-z?


With everything on auto and Turbo set to x40 on all cores, CPU-Z says 1.200V. That's quite horrible!
(I also had to adjust those last Turbo values from 77/112 to 100/150 /I just shot first random higher value I though of/)


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 1, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> Temps were on average 80-85-85-78. Bleh!



just remember that the max for these chips is 105C, so that's actually not that bad..same as 75 C on SB chips. I have also seen many running 95 C-100 C loaded when OC'd. These higher temps are why i think they chose to not use solder..it might melt right off the chip!

Personally, i won't run a beta BIOS as an end user. Try the latest non-beta release...many betas are tuned for extreme LN2 guys.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 1, 2012)

Well, I've always used beta bios since years ago, I find them over at tweaktown forums, think a GA employee posts them there, or someone close to them. Those bioses usually turn into stable official versions over time anyway.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 1, 2012)

I just checked the link you posted and it *seems* the conclusion is that
1) my cpu is shit
2) for IB overclocking, I chose the wrong cooler. I could get the Thermalright HR-02 Macho, but its base is not so perfectly flat as Coolermaster's (which in turn is much less massive)

ad 2: I could ramp up the rpm on the Noctua all the way to max (I installed one of those pwm regulators), but I don't want noisy case, not more than needed anyway. With 1400 rpm I am sure I'd get the temps down a fair bit compared to current 1000, but it's out of question.

Guess I will settle down with finding stable 4GHz offset and be happy with it. In the end I do not need more speed, but I still like to tweak stuff for the hell of it.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 2, 2012)

Maybe I should get more massive cooler. What would you guys recommend? Not one of those dual fan ones though! I really like the HR-02 Macho, but I am not skilled enough to lap the base, so something similar I guess.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 3, 2012)

The mission continues: already at only -0.80V DVID and STILL not friggin' stable. Had to take side of my case off cause temps were going over 95°. And that's with fan on the cooler alrady pushed to 1300 rpm. Wtf is this....


----------



## Crap Daddy (Aug 3, 2012)

Something is wrong. I understand that you don't want auto and you don't like the high temps but 
keeping the voltage on auto and raising just the multi in the turbo setting to 40, the system should be stable regardless of the heat. Furthermore, if enabled, thermal protection if it kicks in should reduce the freq and not crash the machine. As far as I understood beside the high temp the machine is still unstable? And, since your voltage is under 1.1 the only explanation for 95C is that the cooler is not properly seated


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 3, 2012)

The cooler is perfectly seated because the heatsink gets quite hot after a very short while.
Auto is out of question because I *can not cool it* then. I have no idea how others do it with 1.2+ vcore but I just can't.

The machine seems stable for regular work but Prime95 crashes in under 3 hours.
DVID is already at like -0.70 and reported vcore is 1.152V. I just need different cooler. This won't do in my case.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 3, 2012)

Was googling around for a possible cooler replacement and came up with this list:

CoolerMaster Hyper 612S - I really like that one, the base looks flat and pure copper
Scythe SCMG-3100 Mugen 3 Rev.B  - a huge fucker, but unsure about performance given how the heatsink is designed
Scythe SCNJ-3100 Ninja 3 Rev. B - just a humongous fucker
Thermalright HR-02 Macho  - nice massive heatsing, nice looks, shitty base

anyone has any experience with either of them?


----------



## Xzibit (Aug 5, 2012)

Here is a guide done with a Gigabyte MB UEFI

One thing I been finding out is you dont need to run the extra head room on current phases.  Just makes your MB hotter (2-6c).

Been tweaking mine and I'm able to have all the power saving features on now stable.

x45 all 4 cores @ v1.224 (79c)

Slightly better then before where it was at v1.232

If i want to go x45+ I have to drop the power saving features of the motherboard.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 5, 2012)

Xzibit said:


> If i want to go x45  I have to drop the power saving features of the motherboard.



