Processor speed question

[ENG]Uni-Sol · February 2016

I decided to take the plunge and OC my CPU, it's a K series so I figure why waste a potential of extra performance? afterall, that's what the 'K' and the extra expense is for right?

I managed to get it stable at 4.5ghz within safe temps (never goes above 79C under stress tests) but as a trade off I found that I had to turn off any intel power saving features (things like speedstep and C-State through my BIOS) or the chip wouldn't like it and the PC either would freeze or BSOD.. I'm assuming this occurs when the jump in frequency happens from low/high and vice versa.. at least what I'm I'm assuming.

So my question is that now I've turned off all the power saving stuff my Chip is now running at 4.5ghz.. like all the time, from the moment I switch on the PC, even when not doing anything intensive to warrent a need for such a speed, is this constant OC'd speed harmful to the chip? I'm not worried about temps, it's currently at 39C idle @4.5 and goes up and down variable to my CPU fan speed and what I'm doing to a max of 49C. When gaming its in and around 70C.

I don't want to break it

IO_i_OI · February 2016

You should be able to set your BIOS back to "default" settings if you want to start over fresh.

I am running a i7 4790K oc'ed to 4.4Ghz. Idle at 39c and max to 49c. Consider room temp at 21c and the MB temp at 28c. I run all my fans at max RPM including my 120mm cpu cooler. The BIOS/MB temp protection should shut down cpu and stuff if you get close to 79c.

Honestly, I find no real benefit to running a quad-core over 4.0GHz anyway. With an SSD, I find no measurable pick up in performance for gaming or other.

If you want better performance for gaming then look at your GPU to oc or upgrade. Leave the CPU at factory values... at least for now.

frankof · February 2016

I havnt disabled any of my power management features except core parking,
I goes nicely up and down in frequency depending on load.
2600K@4.3

.dcG-Colts^ · February 2016

[ENG]Uni-Sol wrote: »

I decided to take the plunge and OC my CPU, it's a K series so I figure why waste a potential of extra performance? afterall, that's what the 'K' and the extra expense is for right?

I managed to get it stable at 4.5ghz within safe temps (never goes above 79C under stress tests) but as a trade off I found that I had to turn off any intel power saving features (things like speedstep and C-State through my BIOS) or the chip wouldn't like it and the PC either would freeze or BSOD.. I'm assuming this occurs when the jump in frequency happens from low/high and vice versa.. at least what I'm I'm assuming.

So my question is that now I've turned off all the power saving stuff my Chip is now running at 4.5ghz.. like all the time, from the moment I switch on the PC, even when not doing anything intensive to warrent a need for such a speed, is this constant OC'd speed harmful to the chip? I'm not worried about temps, it's currently at 39C idle @4.5 and goes up and down variable to my CPU fan speed and what I'm doing to a max of 49C. When gaming its in and around 70C.

I don't want to break it

Any overclock is essentially going to lower the lifespan of your chip rather that will effect you before you upgrade or not is probably very slim chance. What CPU do you have? I turn off all power saving features because I don't like them especially in this game when it could confuse the CPU into running a lower frequency due to the game only using 1 core and how little overall CPU usage the game will actually use. I have a i5 3570k and I overclock it to 4.3GHz. I have an MSI board so I just use OC Genie and this is the highest OC Genie goes automatically I have gotten higher clocks by not using OC Genie but I have found them to just give me issues.

[ENG]Uni-Sol · February 2016

What gets my chin all scratchy is that as soon as I turn back on Speedstep and C-State the computer freezes a few seconds into a windows boot, either that or it BSODs as soon as the windows logo has finished spinning, thats with 1.25v @4.5ghz, but if I knock the OC down to 4.3 and give it 1.2v.. I can turn it all on and it works

I've tried various combos of things, mostly what I've read about.. I think I've been lucky with this processor so far in terms of how far I've been able to push it, but its been a bit of a mammoth affair to get here

I don't think I'd want to reset it back now.

I didnt even mention doh, lol.. I only got the i5 4690K, I didn't see too much difference in gaming performance over the 4790K so I put the extra wonga to a 970 over a 960, which I've recently learned was probably a good decision (looking at 960/970 benchmarks) only problem I'm having with the 970 so far is that I'm getting some horrible coil whine, when FPS is in the very high hundreds (main menu's in games) it goes away when I'm playing. Card is a beast though.. has to be said, by far the best I've owned to date.

I was mainly just wondering if the chip will be OK at a constant 4.5ghz, cuz if so and its would be fine.. then it'd be mad to run it at stock, might as well get what I paid for innit, even if it costs me a few more quid (or bucks) a year in electricity

.dcG-Colts^ · February 2016

Yes definitely good choice going i5 4690K over i7 4790K no difference gaming wise. Definitely a huge difference between 970 and 960. 960 is one of the worst cards NVIDIA has ever released. So its really good you picked 970 over 960. The only thing good about a 960 is it consumes less power than previous series.

