i5-12600K Core Voltages (MSI motherboard)

[stahlhart]

The core VIDs on this 12600K seem to me to be a bit on the high side at idle, and possibly also a little bit high under all-core load (4700 at the moment, still dialing it in). Are these voltages normal for this CPU, or can I get them lower?

Motherboard is an MSI MPG Z690 Edge Wifi DDR4, latest BIOS.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

If you've made changes, the VID now means nothing to you.

Run at load and witness the all core load v-core you've got set. Does it droop? If it droops a lot, add a little LLC. If it's stable with droop, leave it alone.

 

[RootinTootinPootin]

View attachment 362245

The core VIDs on this 12600K seem to me to be a bit on the high side at idle, and possibly also a little bit high under all-core load (4700 at the moment, still dialing it in). Are these voltages normal for this CPU, or can I get them lower?

Motherboard is an MSI MPG Z690 Edge Wifi DDR4, latest BIOS.

I'd agree on the higher side of things, have you already adjusted LLC/MSI Lite load? (if the board has that option)

You can pull down the idle voltages at the same time the upper limit via those options if undervolting has already been exhausted as an option..

 

[stahlhart]

Thank you both for the responses -- I'm going to have to spend some more time learning MSI's BIOS, as it almost seems like a foreign language in comparison to Asus's. For one thing, I can't find any reporting of the individual V/f points, though I can see where you can adjust the offset on them. I might have to fly blind a bit starting out until I get more of a feel for the behavior. I have LLC currently set to 5. Everything seems to be quite stable so far, just temperatures a little too high at higher stress levels (e.g. y-cruncher) than I'd like. I had a similar thing happen with the i7 and used small amounts of negative offset ibn the higher 4-5 points to bend the upper end of the curve down a little.

Maybe the idle isn't a high as I was thinking -- I was comparing it to my i7, and it's roughly equal in the actual amount, but the i7 idles at 800MHz, which was why I thought at 500MHz the i5 should be lower. The good news is that it's staying under control on the high side; the most I've seen has been about 1.32V so far. I'm not really trying to push this build too far, as it's a secondary 1080p mainly for office usage and older (pre-2020) games.

 

[RootinTootinPootin]

For one thing, I can't find any reporting of the individual V/f points

MSI doesn't have this, that is why I always go for Asus.

I have LLC currently set to 5.

LLC/MSI Lite load is kinda backwards vs LLC on Asus boards, on Asus, the higher the LLC the tighter the voltages become, its the other way around for MSI.

 

[stahlhart]

LLC/MSI Lite load is kinda backwards vs LLC on Asus boards, on Asus, the higher the LLC the tighter the voltages become, its the other way around for MSI.

Yeah, I was wondering about that, which is why I have been staying in the middle. I thought that was the case, but then they put a small illustration of the graph to the right and it almost seems like it could be interpreted in reverse.

And then MSI uses some strange nomenclature in spots, and they don't provide any explanation such as what acronyms stand for -- how do you get "GT" for the iGPU, for example. For Asus I can pretty much keep my eyes on the screen, but for MSI I'm constantly flipping through the BIOS manual to try and get explanations. Much less intuitive.

Update: looks like LLC 6 it is. LLC 7 passed y-cruncher, but crashed R23 instantly. Guess that slight offsets to upper V/f points are about all I have left to work with at this point.

 

[RootinTootinPootin]

Guess that slight offsets to upper V/f points are about all I have left to work with at this point.

for fine tuning you can now use offsets..just always stress test via an app like OCCT or run a few CB R23 cycles..you need to check out the AVX2 workload as well, that can really chop the voltages too much..

 

[stahlhart]

for fine tuning you can now use offsets..just always stress test via an app like OCCT or run a few CB R23 cycles..you need to check out the AVX2 workload as well, that can really chop the voltages too much..

I usually do the final validation with OCCT CPU+RAM medium/large, normal/extreme and then y-cruncher component stress test for the AVX loading.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

I researches Y-cruncher 12600K (from personal screen shots) and it looks like y-crunchy 1b and 2.5b at 4625mhz, so 102.8 bclk included. 1.17v 1b and 1.21v for the 2.5b run which seems a little more accurate. But this is the main reason I don't like Adaptive voltages. When the v-core varies, so does the effective clocks.