With PLL Overvolt enabled? Only thing you should lose is sleep getting near the max of the chip, anything else is related to BIOS programming problems.


----------



## Xzibit (Aug 5, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> With PLL Overvolt enabled? Only thing you should lose is sleep getting near the max of the chip, anything else is related to BIOS programming problems.



Right now i've been OC with PLL Overvolt disable.

i can oc to 4.8ghz before I become afraid of the temps but its summer and 4.5ghz with power saving features makes me feel cooler.

I can hit 5ghz with a slight mem oc aswell but this is suppose to be a silent build. kind of goes out the window if the fans are above 60% but I think I gave up on that when I returned my low noise GPU for a better one aswell.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 5, 2012)

When you have issues booting with a multi, PLL Overvoltage is the setting you need.


Say when 45 boots OK, voltage OK too, and seems it will go for more, then 46 doesn't work...


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 5, 2012)

I think I will rename this thread to something like "lamer's overclocking journey or something".

I had to give up on x40 multi and went to x39, testing again.
Even with the fan on max speed (which is about 1400 for the Noctua - still very quiet btw!) I was still hitting temps up to 89° with 1.100V vcore. This just won't do. Fucks sake...

Anyone wants to discourage me from buying Scythe Mugen 3 Rev.B? This is good time to do it, because I think I will hit the store right on monday.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 6, 2012)

This is ridiculous. I set turbo to x37, vcore to normal, DVID to zero (reported vcore is 1.150V btw), and Prime crashed after two hours again. I am tempted to throw that piece of crap out of the window.

edit: it failed even with vcore on AUTO!!!! Wtf do I do now? RMA the cpu?


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 6, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> This is ridiculous. I set turbo to x37, vcore to normal, DVID to zero (reported vcore is 1.150V btw), and Prime crashed after two hours again. I am tempted to throw that piece of crap out of the window.
> 
> edit: it failed even with vcore on AUTO!!!! Wtf do I do now? RMA the cpu?



Try clearing CMOS( pull battery, jump clear pins together), go in BIOS and choose option to "load CMOS Default", save and exit, then re-download prime95.

Prime95 can corrupt on crash at times. Reset CMOS just be sure. Could be an errant memory timing or whatever.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 7, 2012)

I don't know man. IBT loops indefinitely like a charm. I still believe IBT is more of a memory test though, as the temps are like 20° lower than Prime Small FFTs.

I already flashes new bios and loaded optimized defaults too.

Btw, I tried disabling turbo completely and set vcore to auto. Guess what, crashed after about 2,5 hours. It never passes 3 it seems. Something is wrong and I can't find the cause. It's getting annoying.
If it crashes again this time with turbo off and vcore at 1.200V (and that's 3.5GHz), I will probably either call it or RMA the cpu, or possibly contant George (Prime's author) to try to look for something wrong in the code.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 8, 2012)

I think I finally got it. What do you guys think?




Been stable for 16 hours now.
edit: Needs better cooling. Gonna get the Scythe.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Aug 8, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> Been stable for 16 hours now.
> edit: Needs better cooling. Gonna get the Scythe.



Out of curiosity, what was wrong? What are your settings now?


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 8, 2012)

I was using a little older, bugged version of Prime95 (27.6), thinking I had the latest 27.7.


Temps are still hitting up to 93° with this voltage, and I even took PLL down to 1.600V - sadly nothing changed.

As for other settings, I got I believe -0.110V DVID, and several of the tweaks to extreme perf.
I'll see if I can squeeze 4.3GHz with the same vcore but I doubt it, because -0.005 difference in DVID crashed after one hour. This seems rock stable though.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Aug 8, 2012)

The voltage seems good, Ivy Bridge do heat up far worse than SB but it's still too much for those kinds of voltages. Have you tried to reseat the cooler?


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 8, 2012)

Not yet, I hate to disassemble the whole PC. I will buy the Scythe though, and put this cooler in my wife's PC. She only has the first gen Core i3, but the cooler is doing awful noise.


