Can you overclock a i5 4590 3.3ghz at all?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Vexillarius

Reputable
Aug 23, 2014
1,434
0
5,960
385
You need a K-series CPU for proper overclocking. Non-K CPUs have a locked multiplier.

A non-K CPU can still be overclocked by increasing the base clock but those overclocks will be much lower and harder to get stable.
 

Vexillarius

Reputable
Aug 23, 2014
1,434
0
5,960
385
You need a K-series CPU for proper overclocking. Non-K CPUs have a locked multiplier.

A non-K CPU can still be overclocked by increasing the base clock but those overclocks will be much lower and harder to get stable.
 

Mokdabu

Reputable
Mar 4, 2015
6
0
4,510
0




I'm sorry to disappoint you but i just overclocked my 4590 to 3.7Ghz by just increasing the multiplier. It currently runs smooth at 3.7ghz and 60 degrees Celsius in full load in Prime95 and Aida64.
 

OrangeDriver

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2011
27
0
18,540
2


What setup are you running i.e. board, cooling solution, etc? I'm curious as I was the idiot who didn't realize I could get the better version of the motherboard and the unlocked CPU bundle for cheaper than the locked 4590 and the regular Z97 board. lol
 

Mokdabu

Reputable
Mar 4, 2015
6
0
4,510
0


CASE: Zalman Z1. it has 2x120mm vents
MOBO: MSI B85M E45
PROC: Intel i5 4590
PROC cooling: Deepcool Gammaxx 300 28C in idle and 55 in full load, during games and renderings
MEMORY: 2x4GB Kingston 1600Mhz CL11 - ValueRAM
GPU: Gigabyte AMD Radeon R9 270x OC - 2gb also clocked from 1100 to 1170mhz
SSD1: Kingston V200 - 60gb
SSD2: Kingston V300 - 240gb
HDD: Seagate Baracuda 320gb

I overclocked the gpu today. I tried to clock it to 1200mhz but i got freezes in Dying Light so i downclocked it little by little until i got to 1170mhz. Seems stable now. I played Dying light for about 3 hours and it didn't heat up and gave me no freezes.
 

MKarim

Reputable
Mar 30, 2015
13
0
4,520
1


So I can overclock a i5 4590 on a Gigabyte B85 G1-Sniper-B6? How you did that, BIOS tweaking or software like ThrotleStop? I am new to ocing, trying to learn, just crawling through my way up so hope you guys won't laugh at me!
 

Mokdabu

Reputable
Mar 4, 2015
6
0
4,510
0
Hey there.

It really is not that much of big deal. I just went into bios and increased the multiplier from 33 to 37. That's all i did. I did not increase the voltage. It has been running very smooth since that day. I did not even one single freeze or blue screen.
I use this computer 16-20 hours a day for gaming and work ( architecture, renderings) and like i said, i had no problems this far. You just need to keep a close eye on the temperatures. If they do not go very high and get no errors, shutdowns, blue screens. you are fine. I use a Deep cool Gammaxx 300 cooler and i get maximum 55 degrees when gaming or rendering.

That's pretty much all i can say. Just keep a close eye on the temperature and everything will be alright. If you encounter problems, lower the multiplier until you get a stable system.

Regards,
Bogdan
 

ragingrager

Reputable
Jun 6, 2015
1
0
4,510
0


You guys just made my day (*facepalm*);

Listen. Your CPU is 3.3Ghz when idle. But when it uses it's own built-in turboclock, it goes from 3.3Ghz to 3.7Ghz automaticly. That is how the processor was designed, like so many others.

All you did was to set the multiplier, to an already default predefined value.

So instead of going from 3.3Ghz idle, it is now always 3.7Ghz, even when idle.