If you run a benchmark or stress test, and the effective clocks are a bit lower than what you set, increase the load v-core or increase LLC. FLL_OC should also be enabled if the board offers it.

But you said it seems running hot, would be curious. I cooled mine with a wraith Prism with a max temp of 85c y-cruncher 2.5b. The time of completion was about 98 seconds.

All that just to give you some reference to go by.

 

[stahlhart]

I think I'm zeroing in on where I'd like it to be. You've got me beat on the y-cruncher score, probably the adaptive overclock as you mentioned but this board is also only running XMP DDR4-3600 so that might be contributing also. I was hoping to keep full load temperatures in the 80s, so if this passes stability testing it should be good to go.

 

[stahlhart]

Final core ratios are 50-50-49-49-48-47. 48 all core was stable, but temperatures in the above test went into the red, at 46 there was still some headroom. All OCCT stability testing passed as well.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Final core ratios are 50-50-49-49-48-47. 48 all core was stable, but temperatures in the above test went into the red, at 46 there was still some headroom. All OCCT stability testing passed as well.

Looks like it runs nice and cool this way. Seems closer to 5ghz (all core), the more juice they want. And bad diminishing returns. Now work on that ring clock, but dont use more v-core. 4.5ghz maybe 4.6ghz would be ok.

 

[droopyRO]

The CPU is fine as it is from the factory. It only needs a bit of undervolt, turning off AVX offset and you are good to go. Overclocking results in double to triple power consumption and less than 10% performance between default and 5.1Ghz all core. This is what i get in Warhammer III. My advice is to use offset mode, -0.030 V and test it for stability, if you are lucky you might get to -0.100V stable. My 12600K can only do -0.030V Prime95 Small FFT stable.

 

[RootinTootinPootin]

That's looking good!!

 

[jallenlabs]

Ill have to post my voltage numbers (Ill check settings next time I boot it up), but my 12600kf is running on an MSI Tomahawk at 5.6x2/5.4x4ghz and 4.1ghz ecores. I shut off hyper threading and offset AVX, set the Vcore and to adaptive along with the LLC settings. My memory is bdie at 1.5v at 4000mhz 15-16-16-36. I must admit, I have tackled the ring frequencies yet, but the rig scores very well in benches and is perfectly stable. I do have custom cooling though and temps never go above 62C on the CPU. And yeah performance increased a decent amount over stock and for me, worth the time, effort, energy usage and funds.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Ill have to post my voltage numbers (Ill check settings next time I boot it up), but my 12600kf is running on an MSI Tomahawk at 5.6x2/5.4x4ghz and 4.1ghz ecores. I shut off hyper threading and offset AVX, set the Vcore and to adaptive along with the LLC settings. My memory is bdie at 1.5v at 4000mhz 15-16-16-36. I must admit, I have tackled the ring frequencies yet, but the rig scores very well in benches and is perfectly stable. I do have custom cooling though and temps never go above 62C on the CPU. And yeah performance increased a decent amount over stock and for me, worth the time, effort, energy usage and funds.

Almost had me sold. That 5.6ghz was looking good until you said shut off "HT and Negative Offset AVX".

 

[jallenlabs]

Almost had me sold. That 5.6ghz was looking good until you said shut off "HT and Negative Offset AVX".

HT isnt really needed for gaming and in many benchmarks it doesn't matter much either, at least in low core count situations. AVX isn't needed most of the time either and when youre hitting the CPU hard AVX can really increase temps and again, isn't really used in games, which is what I use that system for, other than tinkering. Could I run HT and straight AVX? Sure, with more time, and that could happen, but in the long wrong, it wont do much to increase the performance in the areas I care out. Now my workstation is a different story, no offset and HT threading enabled, however, my 12700k doesn't like much past 5.3ghz on the P cores.

 

[phanbuey]

Dont most games use AVX/AVX2 though? Have you monitored clocks during gaming? Pretty sure that offsett is kicking in.