I still don't get it how people can cool 4.5GHz with this very same cooler though.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 8, 2012)

Good to hear you got it sorted. I thought Prime95 might be part of the problem!


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 8, 2012)

I found out purely by accident. I was checking some documentation over at its forum, and came by changelogs. I just checked what I had again and was like fuck me...


Btw is it PLL that is supposed to *theoretically* help with lowering the temperatures?


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 8, 2012)

Yes, and it does at times. However, it's really meant to be used in conjunction with PLL Overvolt option, so it's effects can be quite varied without PLL overvolt. enabled.

I like to try 1.65 V and 1.45 V, if the options are there. Usually 1.65 V will work fine, but the temperature drop is not very significant.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 8, 2012)

In my case nonexistant 
Guess I can't do much more than buying a ne cooler. But the result is more or less what I wanted to achieve - some overclock at lowest possible voltage.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 8, 2012)

So, now what do you think of using the offset method with all options enabled?


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 8, 2012)

it works


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 9, 2012)

So I found out the Blend-like custom test fails. Damn. I didn't overclock memory at all, yet it fails after one hour. Which settings shall I check and adjust?


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 9, 2012)

Oh I could provide some screens. That's nice feature of the new generation of bioses.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 9, 2012)

try IMC @ 1.05 V, matched with VTT.

Power options should be left on auto.

Set "Memory Performance Enhance" to Turbo, not extreme.

Those would be what I do.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 9, 2012)

Well, it turned out something really bad was going on.
I started to get BSODs out of the blue, first while running memory test in Prime95, later without any reason at all.
It only gets worse.
I went back to latest official stable bios version and started to test with pure default optimized settings. No way.

I can't even install Windows because the damn installer freezes on the first screen. I eventually found out I needed to disable xHCI in order to have functional keyboard and mouse (wtf, it's supposed to work, WinPE is not DOS at all, plus I had legacy USB enabled anyway).

I am going to RMA the whole shit package tomorrow.

People told me to try this and that, bump this or that voltage, try whatever voodoo.
I say stuff MUST work out of the box. If I can't get it to work with totally default settings, it's RMA time.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 9, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> I say stuff MUST work out of the box. If I can't get it to work with totally default settings, it's RMA time.



I agree 100%. However, at stock, of course, and once you OC, you do take some chances.

If you had "Extreme" set in memory options instead of "Turbo"(default) or "Standard"(compatibility setting), then that would cause all the issues you describe, however.

Windows install should always be done at stock, too, IMHO.

Same thing with BETA BIOSes.. I am pretty familiar with all these things, and I still won't run a BETA BIOS. I always update to most recent full release, and use that.


Once you step out of the "safe zone", you so take a fair bit of risk, and I do realize your more than aware of this, just kinda posting this for the benefit of others.


Having to install @ IDE mode is weird, for sure. No reason for that to happen.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 9, 2012)

Well, I managed to install Windows somehow with some problems, and got some shit right after boot. Unrecoverable error, system will restart. Yay. Explorer stopped working. Yay.

The very last nail in the coffin are 29 WHEA errors in the EventLog.
A corrected hardware error has occurred.

Reported by component: Processor Core
Error Source: Corrected Machine Check
Error Type: Internal parity error
Processor ID: 2


Do you think I should RMA just the CPU or everything?
Keep in mind I didn't get any BSODs or crashes until yesterday/today.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 9, 2012)

Ha! I think I got it.
After enabling just ONE core all the problems are gone. No errors, no BSODs, no crap in the log, Prime is happily grinding numbers with default voltages.
RMA time - I said it! But at least it's "just" the CPU.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 9, 2012)

could be board power delivery too..one core is far less load. Actually, that might also explain the high temps, if VRM on board was whacky...give the board a good visual inspection.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 9, 2012)

Well, that sounds logical too. However when I checked the errors in the log, it was always core 2 and 3 (at least I hope I read it correctly).