If you don't believe me, go check the specifications of the processor again. It is 3.3Ghz, (3.7Ghz when it uses turboclock)
 

Mokdabu

Reputable
Mar 4, 2015
6
0
4,510
0


No. that's not what happens. It's funny seeing you trying to guess. I'll tell you the story again. The processor was working in full load at 3.3ghz. When in idle it ran at minimum 800mhz. Since i changed the multiplier in BIOS from 33 to 37 it always runs at 3.7 in full load and at 800mhz when in idle. It is true that the specs say the turbo clock is at 3.7 but it does not clock itself to that value. Even with auto multiplier in BIOS.

Hope you didn't hurt yourself with the facepalm.

 

Gam3r01

Titan
Moderator
Considering the 4590 has a base turbo of 3.7, no matter what tweaking you did, it would have been simpler to leave turbo boost on and let it do its thing.
That being said, this thread id nearly 8 months old with a solution. There is no point in continuing to post.
 

Mokdabu

Reputable
Mar 4, 2015
6
0
4,510
0


But it did not do "it's thing".
Keep in mind that a solution is not the only solution to a problem. Feel free not to continue to this post if it is of no interest to you.
Have a wonderful evening.
 
Agreed, it's an old post. Forcing a cpu to run at it's default turbo settings is not overclocking. A cpu not running at it's full factory potential is an indication of not correctly setting the bios to begin with or the results of using a cheap board. Cutting corners isn't without it's headaches and obviously made a job out of reaching performance that comes out of the box.
 

Mokdabu

Reputable
Mar 4, 2015
6
0
4,510
0


You might be right. But i still prefer to pay $70 instead of $200 for a motherboard.
 

tony1-3-9

Reputable
Sep 2, 2014
73
0
4,630
0
Old topic and all but im intrigued as i have a 4590 and tried this, basically your forcing constant turbo right? But i did find 1 thing the 4590 will only run 3.7 on 2 cores or less, there's no way your running 3.7 on all 4 cores to my knowledge. Under load in games it runs at 3.5 so there's no point forcing the constant turbo when your getting the same result. Surely the original post would have seen clocks changing if he was indeed running prime or only 2 cores being used.
 
What motherboard would you need to buy for $200? You can get a z series motherboard for $75 usd or less. For $140 you can get a solid fully featured z series motherboard with voltage check points, onboard reset, dual bios, 6 true digital power phases doubled to 12 with dual lan. Saying a decent motherboard costs $200 is a myth unless you live in an unusual region with extremely high import taxes and tariffs.
 

eltidi

Honorable
Apr 3, 2012
11
0
10,520
1
There is a lot of confusion in this thread, I have one so let me help.

the i5 4590 runs at 3.3 without turbo, the turbo depends on the number of cores used, with all 4 of them it will turbo to 3.5 ghz, Now with some b85 boards you can force the turbo to 3.7 ghz in all 4 cores, there is an option in the bios that allow you to force the multiplier in the turbo and to up the tdp of 84w before it disables the turbo.

Can this be qualified as overclock, I would say yes because you are gaining 200 mhz from the designed specs.
 
Yes I suppose 'technically' that would be an overclock of 5%. Similar to pushing the base clock higher to achieve an extra 100mhz. Rarely worth the time and effort. So little if it weren't for technicality it would almost be a margin of error. If the 4590 is not fast enough for some reason to the point it's noticeable or needs more 'oomph' to get the job done, 100-200mhz isn't going to make a difference. I don't see this being the case for the vast majority but in a 'what if' scenario. Likely only going to make a difference in synthetic benchmarks for bragging rights if that.
 
Why be upset that intel charges more for performance or features? Case manufacturers do it all the time with windowed vs non windowed cases. Some cases cost more simply because of a different paint color. The cpu silicon used in the k series are top binned, higher quality material that passes higher levels of testing than the similar locked editions (aka 4690k vs 4690 vs 4590). Premium cuts of meat cost more, steak costs more than hamburger yet it's still beef. Ht costs more too, yet people pay out extra for it all the time.
 
