# Is BCLK linked to DRAM frequency on 6700K ?



## RejZoR (Aug 31, 2015)

Couldn't get reply about this in two other threads...

On Intel 6700K, when increasing BCLK, does DRAM clock stay at fixed value or does it increase along with BCLK?

On Core i7 920 that I have it was linked and it was very important to have high spec enough RAM if you wanted to get a decent overclock. So I know if I have to aim at higher spec RAM or just go for the cheapest one...


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Aug 31, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> Couldn't get reply about this in two other threads...



Seems like you havent gotten your answer in your third thread either. 

If you couldnt get a reply in two others? Why did you feel the need to make a third?


----------



## buildzoid (Aug 31, 2015)

yes it is. DRAM clock = DRAM multi * BCLK


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 31, 2015)

Yes. But, there are some seriously low memory multipliers so you don't really need to get high spec ram.

Id still get a decent set of DDR4 though, 2800+. 2133/2400/2666 is DDR3 land.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Aug 31, 2015)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> Seems like you havent gotten your answer in your third thread either.
> 
> If you couldnt get a reply in two others? Why did you feel the need to make a third?



"Why did you feel the need to make a third?" ..... why did you fell the need to point out obvious observation whilst not answering the question at hand? trolling/post whoring?

Excuse my ignorance but isn't BCLK overclocking a bit outdated what with most chips being overclocked by the multiplier these days unless you are trying to squeeze every last bit of OC out of it, afik bclk is also related to PCIE lanes etc so you can't overclock the bclk/bus that much...


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 31, 2015)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> Seems like you havent gotten your answer in your third thread either.
> 
> If you couldnt get a reply in two others? Why did you feel the need to make a third?



Because it was question in a thread about other things. This one is very specific to question just this.

So, if I ramp up BCLK, RAM will also go beyond 2133 MHz ? I'm going for Sabertooth Z170 which is only certified up to 2400 MHz so that's an important factor...

@NdMk2o1o
Not with Skylake. BCLK goes to ridiculous heights. It is not linked to PCIe bus. It wasn't even on X58 that I have. PCIe is always at 100 MHz regardless of BCLK. DRAM clock however does increase and can cause problems if you bought 1066MHz RAM, which meant you actualyl had to overclock it beyond specs. Buying a faster RAM made things ieasier in this regard.

That's why I'm asking for Skylake, so I know if I have to take higher clocked RAM to mitigate this or not...


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 31, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> So, if I ramp up BCLK, RAM will also go beyond 2133 MHz ? I'm going for Sabertooth Z170 which is only certified up to 2400 MHz so that's an important factor...


Yes.

But like most overclocking boards, I would imagine (not sure read reviews) that it has multipliers beyond 2400 MHz...

And why the sabertooth? You have a thing for (f)ugly, overpriced, gimmicky boards?



NdMk2o1o said:


> Excuse my ignorance but isn't BCLK overclocking a bit outdated what with most chips being overclocked by the multiplier these days unless you are trying to squeeze every last bit of OC out of it, afik bclk is also related to PCIE lanes etc so you can't overclock the bclk/bus that much...


Welcome to Skylake/Z170 friend... BCLK o/c is back. It is now NOT attached there and you can go well past 200MHz on many boards. The point seems to be only for granularity of figures more than anything though.


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 31, 2015)

I'm for durability. And it has two LAN ports in case if one becomes quirky like it did on my current board...


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 31, 2015)

My fault. No idea you lived in a desert and took your PC on a humvee. 

Being serious, there are many with dual LANs that are just as durable (the armor is a friggin dust cover man). Choice is yours, but, that thing is hideous in both looks (to me) and expense compared to others with similar features.


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 31, 2015)

The other boards that I have in mind are MSI Gaming M7 and Maximus VIII Hero. Roughly same price, similar features...


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 31, 2015)

So, can someone tell me how exactly does BCLK and DRAM clocks increase together? Are there any ratios to adjust that? I'm again not getting the info. Googled for guides and not a single one of them bothered to mention this...


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Aug 31, 2015)

Having only had a 2500k and 3570k in the last 3-4 years I'm a tad out of the loop, though surely cant you just easily test this if there is no easily available info by increasing the bclk slightly and monitoring the dram bus clocks when you do? ok so it's not an exact guide but you should be able to find out how they are related? surely you can set them independently or on a ratio if they do affect one and another to compensate


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 31, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> So, can someone tell me how exactly does BCLK and DRAM clocks increase together? Are there any ratios to adjust that? I'm again not getting the info. Googled for guides and not a single one of them bothered to mention this...


You're over-analyzing it. IT cannot be any other way than what past platforms offer, since IMC is on-chip, and is linked to the L3 speed. Yes, there are many dividers, from 800 MHz up past 4000 MHz with both 100 MHz  and 133 MHz base points (you can choose 100/133 offset from bclk - that is independent from the CPU BCLK).