When I enabled two cores, the errors were back. That's why I primarily suspect the CPU.
I also disabled HT btw.

Ill check the board anyway, of course.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 9, 2012)

Might wanna try HT on, too. There's really no need to disable anything on IVB for 24/7 clocking, and I have yet to see a game that has issues with HT in the past year or so, while for me, the temp difference is negligible.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 9, 2012)

That was just a test you know. The PC is in pretty much useless state - I was just doing one last attempt at finding what was behind it. I will RMA it tomorrow anyway.

edit: HT on, ramped up some frequency... and it's still stable


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 9, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> edit: HT on, ramped up some frequency... and it's still stable



Do you mean that once you enabled HT, and all cores, it's fine, but HT off, it is not?


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 9, 2012)

No. I enabled HT and kept only one core enabled, and it was stable anyway.
I have it currently running with 1.230V vcore.

I am 90% sure it's the cpu, because I was getting BSODs and other errors in idle too.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 10, 2012)

Everything is RMA'ed and I will hopefully get a replacement next week. I only hope they won't tell me it works fine for them.

P.S. I read some reviews about the cooler I wanted to buy and seems like I will have to start looking again. Weird mounting mechanism, crappy fan clip, and as a bonus I think I couldn't fit my memory under it, the modules are bloody 6cm high.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 10, 2012)

lol I just got a call from a tech regarding the RMA. Seems like the board freaked out and fried one of the cores since a corner of the cpu was somewhat burned from underneath (I didn't notice that at all). Also he couldn't even get the board to work at all. Weird stuff going on.

I will be getting brand new board+cpu tomorrow. Yay!


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 10, 2012)

Ha, sad to hear, but at least it explains the problems!

Let us know when you get the new hardware and we can try again! lol.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 10, 2012)

lol yeah. He asked me "have you OCed the thing, just between us?"  Sure I told him I did, but we agreed I couldn't fry it the way I was going at it. He said it looked like the board power regulator or whatever it was gone mad and pumped some insane current right into the poor cpu. Shit happens I guess, but it's like the first time I've seen something like this. Especially with nowadays' hardware.

I really want to get a different cooler prior to assembling the thing again though. Tough choices! (still crying a river over the Scythe, totally unsure whether to try it or not).


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 10, 2012)

Pro tip:

Next time do not adjust power settings in BIOS for the VRM. Auto is enough to go way over 5000 MHz.




I think the board was knackered from the get-go though, as that would very easily explain the horrible temps you were getting since day one.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Aug 10, 2012)

From the start something felt fishy with the motherboard rather than the CPU since with auto settings it wasn't able to keep stable 4GHz. Anyway good to hear you'll get a replacement so soon.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 10, 2012)

Crap Daddy said:


> From the start something felt fishy with the motherboard rather than the CPU since with auto settings it wasn't able to keep stable 4GHz. Anyway good to hear you'll get a replacement so soon.


Nono, the instability wasn't real, it was the damn bugged old version of Prime95.



cadaveca said:


> Pro tip:
> 
> Next time do not adjust power settings in BIOS for the VRM. Auto is enough to go way over 5000 MHz.
> 
> I think the board was knackered from the get-go though, as that would very easily explain the horrible temps you were getting since day one.


The temperatures were horrible. I saw people with the very same cooler hitting lower temps with 0.1V more, lmao, and was like WTF are you kidding me... Guess the board really was dead before I turned it on 

So that means I might not need a new cooler at all!!


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 10, 2012)

Yeah, you should not. It's not going to be the best, but it's butt-loads better than the stock cooler, for sure. I'm using an H100, and still get pretty high temps at times, so some chips just run hot, period, but they should NOT be like yours was.

That's why I kept offering more stuff to change, etc...it just didn't seem right.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 10, 2012)

What did you mean by _Next time do not adjust power settings in BIOS for the VRM_ btw? I don't have manual atm and still didn't memorize all the settings yet. Which one is this?