 

[stahlhart]

Oh look, my thread got hijacked.

 

[jallenlabs]

Dont most games use AVX/AVX2 though? Have you monitored clocks during gaming? Pretty sure that offsett is kicking in.

Possibly and I checked the BIos, turns out I had switched it back to auto with no offset, my mistake.

I think I'm zeroing in on where I'd like it to be. You've got me beat on the y-cruncher score, probably the adaptive overclock as you mentioned but this board is also only running XMP DDR4-3600 so that might be contributing also. I was hoping to keep full load temperatures in the 80s, so if this passes stability testing it should be good to go.

Youre voltage looks really good to me. 3600 is pretty much the sweet spot, but you can play with the timings. Didnt mean to hijack the thread...

 

[stahlhart]

Youre voltage looks really good to me. 3600 is pretty much the sweet spot, but you can play with the timings. Didnt mean to hijack the thread...

Thank you, no worries -- I am pretty much done dialing the CPU in now anyway. Should have put an emoticon on that post... carry on.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

HT isnt really needed for gaming and in many benchmarks it doesn't matter much either, at least in low core count situations. AVX isn't needed most of the time either and when youre hitting the CPU hard AVX can really increase temps and again, isn't really used in games, which is what I use that system for, other than tinkering. Could I run HT and straight AVX? Sure, with more time, and that could happen, but in the long wrong, it wont do much to increase the performance in the areas I care out. Now my workstation is a different story, no offset and HT threading enabled, however, my 12700k doesn't like much past 5.3ghz on the P cores.

AVX and AVX2 are the 2 most common instruction sets for probably the last decade or more. You'd use OCCT AVX for burn in testing.

For your uses, fine. I get it. But you'd came in advertising numbers. Called it out cause I know better.

Of course, cause past 5.2/5.3ghz, it requires chilling no matter how much v-core you throw at it. (12700k with AVX, plus HT on ect).

Either way, I look forward to your screen shots so we can critique them!

 

[jallenlabs]

I didnt come in bragging about numbers, I came to contribute. Apprarently I confused AVXs. I do have several first places in PCMark/3DMark with this rig.... theres your bragging. I dont pretend to be the end all be all in OCing. Just trying to help a fellow poster if I can. Ill post my screen shots and you can blast away. If my 2cents arent wanted, fine. My daily clocks.
..

 

[phanbuey]

I used to have almost that exact same setup with my 12600K -- i think i needed about 1.28V for 5.2 and 1.36 or so for 5.3, so I typically left it at 5.2 with HT on. HT off I could get to 5.4 but for whatever reason far cry 5 (that I was nolifing at the time) would hitch with HToff, so ended up turning it back off and settling. Still a brutally fast chip at those clocks tho - I remember I was beating a 7700X at comparative benchmarks in games and in productivity .

That MSI bios is awesome for ram tuning - I remember TREFI making a huge difference and as I was running 4x8 - the turnaround timings on the 4 ranks made a nice difference.

I didnt come in bragging about numbers, I came to contribute. Apprarently I confused AVXs. I do have several first places in PCMark/3DMark with this rig.... theres your bragging. I dont pretend to be the end all be all in OCing. Just trying to help a fellow poster if I can. Ill post my screen shots and you can blast away. If my 2cents arent wanted, fine. My daily clocks.
..View attachment 363494

 

[ShrimpBrime]

I didnt come in bragging about numbers, I came to contribute. Apprarently I confused AVXs. I do have several first places in PCMark/3DMark with this rig.... theres your bragging. I dont pretend to be the end all be all in OCing. Just trying to help a fellow poster if I can. Ill post my screen shots and you can blast away. If my 2cents arent wanted, fine. My daily clocks.
..View attachment 363494

I said brag? No I didn't. Never said any of that... Sounds like you've been offended. Bummer.

Stock AVX is 4.4ghz all cores. On auto it should follow the multi you set unless you change to a lower offset AVX multi.

For detailed readings, try HWInfo64 instead of HWMonitor.

Good luck in your journeys!