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-960-vs-GeForce-GTX-670

It's pretty sad a gtx 670 has that much over a 960. Especially when you compare a gtx 670 to gtx 970.

Much better 3DMark06 score 29,150 vs 10,767.5 2.8x better 3DMark06 score
Higher memory bandwidth 192.3 GB/s vs 96 GB/s
Higher texture rate 102.5 GTexel/s vs 72.1 GTexel/s
Significantly higher crysis 3 framerate 59.9 fps vs 36.1 fps
More texture mapping units 112 vs 64
Slightly more shading units 1,344 vs 1,024
Higher BioShock infinite framerate 83.7 fps vs 75.8 fps

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-970-vs-GeForce-GTX-670
For gtx 670 vs gtx 970 the gtx 670 wins in only 2 categorys. A gtx 670 only beats the gtx 970 by 100% in 3DMark06 because a gtx 670 supports directx9 that much better than a gtx970.

Much better 3DMark06 score 29,150 vs 15,071 Around 95% better 3DMark06 score
Higher crysis 3 framerate 59.9 fps vs 50.6 fps

Heres 960 vs 760
http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-960-vs-GeForce-GTX-760

and 660 vs 960
http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-960-vs-GeForce-GTX-660

770 vs 970 to show you what a next series card should have over a previous.
http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-970-vs-GeForce-GTX-770

and here is the main event gtx 660 vs gtx 760
http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-760-vs-GeForce-GTX-660

As you can see the gtx 660 only beats the gtx 760 in Noise Level and Power consumption.

For this game it would have been better to get a 680 or 760, 770, 780, or w/e instead of a piece of crap gtx 960

So good choice in picking gtx 970

IO_i_OI · February 2016

I've got a 960 ssc 2.0, and get steady 110 FPS with AAPG and 145 FPS with other titles all max 1080 all day long! Don't know how you can say 960's are POS. You just have to get the super-super-clocked version that runs the 2 fans. (2.0)

[ENG]Uni-Sol · February 2016

I had actually ordered a MSI 960 Gaming 4GB before I changed my mind.. saw too many great reviews for the 970 that twisted my arm enough to justify paying the extra for it, extra that I had saved from getting the 4690 over the 4790. Had I of gone for the i7 I'd be rocking a 960, which is still better than my old Ati 7950 I've been aching to replace, to think too.. when the 7950 was new it cost me more than this 970 has which is crazy

I'm sure the Mission editor would have liked to meet the i7 had I gone down that route.. especially when it comes to building a map, but meh.. I couldn't hold out any longer and I game games a heck of a lot more than I map maps so the extra cores took the back seat

I added up the total build cost of my entire PC (Case and all insides) and it came to £807, which aint too shabby.

Yep.. Still aint bought a mic or decent headset

frankof · February 2016

the 960 isnt POS, its just a overpriced midrange card, theres really no reason to buy it, unless your a fanboy on a budget.

{4F}DeadlyGrouse · February 2016

I never noticed any performance increase overclocking my processor. I'm running an amd fx-8350 4.2ghz and i had it overclocked to 4.7 and i didn't notice any better performance in game really.

.dcG-Colts^ · February 2016

IO_i_OI wrote: »

I've got a 960 ssc 2.0, and get steady 110 FPS with AAPG and 145 FPS with other titles all max 1080 all day long! Don't know how you can say 960's are POS. You just have to get the super-super-clocked version that runs the 2 fans. (2.0)

Maybe it's because I have msi gtx 670 2gb power edition and maintain 122fps constant on all maps except ones like coldfront and slums. A gtx 960 should surely out perform my gtx 670 considering its 2 series above mine. A gtx 760 is pretty much on par with a gtx 670 as you can see here. http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-760-vs-GeForce-GTX-670 but if you compare gtx 670 to gtx 960 it doesn't get better like it should it gets much much worse. http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-960-vs-GeForce-GTX-670

Like I mean Crysis 3 1920 x 1080 - Very High preset + 16xAF + 2xSMAA
-the gtx 670 gets an average of 59.9 fps. (65% more performance than gtx 960)
-the gtx 760 gets an average of 58.7 fps (A little under 65% more performance than gtx 960)
-the gtx 960 gets an average of 36.1 fps (Ridiculous)
Do I really need to say more? The gtx 960 is also 128bit when everything else is 256bit or higher.

frankof wrote: »

the 960 isnt POS, its just a overpriced midrange card, theres really no reason to buy it, unless your a fanboy on a budget.

The gtx 960 is not mid-range like the previous series of its kind (gtx 660, gtx 760, gtx 560, gtx 460, etc...) The gtx 960 is definitely low end. Thus is ridiculously overpriced as well.

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-960-vs-GeForce-GTX-950
It barely beats a gtx 950. Nvidia cards that are 128bit have always been low-end.

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-760/specifications
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-960/specifications
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-660/specifications

For the 900 series nvidia has changed their low end - high end products.

A gtx titan x - high range
A gtx 980ti - high range
A gtx 980 - mid range
A gtx 970 - mid range
A gtx 960 - low range
A gtx 950- low range

For the 700 series it went like this:

A gtx titan z - super high range
A gtx titan black - high range
A gtx titan - high range
A gtx 780 ti - high range
A gtx 780 - high range
A gtx 770 - mid range
A gtx 760ti - mid range
A gtx 760 - mid range
A gtx 750ti - low range
A gtx 730(128bit ver) -gtx750 - low range
A gtx 705 - gtx 730 (64bit ver) - low range

For the 600 series a gtx 650ti - gtx 660ti was mid range a gtx 670-gtx 680 was high range and gtx 690 being super high range

IO_i_OI · February 2016

I don't have any FPS drops on any maps. Same goes for the nVidia drivers... I always use the most updated and never have problems but others report they do. I'm very satisfied with my 960 ssc. Shelling out $1000 on a GPU isn't going to make you a better gamer, I think anyone spending over $300 for a GPU needs to get out the house, put down the caffeine cold drinks, and do some exercises.

IMO.

[ENG]Uni-Sol · February 2016

I'm airing on the side of 'hopefully not having to upgrade for another 3-5 years'.

At least that's what I told the Mrs

.dcG-Colts^ · February 2016

I'm on the latest drivers as well. Just because someone is smart enough to buy a higher quality product and spend their money wisely doesn't mean they need to do any of the stuff you mentioned...

BTW a gtx 960 is 200$ US 315$ Can and gtx 970 is 310$ US 480$ Can you wont see me buying either. I'll wait for pascal and the canadian dollar to raise a bit lol! (It really sucks when can dollar is so low) When i bought my gtx 670 feb 2013 or 2012 I forget I spent 340$ Can and at the time a gtx 670 was 300$ US just to show you what a difference the canadian dollar being lower makes.

.dcG-Colts^ · February 2016

[ENG]Uni-Sol wrote: »

I'm airing on the side of 'hopefully not having to upgrade for another 3-5 years'.

At least that's what I told the Mrs

If your playing 1080p resolution you should be able to achieve that no problem because you went with 970 over 960

frankof · February 2016

.dc-colts^ wrote: »

frankof wrote: »

the 960 isnt POS, its just a overpriced midrange card, theres really no reason to buy it, unless your a fanboy on a budget.

The gtx 960 is not mid-range like the previous series of its kind (gtx 660, gtx 760, gtx 560, gtx 460, etc...) The gtx 960 is definitely low end. Thus is ridiculously overpriced as well.

Its priced as a mid-range card, at least here in sweden($200), and honestly, it does have its strong sides.
Its efficient, cool and silent, perfect for a HTPC where you also do some casual gaming now and then.

Bass-Junkie · February 2016

On gtx 780ti sli and a i7 2700k stock 3.9 ghz I run 5.0 ghz 24/7 and see huge fps boosts compared to 3.9 stock ..... specialy in games that use unreal engine or stalker games games like bf3 or 4 u will see less gpu ussage when [TOS Violation] starts going crazy 64 man serves

IO_i_OI · February 2016

Bass-Junkie wrote: »

On gtx 780ti sli and a i7 2700k stock 3.9 ghz I run 5.0 ghz 24/7 and see huge fps boosts compared to 3.9 stock ..... specialy in games that use unreal engine or stalker games games like bf3 or 4 u will see less gpu ussage when [TOS Violation] starts going crazy 64 man serves

I've only heard the 5.0Ghz barrier broken by a few and not 24/7. ??

-Ner0- · February 2016

I've read i7 2700 should be a stable OC cpu. Fast googling "i7 2700k 5.0 ghz overclock" I found this among others.
http://www.overclock.net/products/intel-core-i7-2700k-3-5-ghz-lga-1155-processor-bx80623i72700k

[ENG]Uni-Sol · February 2016

Its all about being able to crank up the voltage as well as keep them cool enough not to fold.

http://www.overclock.net/t/678487/official-5ghz-overclock-club
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18608863

I remember when 5ghz was an exclusive club and its not very long ago at all, with the rise in water cooling you can find a lot of people willing to push their chips to their very limits

I've seen many reports and evidence in some cases of people getting over 5ghz on good ol' conductive metal with a fan attached

<< IKR

http://valid.canardpc.com/cjdgaz

iNv|eKComm · February 2016

i run 660Ti. I'll kill you.

on a serious note. Its the first thing im upgrading when the time comes.

Processor speed question

Comments

Greetings!

Categories

Latest Discussions