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 10, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> What did you mean by _Next time do not adjust power settings in BIOS for the VRM_ btw? I don't have manual atm and still didn't memorize all the settings yet. Which one is this?



This page, where you adjusted a few things. Really, you should not need to touch anything on that page.:

View attachment 48069


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 10, 2012)

Ah! Well I followed the overclocking guide 
At first I only changed voltage response and vcore LLC though, only randomly flipped other around later when I was desperate.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 10, 2012)

Wasn't a guide I wrote....

Seriously though, you do not need to adjust anything there, and doing so will only really give you more heat to deal with. Xzibit mentioned this as well several posts back.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 11, 2012)

Everything is up and running.
Default settings still, everything on auto.
Testing CPU with Prime95. Temperatures are at 80°, and CPU-Z reports vcore to be 1.080V. rofl
Quite a difference from 1.2+ on original board.
How could that pass factory testing is beyond me...


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 11, 2012)

Octopuss said:


> Quite a difference from 1.2+ on original board.
> How could that pass factory testing is beyond me...




Your "extreme" setting for loadline explains the higher voltage. Exteme makes it so the CPU voltage _increases_ under load, rather than going lower as it should. I wouldn't really call it that out of place, honestly.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 11, 2012)

You're right, I just tested it and it really pumps more volts then. It is still lower than before with same settings!


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 11, 2012)

New CPU though, right? There is no set voltage for these chips, each is individual.


----------



## Xzibit (Aug 11, 2012)

There just a range of 0.25000-1.45000 i beleive

For current phases on the motherboard:
I would test with every settting on (Lowest setting avaible) "Regular" <- thats what my board says.

J.J. from Asus (I know your running Gigabyte) said on a overclock demo. To start with that because the chip will only ask for the current window Intel has specified it for and the additional settings are for extreme overclocking where the chip is reaching its limits and your pushing it beyond the recomended envolope and you'd just be adding heat to the system.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 12, 2012)

Hm, I am at 4.2GHz again, CPU-Z says vcore is 1.032V, and temps while Priming are... 78-85°. Shall I be afraid again? lol

Didn't touch the PWM stuff this time.


----------



## Xzibit (Aug 12, 2012)

I'll assume your running the -/+  Offset and not the Auto voltage ?

Once you figure out the lowest voltage to run a certain multiplier.  It will then be a matter of how cool you can keep it with the cpu cooler.

Voltage looks good @ 4.2ghz i was peeking 66c but I'm on a ALC and Cadaveca is on a better one also so we'll have lower temps.



Just looked at your case and it might be a ventalation issue.  If your area around the PC is just warm and the case Lian-Li PC-8NWX just has 2 120mm fan and its not pushing enough fresh air to the CPU cooler to circulate the hot air out thru the rear 120mm fan then it might be building up a little hot air pocket everytime you run prime and could give you that extra heat.
If you installed the optional 140mm fan on top it might very well just be your not getting rid of the heat as fast with the cpu cooler.

NOTICED: Its a top mounted PSU design.. Dont know how you have your Enermax MODU82+ facing but if you plan on leaving your CPU overclocked you might want have the fan facing up so it pulls in fresh cool air from the 140mm opening on top of the case.  You dont want +80c temps being blown into the PSU if you have it facing down into the CPU cooler. 

Try leaving the case side panel off. That lowers my temp about 2-4c.  Might be better for you since your cooling with air.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 12, 2012)

The trouble is the cpu cooler I think. When I put my hand in front of the fan, it actually blows on my hand! Most of not all of the air is supposed to be pushed through the pins of the heatsink, but not in this case. I suspect the mounting mechanism (despite being very solid overall) is a bit shitty in this regard. And no, I attached the fan in correct way 

I was thinking about buying 140mm fan to mount on the upper side, but I am not sure how would it help the airflow as the cpu cooler is pretty much right below the PSU. It's also pretty close to the rear fan, so it should work well in theory, but sadly it doesn't 

edit: taking side off indeed lowers the temps by about 5°, but that's not the solution I want.
I also do not use the front fan as experiments showed absolute zero difference in temps.


----------



## Xzibit (Aug 12, 2012)

I would think about these coolers you dont have to worry about heat circulation. 

ANTEC  920
THERMALTAKE I have the Performer
CORSAIR Cadaveca has the H100

I know H100 wont fit in your case but a Antec 920 / Thermaltake Performer or Pro / Corsair H80 will be good.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 12, 2012)

This class of coolers is too expensive. Max I am willing to pay is about $50.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 14, 2012)

Is it possible the cpu kind of "burns in"? I know I wasn't stable with what I have working right now at the beginning.

Anyway, I don't think I can get better than this:


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 14, 2012)

Yeah, running high temps will dry the IHS paste out over time, so "burn-in" is definitely more real with IVB.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 14, 2012)

Ah. I thought the paste is supposed to stay... greasy or something. Everytime I was cleaning an old PC, the paste looked like fossilized and didn't look like it was doing much.


----------



## babdi (Aug 23, 2012)

My rig is OCed to 4.6 Ghz at 1.2 Volts
All settings at default. Just applied 4.6 at BIOS. C1,C3.C6 disabled


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 23, 2012)

...and?


----------



## babdi (Aug 23, 2012)

And what ?


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 23, 2012)

That's what I asked you.


----------



## babdi (Aug 24, 2012)

That's it. Just gave the info. The Vcore is 1.280 at 4.60 Ghz to be precise.
At stock voltage you cant get more than 3.7 ~ 3.8 I guess.


----------



## Octopuss (Aug 24, 2012)

And we asked for info about your overclock or what?


----------



## Xitro (May 30, 2013)

*Hot 3770K*

Sorry to kick up an old topic, but I need some help.

I have an 3770K with a Thermalright True Black 120 with Arctic Silver 5, which gets to 100 degrees celcius without a problem. (Prime95 stress test) And I have the Asus Maximus V Gene. (Z77)

Here is a CPU-Z pic:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6978239/pc.jpg

These are the default BIOS settings, just everything on AUTO.
I don't want to overclock. I just want the damn thing to run fast, smooth and stabile.

What settings do I need to change, because the Vcore seems to be way too high.
The CPU isn't supposed to be on 4,6ghz either.

Thanks alot!


----------



## Octopuss (May 30, 2013)

Whoa.
That's what happens when you try to OC on auto settings.
Just load optimized defaults, that should do the job. If not, reset the BIOS physically (should have a button on the board).


----------



## Xitro (May 30, 2013)

Octopuss said:


> Whoa.
> That's what happens when you try to OC on auto settings.
> Just load optimized defaults, that should do the job. If not, reset the BIOS physically (should have a button on the board).



Thanks for your quick response! I will try that, hope it will keep my temps low.


----------



## Octopuss (May 30, 2013)

That will simply set everything to its default state. CPU speed as well, of course. So, if you still want a bit of extra speed (default is between 3.5 and 3.9GHz depending on load), you will have to start educating yourself on the subject of Ivy Bridge overclocking


----------



## Xitro (May 30, 2013)

Octopuss said:


> That will simply set everything to its default state. CPU speed as well, of course. So, if you still want a bit of extra speed (default is between 3.5 and 3.9GHz depending on load), you will have to start educating yourself on the subject of Ivy Bridge overclocking



The strange thing is that it is default, all the CPU settings are AUTO.
I just disabled all the speedstep crap.

But what to know about Ivy Bridge overclocking, I got a pretty cool overclock right now, 4,6 ghz baaammmnn.. without doing anything hahahaha Im the overclock meister..

Only the temperatures are not good..


----------