----------



## RejZoR (Aug 31, 2015)

So, bottom line, if you want to overclock Skylake with the least problems you still have to get RAM faster than 2133MHz, otherwise you have to actually overclock it and that may cause stability issues.

So, best way to OC Skylake is to have like 3000MHz RAM and you can be sure not to run into RAM stability problems due to overclocking.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 31, 2015)

RejZoR said:


> So, bottom line, if you want to overclock Skylake with the least problems you still have to get RAM faster than 2133MHz, otherwise you have to actually overclock it and that may cause stability issues.
> 
> So, best way to OC Skylake is to have like 3000MHz RAM and you can be sure not to run into RAM stability problems due to overclocking.




No. Because there is CPU multiplier support for multis up to 80+, there is no real need to BCLK OC at all.

Also, 2133 MHz mem is default, but 800 MHz is the lowest multiplier, so you do have significant overhead for BCLK OC with just 2133 MHZ memory.

The issue with a 920 was that you had limited CPU/mem multipliers available. Since SNB launch, such has not been an issue.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 31, 2015)

cadaveca said:


> there is no real need to BCLK OC at all



This.  Even on the old platforms that didn't link almost everything to the BCLK(or FSB back in the day), overclocking via multiplier was always preferred.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 1, 2015)

But wasn't possible without spending a shed load for an unlocked processor... hence the need for most users those platforms.



cadaveca said:


> No. Because there is CPU multiplier support for multis up to 80+, there is no real need to BCLK OC at all.
> 
> Also, 2133 MHz mem is default, but 800 MHz is the lowest multiplier, so you do have significant overhead for BCLK OC with just 2133 MHZ memory.
> 
> The issue with a 920 was that you had limited CPU/mem multipliers available. Since SNB launch, such has not been an issue.


Thanks for spelling it out.


----------



## newtekie1 (Sep 1, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> But wasn't possible without spending a shed load for an unlocked processor... hence the need for most users those platforms.



Yep, but Intel's compromise for linking everything to the BCLK was that they had to release more affordable unlocked processors.  It is still annoying that they don't have unlocked i3 processors though.  But now, hopefully, with Skylakes being capable of higher BCLK, we might finally have the ability to get decent overclocks on cheap processors again.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 1, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> My fault. No idea you lived in a desert and took your PC on a humvee.
> 
> Being serious, there are many with dual LANs that are just as durable (the armor is a friggin dust cover man). Choice is yours, but, that thing is hideous in both looks (to me) and expense compared to others with similar features.



Just wait for a mark 2 version.  It'll be cheaper.  It's not a bad board but I do agree the dust cover "armor" is fairly gimmicky.

The good component selection is fairly solid however.  Agreed it can be found elsewhere though.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 1, 2015)

cadaveca said:


> No. Because there is CPU multiplier support for multis up to 80+, there is no real need to BCLK OC at all.
> 
> Also, 2133 MHz mem is default, but 800 MHz is the lowest multiplier, so you do have significant overhead for BCLK OC with just 2133 MHZ memory.
> 
> The issue with a 920 was that you had limited CPU/mem multipliers available. Since SNB launch, such has not been an issue.



Ok, if range of multipliers is so high, then using that makes sense. I'm just used to a very limited range of multipliers on all CPU's that I've owned so far (AXP2400+,E4300,E5200,i7 920) where I was mostly forced to increase the bus speed since multipliers ended rather quickly.

This is all I've needed to know. Skylake has more multipliers and more BCLK/DRAM ratios. Thx



newtekie1 said:


> Yep, but Intel's compromise for linking everything to the BCLK was that they had to release more affordable unlocked processors.  It is still annoying that they don't have unlocked i3 processors though.  But now, hopefully, with Skylakes being capable of higher BCLK, we might finally have the ability to get decent overclocks on cheap processors again.



This brings me the memories of Intel E5200. A cheapo dual core that I overclocked to 3,9 GHz. Cheap as a cracker, fast a s a racing car


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 1, 2015)

newtekie1 said:


> But now, hopefully, with Skylakes being capable of higher BCLK, we might finally have the ability to get decent overclocks on cheap processors again.


Nope, only small BCLK OC will be available on the non-K SKUs. Not enough to matter... Intel isn't going to shoot themselves in the foot. SO buy a "K" SKU if you want something more than stock + maybe 100 MHz.


----------



## hat (Sep 1, 2015)

So even with skylake non k cpu is basically the same as its been?


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 1, 2015)

hat said:


> So even with skylake non k cpu is basically the same as its been?


According to ASUS reps, yep. You might get a bit more than 100 MHz, I suppose, but then Intel would be limiting themselves on the number of SKUs they can release. While this might make sense on 2011-3, it definitely doesn't on 1151, where many of these boxes will end up in offices, where even $20 difference in price matters, due to the volume of units bought.



			
				Raja@ASUS said:
			
		

> BCLK is locked from excessive change on the multiplier locked CPUs - a built-in feature Intel named "BCLK Governator" prevents necessary adjustments for significant OC. No way to override it. We tried.


----------