No no tea urchin, I was referring to bmacsys being sickened by intel charging more for a k series cpu. It might seem unfair but everything in life costs more for additional features whether for looks, performance, comfort etc. It's not too terribly much for the additional features though. A $15 difference for the 4690k over the 4690. The i7 4790k is around $45 more than the 4790 non k, but in addition to containing a better binned piece of silicon with the most options (ht, igpu, unlocked etc) it also comes with 11% more speed straight from the box without even touching the overclocking potential. I'm sure if it were clocked identical to the 4790 or if the 4690k were 11% faster than the 4690 out of the box those k series pricing differences would be more in line with one another.
 

bmacsys

Honorable
BANNED
Jul 4, 2013
1,854
9
12,165
108


Windowed vs non windowed? A windowed case obviously costs more to produce than a non windowed case. How can you compare that to charging for a something that at one time was a given? It is gouging plain and simple. You have absolutely no evidence that the cpu's are any higher binned for a K part. A higher binned part will be sold as a higher clocked cpu from the get go. How is an unlocked multiplier a "feature"? Prime cuts of beef are cut from a much different portion of a steer than what is sold as ground beef. Ground beef is made from the leftovers. It obviously tastes different. Why don't you make a car analogy now?
 
I would but I'd rather listen to people like you whine senselessly over features costing more money. I suppose steak should cost the same as ground chuck, it's all beef. Cars should charge the same for leather interior as cloth because they're the same seats. (there's your car analogy, enjoy).

"Defects in manufacturing are not always fatal, however; in many cases it is possible to salvage part of a failed batch of integrated circuits by modifying performance characteristics. For example, by reducing the clock frequency or disabling non-critical parts that are defective, the parts can be sold at a lower price, fulfilling the needs of lower-end market segments."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_binning

"Intel's spec for K-SKU processors demands higher thermal, frequency, and voltage tolerance than—for instance—their power-saving S-line. In general, this means that consumers purchasing K-SKU products will have an objectively "better" die housed under their IHS, being that it's been tested and qualified for more abusive computing environments. Intel knows their K-SKU devices will be marketed to overclockers, and thus selectively uses higher-quality components for them."
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/1140-silicon-die-bin-out-process-explained

"Once the chips have been packaged they go through a class testing or ‘binning’ process whereby their thermal and frequency characteristics will be analysed. Think of it as an audition process, with each chip hoping to be capable of getting a role at the top end of the range, running at the highest frequencies. Unfortunately, due to tiny variances in the production process, some chips may not run as well and will have to be content with being binned as lower range chips"
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/06/10/how-to-make-a-cpu-from-sand-to-shelf/4

http://download.intel.com/pressroom/kits/chipmaking/Making_of_a_Chip.pdf

Actual there is evidence of this. Perhaps a quick trip around google will help you learn what 'binning' is. Quit being lazy and riding on assumptions when 5min with google will show you that yes, there IS a difference. Since analogies are lost on you, perhaps articles would be better? You might just learn something rather than crying about it.

"A higher binned part will be sold as a higher clocked cpu from the get go". What do you think k series cpu's are? What i5 is faster than the 4690k? Which lga 1150 i7 is faster than the 4790k? The K sku's ARE the fastest/highest clocked chips regardless of the overclocking potential. You're already not paying attention to your own statements.

"Prime cuts of beef are cut from a much different portion of a steer than what is sold as ground beef." As are the various binned dies used for cpu's. The higher binned dies are being cut from a different part of the wafer than the lower binned chips.

@ tea urchin, lol - I'd rather ramble and give people facts than short parroted answers which are often baseless. To each their own. :)
 

Jordan_gogov

Reputable
Feb 4, 2016
6
0
4,510
0

Tony you are correct for the 3,7 Ghz / 2 Core, but turbo on the all 4 cores is 3,5 and i think if you run it with turbo and BCLK at 110 mhz and you will get (maybe stable) 3,85 Ghz for all 4 cores if i am wrong please correct me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY