Gigabyte Offset Voltage

[burnhamjs]

I just finished an overclock of an i5 6600k, 4.6 GHz, Vcore 1.290V (BIOS) / 1.284 (CPU-Z). I'll list my settings I used DURING OC'ing below. I passed OCCT-LINPACK and OCCT CPU-Large, but when I ran OCCT CPU-Small my temps climbed above 80-degrees. I ended up needing to use the "Relax OC" under the advanced memory settings which brought the temps down 10-degrees. Not sure what "Relax OC" does because BIOS is still showing the same DRAM voltages and timings from the XMP Profile 1. This allowed me to complete all tests for 3 hours and keep temps below 80.

So now it's time to use an offset or adaptive voltage. [Note - this is a Gigabyte MOBO]. I set the CPU Voltage to "NORMAL" (in place of the 1.290V manual voltage) then set a DVID of +0.000V. Everything seemed to run just as it did when I have the manual voltage set. Check.

Questions
A) Next I enabled Turbo, EIST, and all C-states but voltage stays at 1.284V (CPU-Z) and Freq 4600GHz regardless if the system is idle or under load. Why doesn't the voltage or freq drop at idle?

B) I tried different values for DVID but all minus values caused a crash (even -0.005v) and the plus DVID just put me above the 1.284 I needed to remain stable. Does anybody know how to make offset or adaptive voltage work on the Gigabyte boards?


Setting used during OC'ing:

----For the CPU:
[1]-CPU VCore at 1.290 V,
[2]-CPU Core Ratio at 46,
[3]-Uncore Ratio at 45,
[4]-FCLK Frequency For Early Power 1000 MHz
[5]-CPU VCore Loadline Calibration (LLC) on High
[6]-Internal Graphics Disabled

-----For the memory:
[7]-Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.) on "Profile 1"
[8]-Memory Enhancement Settings to "Relax OC"

-----Advanced CPU Settings [Energy Savers]
[10] Intel Turbo Boost Technology DISABLED
[11] CPU EIST DISABLED
[12] CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) DISABLED
[13] C3 State Support DISABLED
[14] C6/C7 State Support DISABLED
[12] C8 State Support DISABLED
[13] Package C-State Limit AUTO

PC Specs:
MOBO: Gigabyte Z170 Gaming 3 (F6 BIOS)
CPU: i5 6600k
CPU Cooler: EVO 212
RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 3000MHz
GPU: Gigabyte GTX960OC 2GB

 

[burnhamjs]

Interesting observation today. I wanted to verify my voltage was dropping in my "stock" BIOS profile so I loaded this profile and verified that indeed my voltage (and cpu freq) did drop at idle.

Next I booted into BIOS and changed my CPU voltage from AUTO to 1.290V then saved and exited. When windows loaded I opened CPU-Z and noted that my voltage wasn't dropping at idle.

Next I booted into BIOS and reloaded my "stock" BIOS profile and verified CPU voltage was back to AUTO. When windows loaded I opened CPU-Z and noted that my voltage wasn't dropping again.

So, I SHUT DOWN vice a restart - the booted to windows and now my voltage is dropping again at idle. It appears the settings didn't apply correctly when I just saved and exited from BIOS.

With this observation - I booted back to BIOS - loaded my 4.6GHz profile - changed the CPU voltage from 1.290V to NORMAL (leaving DVID at +0.000V) saved and exited. Now voltage is dropping at idle. So all seems to be working correctly, though I did run a short OCCT-SMALL test and noted my CPU voltage was running at at 1.284V but had a couple spikes to 1.308V.

Next - I may try to use a small negative value for DVID (perhaps -0.020v) to see how it behaves.

Current Settings:

----For the CPU:
[1]-CPU VCore at NORMAL,
[1a] DVID at +0.000V
[2]-CPU Core Ratio at 46,
[3]-Uncore Ratio at 45,
[4]-FCLK Frequency For Early Power 1000 MHz
[5]-CPU VCore Loadline Calibration (LLC) on High
[6]-Internal Graphics Disabled

-----For the memory:
[7]-Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.) on "Profile 1"
[8]-Memory Enhancement Settings to "Relax OC"

-----Advanced CPU Settings [Energy Savers]
[10] Intel Turbo Boost Technology DISABLED
[11] CPU EIST at AUTO
[12] CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) at AUTO
[13] C3 State Support DISABLED
[14] C6/C7 State Support DISABLED
[12] C8 State Support DISABLED
[13] Package C-State Limit AUTO

PC Specs:
MOBO: Gigabyte Z170 Gaming 3 (F6 BIOS)
CPU: i5 6600k
CPU Cooler: EVO 212
RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 3000MHz
GPU: Gigabyte GTX960OC 2GB

 

[philipew]

I just finished an overclock of an i5 6600k, 4.6 GHz, Vcore 1.290V (BIOS) / 1.284 (CPU-Z). I'll list my settings I used DURING OC'ing below. I passed OCCT-LINPACK and OCCT CPU-Large, but when I ran OCCT CPU-Small my temps climbed above 80-degrees. I ended up needing to use the "Relax OC" under the advanced memory settings which brought the temps down 10-degrees. Not sure what "Relax OC" does because BIOS is still showing the same DRAM voltages and timings from the XMP Profile 1. This allowed me to complete all tests for 3 hours and keep temps below 80.

So now it's time to use an offset or adaptive voltage. [Note - this is a Gigabyte MOBO]. I set the CPU Voltage to "NORMAL" (in place of the 1.290V manual voltage) then set a DVID of +0.000V. Everything seemed to run just as it did when I have the manual voltage set. Check.

Questions
A) Next I enabled Turbo, EIST, and all C-states but voltage stays at 1.284V (CPU-Z) and Freq 4600GHz regardless if the system is idle or under load. Why doesn't the voltage or freq drop at idle?

B) I tried different values for DVID but all minus values caused a crash (even -0.005v) and the plus DVID just put me above the 1.284 I needed to remain stable. Does anybody know how to make offset or adaptive voltage work on the Gigabyte boards?


Setting used during OC'ing:

----For the CPU:
[1]-CPU VCore at 1.290 V,
[2]-CPU Core Ratio at 46,
[3]-Uncore Ratio at 45,
[4]-FCLK Frequency For Early Power 1000 MHz
[5]-CPU VCore Loadline Calibration (LLC) on High
[6]-Internal Graphics Disabled

-----For the memory:
[7]-Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.) on "Profile 1"
[8]-Memory Enhancement Settings to "Relax OC"

-----Advanced CPU Settings [Energy Savers]
[10] Intel Turbo Boost Technology DISABLED
[11] CPU EIST DISABLED
[12] CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) DISABLED
[13] C3 State Support DISABLED
[14] C6/C7 State Support DISABLED
[12] C8 State Support DISABLED
[13] Package C-State Limit AUTO

PC Specs:
MOBO: Gigabyte Z170 Gaming 3 (F6 BIOS)
CPU: i5 6600k
CPU Cooler: EVO 212
RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 3000MHz
GPU: Gigabyte GTX960OC 2GB

"Relax OC" does not modify the memory timings that YOU set in the BIOS but rather values (settings) of the IMC (Integrated Memory Controller) parameters (like the write recovery time tWR, the refresh cycle time tRFC, etc.) located inside ("integrated") the CPU to "ease" (or simply make possibe) its management of the flow of data going to and from the computer's main (RAM) memory under YOUR own BIOS timings (by increasing latencies, etc.).

 

[philipew]

Interesting observation today. I wanted to verify my voltage was dropping in my "stock" BIOS profile so I loaded this profile and verified that indeed my voltage (and cpu freq) did drop at idle.

Next I booted into BIOS and changed my CPU voltage from AUTO to 1.290V then saved and exited. When windows loaded I opened CPU-Z and noted that my voltage wasn't dropping at idle.

Next I booted into BIOS and reloaded my "stock" BIOS profile and verified CPU voltage was back to AUTO. When windows loaded I opened CPU-Z and noted that my voltage wasn't dropping again.

So, I SHUT DOWN vice a restart - the booted to windows and now my voltage is dropping again at idle. It appears the settings didn't apply correctly when I just saved and exited from BIOS.

With this observation - I booted back to BIOS - loaded my 4.6GHz profile - changed the CPU voltage from 1.290V to NORMAL (leaving DVID at +0.000V) saved and exited. Now voltage is dropping at idle. So all seems to be working correctly, though I did run a short OCCT-SMALL test and noted my CPU voltage was running at at 1.284V but had a couple spikes to 1.308V.

Next - I may try to use a small negative value for DVID (perhaps -0.020v) to see how it behaves.

Current Settings:

----For the CPU:
[1]-CPU VCore at NORMAL,
[1a] DVID at +0.000V
[2]-CPU Core Ratio at 46,
[3]-Uncore Ratio at 45,
[4]-FCLK Frequency For Early Power 1000 MHz
[5]-CPU VCore Loadline Calibration (LLC) on High
[6]-Internal Graphics Disabled

-----For the memory:
[7]-Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.) on "Profile 1"
[8]-Memory Enhancement Settings to "Relax OC"

-----Advanced CPU Settings [Energy Savers]
[10] Intel Turbo Boost Technology DISABLED
[11] CPU EIST at AUTO
[12] CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) at AUTO
[13] C3 State Support DISABLED
[14] C6/C7 State Support DISABLED
[12] C8 State Support DISABLED
[13] Package C-State Limit AUTO

PC Specs:
MOBO: Gigabyte Z170 Gaming 3 (F6 BIOS)
CPU: i5 6600k
CPU Cooler: EVO 212
RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 3000MHz
GPU: Gigabyte GTX960OC 2GB

When you write <<and now my voltage is dropping again at idle>> you effectively highlight an anomaly. Remember that the voltage (within a range narrowed by setting "CPU VCore Load Line Calibration" (LLC) to "High", such as 1.284 / 1.296 V in your case) goes down (in this range to 1.284 V) under load (NOT at idle as you write) in order to protect the CPU from excessive power because the current goes up under load (it can't be avoided). The voltage goes up to 1.296 V at idle. I know, it all looks rather counter-intuitive but you can easily check it (in real time) with CPUID HWMonitor, a the top, at the right of VCore Voltage: in the min. and max. columns.

And since "Power (P) = Voltage (V) x Current (A)", (i.e. P = V x A), if both the current and the voltage go up, the resulting power (the product of both) can quickly become excessively high. It is the mobo, not the CPU, that curbs down the voltage under load (by an amount called VDroop, in millivolts) to reduce the resulting power applied to the CPU.

One thing I don't quite understand is your mention of <<the settings didn't apply correctly>> ...er... didn't apply WHAT correctly? Should this perhaps be read instead as "the settings weren't applied correctly" ? Not being a native English speaker, I don't want to miss anything here.

 

[burnhamjs]

When you write <<and now my voltage is dropping again at idle>> you effectively highlight an anomaly.

My apologies - I could have written that better. I should have said my voltage is appropriately dropping at idle [and ramps back up under load]. Adaptive voltage is working. Now I just want to play with the offset, trying a -0.010 offset perhaps.

One thing I don't quite understand is your mention of <<the settings didn't apply correctly>> ...er... didn't apply WHAT correctly? Should this perhaps be read instead as "the settings weren't applied correctly" ? Not being a native English speaker, I don't want to miss anything here.

I had appropriately set the voltage from 1.290V to NORMAL {adaptive}, however, when I “saved & exited” it stayed as a manual voltage (1.290V) instead of the NORMAL {adaptive} I had applied. When I shut down then started it was correctly using the NORMAL voltage setting. Just odd that I had to go a shut down vice a restart to get the settings to apply.

 

[philipew]

When you write <<and now my voltage is dropping again at idle>> you effectively highlight an anomaly.

My apologies - I could have written that better. I should have said my voltage is appropriately dropping at idle [and ramps back up under load]. Adaptive voltage is working. Now I just want to play with the offset, trying a -0.010 offset perhaps.

One thing I don't quite understand is your mention of <<the settings didn't apply correctly>> ...er... didn't apply WHAT correctly? Should this perhaps be read instead as "the settings weren't applied correctly" ? Not being a native English speaker, I don't want to miss anything here.

I had appropriately set the voltage from 1.290V to NORMAL {adaptive}, however, when I “saved & exited” it stayed as a manual voltage (1.290V) instead of the NORMAL {adaptive} I had applied. When I shut down then started it was correctly using the NORMAL voltage setting. Just odd that I had to go a shut down vice a restart to get the settings to apply.

Let light shine out of darkness.

No worries. I am sorry but for "I had to go a shut down vice a restart to get the settings to apply.", I put "vice" in Google and got in return: <<word-forming element meaning "instead of, in place of,">>. This (I am told) may be a common expression in the area where you live (?). Now I get it... So I think you actually meant: "I had to go and do a shut down instead of a restart to get the settings to be applied." That's no problem, good to know even.

By the way, concerning "NORMAL {adaptive}", "Normal" is a setting which usually sets the stock value, whatever it is (around 1.20 V for VCore initially). "NORMAL {adaptive}" seems to imply that "Normal" in this case corresponds to some sort of "adaptive" setting. From the other thread on DVID I gathered that VCore effectively had to be set to "Normal" for this to work in some sort of "adaptive" way (it looks more like an offset though).

During periods of high CPU demand, the VRM (Voltage Regulator Module) circuit works hard to supply the current "requested" by the processor. However, as soon as that load is gone, the VRM circuit must act quickly in order to reduce the current supply to the level needed to match the new demand. Because it's impossible for the VRM circuit to respond instantaneously, the larger the load change the greater the maximum potential peak overshoot voltage. Controlling the magnitude of these peak values is critical for maintaining system stability.

By positioning the processor's no-load (idle) voltage level higher during periods of light loading (e.g. 1.20 V is higher than 0.70 V), it is possible to sustain a larger negative voltage dip without crossing the processor's minimum specified voltage limit (e.g. 0.70 V). In addition, "drooping" the load voltage (by the VDroop amount) as a function of supply current, allows the VRM to effectively limit the maximum positive peak overshoot voltage (experienced during a heavy to light load transient) to a value below the maximum allowable max. CPU voltage. This resulting control system ensures the processor supply voltage, regardless of CPU load, never violates a specified limit (see further details here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5).

So the CPU VID ( e.g. 1.20 V base) setting establishes the absolute maximum allowable processor supply voltage experienced during transient conditions and is not the target idle voltage. The DVID (Dynamic Voltage Identification, or Dynamic Voltage ID - http://www.overclock.net/t/665362/vid-voltage-identification-explained) is said to be "dynamic" because it can change according to the CPU activity level (either loaded or idle) dynamically (i.e. automatically and in real time). Interestingly, I found from the following site: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/10/14/gigabyte_z170x_gaming_g1_motherboard_review/3
...the following explanation which may help understanding (it is only an extract, please go to the IP address for the complete article) which mentions "the dynamic vCore (DVID) setting that will light up below it" (see below):
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
... For example, I dislike how GIGABYTE implements voltage control for the CPU in the BIOS and that is putting it mildly. There isn’t a clearly defined specific adaptive or fixed / override voltage mode as such. These features are supported, but how these features are used isn’t exactly obvious, or it won’t be obvious for many people. You can’t hit enter and see all the values and choices present either.
....................................
If you set the voltage to "normal" then it puts the voltage control into offset mode. The voltage is appears to be fixed at 1.2v as a base setting. You can then add voltage via the dynamic vCore (DVID) setting that will light up below it. Any voltage offset you add or subtract seems to be based off the 1.2v setting. However the name implies the voltage mode to be a dynamic and offset combination. In truth, it is a dynamic value with a max of 1.2v combined with whatever offset voltage is added or subtracted from that 1.2v value.

The methods GIGABYTE has chosen for control do work ultimately, but it isn’t the most user friendly way they could have gone about it. Frankly, virtually everyone in the industry handles CPU vCore settings in a better way.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I still need to physically test this on my rig but from what I read and understand so far, the idea is to 'determine' the max VCore necessary for stability (e.g. 1.355 V) at the desired frequency (say 4.6 GHz for example). Then 'discover' the base setting, i.e. the "Normal" or default “stock” CPU VCore voltage automatically supplied by the motherboard's BIOS (let's say for example that it is 1.20 V) at that frequency. Then subtract the default VCore from the max VCore needed for stability (say 1.355 V – 1.200 V = 0.155 V). This resulting number is inserted as the DVID setting (say + 0.155 V). The end-value DVID (say 1.200 V + 0.155 V = 1.355 V in this example) is therefore a dynamic value made of: 1) a max. of 1.20 V combined with 2) whatever offset voltage is added (or subtracted) from that 1.20 V base setting value.

Mind you, I don't recall to ever have noticed any mention of this "DVID" setting in any of the (super thin and incomplete) documentation, either on paper or electronic media, but I can already confirm from looking at a screenshot from this review of the "GA-Z170XP-SLI" mobo's BIOS that it is there (on the second line, under CPU Vcore at the top): http://www.tweaktown.com/image.php?image=imagescdn.tweaktown.com/content/7/4/7401_47_gigabyte-z170xp-sli-intel-z170-motherboard-review_full.png. ...So I can't wait to be back home and try it ;-).

Everything counts here because although power consumption and temperature increase linearly with clock frequency, it increases exponentially with voltage !!! - And it's the overall temp that is of great interest to me, much more than the puny saving of a few bucks on the electricity used by my CPU.

I just hope that this thread's (http://forum.giga-byte.co.uk/index.php?topic=6849.0) specification of all C-states having to be enabled is not necessary (I prefer them disabled). It mentions: <<DVID = Gigabyte Dynamic Vcore. Vcore must be set to normal or DVID will not function. All C states and EIST etc must be enabled.>>. I must check this out.

Good on you for "unearthing" this not-so-well-known method, and further suggesting it as a thread on this forum for all Gigabyte users to benefit from using it... If I can effectively use this the way I describe it above (and of course I still have to test it all physically on my rig), I will consider this method a pure gem. Now let's put it into practice, and test... ;-).

PS: Thank You "grimsin" also for pointing out the "Offset" in your post... which eventually put me on this path...

 

[burnhamjs]

One thing I don't quite understand is your mention of <<the settings didn't apply correctly>> ...er... didn't apply WHAT correctly? Should this perhaps be read instead as "the settings weren't applied correctly" ? Not being a native English speaker, I don't want to miss anything here.

Yes, that would be another way of stating.

By the way, concerning "NORMAL {adaptive}", "Normal" is a setting which usually sets the stock value, whatever it is (around 1.20 V for VCore initially). "NORMAL {adaptive}" seems to imply that "Normal" in this case corresponds to some sort of "adaptive" setting. From the other thread on DVID I gathered that VCore effectively had to be set to "Normal" for this to work in some sort of "adaptive" way (it looks more like an offset though).

Correct, you must set CPU Vcore to NORMAL to be able to set the Dynamic Voltage (DVID) which is directly under CPU Vcore in BIOS. For me this NORMAL voltage is 1.308V with LLC in HIGH (and a DVID of +0.000V).

From what I understand so far, having determined that you require VCore 1.284 V to be stable, you could set your DVID offset to +0.084 V (1.20 V + 0.084 V = 1.284 V). So at idle VCore would remain at 1.20 V (the "Normal", or "stock" value), and under load it would jump to VCore 1.284 V, and therefore be stable as you determined it previously. That's a reduction of 84 mV between idle and load. It gets even better when compared to the original LLC idle VCore of 1.296 V as it gives 1.296 V - 1.200 V = 0.096 V, or a 96 mV reduction (not bad at all).

When I set CPU Vcore to NORMAL, DVID +0.000V, LLC HIGH my idle Vcore is approximately 0.774V and under load it will go up to 1.284V/1.297V under load. HWMonitor showed a MIN of 0.774V and a MAX of 1.308V

It even becomes still better the higher you have to go with VCore (i.e. the higher your operating frequency). For example, if you need VCore 1.404 V for a stable 4.7 GHz (like in my case to obtain an LLC range of 1.404 / 1.416 V, I know, not the best CPU), an offset of +0.204 V would be used (1.200 V + 0.204 V = 1.404 V), meaning a 0.204 V difference (i.e. a reduction) between idle and load voltages. Now comparing with the LLC idle VCore of 1.416 V, it gives 1.416 V - 1.200 V = 0.216 V, or a 216 mV reduction... This is really great (people going up to VCore 1.45 V should be salivating by now).

I would recommend starting with a DVID of +0.000V to see what value of Vcore NORMAL provides. Then offset from there.

As a side note, you could even go a little further than this. In your case for example, when you write that you determined you needed VCore 1.284 V to be stable, this may not be entirely accurate. In fact you determined that you needed to set VCore 1.290 V in the BIOS in order for the CPU to select the LLC 1.284 / 1.296 V voltage range. But you don't know whether perhaps VCore 1.280 V might also be stable.

I need to set Vcore to 1.290V with LLC set to HIGH to get an actual Vcore of 1.284V (as reported by CPU-Z, HWMonitor, and OCCT) to be stable. If I set Vcore to 1.280V I cannot pass stability testing.

I just hope that this thread's (http://forum.giga-byte.co.uk/index.php?topic=6849.0) specification of all C-states having to be enabled is not necessary (I prefer them disabled). It mentions: <<DVID = Gigabyte Dynamic Vcore. Vcore must be set to normal or DVID will not function. All C states and EIST etc must be enabled.>>. I must check this out.

I do not believe this statement to be correct. I have Vcore set to NORMAL and can adjust DVID. I have EIST and C1E ENABLED, but I have C3, C6/7, and C8 DISABLED. I also have Turbo DISABLED.

 

[burnhamjs]

Adaptive voltage testing went well. I set DVID to -0.010V which brought my max Vcore to 1.296V during stress testing. Completed 3 hrs of OCCT-Large {see below}.

Stable 4.6G settings

----For the CPU:
[1]-CPU VCore at NORMAL,
[1a] DVID at -0.010V
[2]-CPU Core Ratio at 46,
[3]-Uncore Ratio at 45,
[4]-FCLK Frequency For Early Power 1000 MHz
[5]-CPU VCore Loadline Calibration (LLC) on High
[6]-Internal Graphics Disabled

-----For the memory:
[7]-Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.) on "Profile 1"
[8]-Memory Enhancement Settings to "Relax OC"

-----Advanced CPU Settings [Energy Savers]
[10] Intel Turbo Boost Technology DISABLED
[11] CPU EIST at AUTO
[12] CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) at AUTO
[13] C3 State Support DISABLED
[14] C6/C7 State Support DISABLED
[12] C8 State Support DISABLED
[13] Package C-State Limit AUTO

 

[philipew]

Adaptive voltage testing went well. I set DVID to -0.010V which brought my max Vcore to 1.296V during stress testing. Completed 3 hrs of OCCT-Large {see below}.

Stable 4.6G settings

----For the CPU:
[1]-CPU VCore at NORMAL,
[1a] DVID at -0.010V
[2]-CPU Core Ratio at 46,
[3]-Uncore Ratio at 45,
[4]-FCLK Frequency For Early Power 1000 MHz
[5]-CPU VCore Loadline Calibration (LLC) on High
[6]-Internal Graphics Disabled

-----For the memory:
[7]-Extreme Memory Profile (X.M.P.) on "Profile 1"
[8]-Memory Enhancement Settings to "Relax OC"

-----Advanced CPU Settings [Energy Savers]
[10] Intel Turbo Boost Technology DISABLED
[11] CPU EIST at AUTO
[12] CPU Enhanced Halt (C1E) at AUTO
[13] C3 State Support DISABLED
[14] C6/C7 State Support DISABLED
[12] C8 State Support DISABLED
[13] Package C-State Limit AUTO

Thank you for publishing your results, complete with clear screenshots, etc.

You are right, this looks good, but you are still a little too high at 1.296 V when 12 mV less (1.284 V) is sufficient for you to be stable, as you wrote previously. And since an offset of -10 drops your load VCore from 1.308 V to 1.296 V (-12 mV), I suppose that an offset of -20 would drop your load VCore from 1.296 V to 1.284 V (-12 mV) which is your ideal operating value, and also get your idle VCore even closer to 0.7 V (from 0.732 V) as a bonus. I recall that you already hinted (in a previous post) at trying this -20 offset.

The VID value and the other influencing parameters are very particular to each setup, even to each particular 6600K CPU unit. So I must really try it on my own rig and make observations as they appear, in sequence (not just when seeing an end-result) before being able to make more sense of how this works. I will probably be able to do it this week-end already, time permitting.

 

[grimsin]

idk how your geting occt to read accurately, none of the graphs show correctly for me.

 

[philipew]

idk how your geting occt to read accurately, none of the graphs show correctly for me.

I must say, the values threw me off as well - can't make sense of the results - that's why I prefer to perform my own tests.

 

[burnhamjs]

idk how your geting occt to read accurately, none of the graphs show correctly for me.

grimsin - are you saying the ones I posted don't display correctly for you, or that when you use OCCT the graphs don't display the correct data?

 

[burnhamjs]

idk how your geting occt to read accurately, none of the graphs show correctly for me.

I must say, the values threw me off as well - can't make sense of the results - that's why I prefer to perform my own tests.

what values are throwing you off?

 

[burnhamjs]

Thank you for publishing your results, complete with clear screenshots, etc.

You are right, this looks good, but you are still a little too high at 1.296 V when 12 mV less (1.284 V) is sufficient for you to be stable, as you wrote previously. And since an offset of -10 drops your load VCore from 1.308 V to 1.296 V (-12 mV), I suppose that an offset of -20 would drop your load VCore from 1.296 V to 1.284 V (-12 mV) which is your ideal operating value, and also get your idle VCore even closer to 0.7 V (from 0.732 V) as a bonus. I recall that you already hinted (in a previous post) at trying this -20 offset.

The VID value and the other influencing parameters are very particular to each setup, even to each particular 6600K CPU unit. So I must really try it on my own rig and make observations as they appear, in sequence (not just when seeing an end-result) before being able to make more sense of how this works. I will probably be able to do it this week-end already, time permitting.

I am going to try a -0.020V offset (DVID) next.

This is actually my son's PC that he and I built together. I try to balance the time between him playing and running stress tests while we overclock.

 

[grimsin]

On my computer, nothing shows right it doesn't see my overclock CPU, my vcore is a constant .6v lol, every graph is wack.

 

[burnhamjs]

On my computer, nothing shows right it doesn't see my overclock CPU, my vcore is a constant .6v lol, every graph is wack.

That is odd. I use CPU-Z and HWMonitor for monitoring and OCCT for stress testing - but as OCCT outputs the graphs I thought I'd post.

 

[grimsin]

Your graphs look fine, just mine that are messed

 

[burnhamjs]

idk how your geting occt to read accurately, none of the graphs show correctly for me.

I must say, the values threw me off as well - can't make sense of the results - that's why I prefer to perform my own tests.

Your graphs look fine, just mine that are messed

Okay, thanks grisim. Considering philipew comment I wasn't sure if you guys saw something in the graphs that didn't make sense. Everything looked good to me.

 

[philipew]

idk how your geting occt to read accurately, none of the graphs show correctly for me.

I must say, the values threw me off as well - can't make sense of the results - that's why I prefer to perform my own tests.

what values are throwing you off?

Mostly VCore.What is your VID, the one you apply your offset to? It should be higher than VCore in your case.

 

[burnhamjs]

Mostly VCore.What is your VID, the one you apply your offset to? It should be higher than VCore in your case.

In most tests my VID was 1.2V, but it's not as simple as subtracting VID from Vcore.

I recommend setting CPU Vcore to NORMAL with a +0.000V Dynamic Voltage (DVID) for an offset to see what CPU-Z reports for Vcore. Then adjust the Dynamic voltage (DVID) offset from this number.

For example - if you get a Vcore of 1.308V with CPU Vcore in NORMAL and a +0.000V DVID, but you need a Vcore of 1.355V. Subtract 1.308 from 1.355 and you get 0.047. Now set DVID to +0.045 and see how that works.

 

[philipew]

As I said on the other thread (http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-2970985/safe-vcore-6600k-tips/page-2.html#19211061):

The same thing happens to me. I can get "Normal" and +0.000 V working but only at stock 3.5 GHz (not great). The moment I put in the CPU Clock multiplier (46), even with absolutely nothing else changed, it no longer boots. I tried multiple combinations but even a complete stock reset (3.5 GHz) and "Relax OC" for the memory (also unchanged at stock 2133 MHz) offers no more booting. Just bad luck I suppose.

Here is the method I had in mind, wich I think is sound (the values are for illustrative purposes only of course) - I wrote it on the back of an envelope while sitting on the plane:
1. Go to the BIOS of your already stable overclocked CPU (e.g. 4.6 GHz OC and VCore value of 1.344 V)
2. Set CPU Vcore to “Normal”, the stock voltage recommended by Intel, based on the current settings
3. Keep “Dynamic Vcore(DVID)” (which lights up just under) unchanged at its default value of +0.000V (just enter 0.000)
4. Save (F10) then completely shut down (not just a restart) to make sure that “Normal” is applied to VCore
5. Back in Windows, read the “Normal” VCore value (e.g. 1.368) via CPUID HWMonitor and/or CPU-Z
6. Go back to the BIOS
7. To keep your existing OC running at 1.344 V, offset the Dynamic Vcore(DVID) by the right amount:
8. - Lower “Dynamic Vcore(DVID)” using an offset of -0.024 to reach 1.344 V (= 1.368 V – 0.024 V)
9. - Save (F10) then completely shut down (not just a restart) to make sure that the offset is fully applied
10. Back in Windows you will still be at 4.6 GHz, but with VCore “idle” at 0.804 V and VCore “load” at 1.344 V

I know that LLC (Load Line Calibration) can also be disabled if it interferes, but in my case it makes no difference - no boot.

What do you think with your "hands-on" experience with DVID Offset? Shouldn't this method work? Am I missing something?

 

[burnhamjs]

The same thing happens to me. I can get "Normal" and +0.000 V working but only at stock 3.5 GHz (not great). The moment I put in the CPU Clock multiplier (46), even with absolutely nothing else changed, it no longer boots. I tried multiple combinations but even a complete stock reset (3.5 GHz) and "Relax OC" for the memory (also unchanged at stock 2133 MHz) offers no more booting. Just bad luck I suppose.

Here is the method I had in mind, which I think is sound (the values are for illustrative purposes only of course) - I wrote it on the back of an envelope while sitting on the plane:
1. Go to the BIOS of your already stable overclocked CPU (e.g. 4.6 GHz OC and VCore value of 1.344 V)
2. Set CPU Vcore to “Normal”, the stock voltage recommended by Intel, based on the current settings
3. Keep “Dynamic Vcore(DVID)” (which lights up just under) unchanged at its default value of +0.000V (just enter 0.000)
4. Save (F10) then completely shut down (not just a restart) to make sure that “Normal” is applied to VCore
5. Back in Windows, read the “Normal” VCore value (e.g. 1.368) via CPUID HWMonitor and/or CPU-Z
6. Go back to the BIOS
7. To keep your existing OC running at 1.344 V, offset the Dynamic Vcore(DVID) by the right amount:
8. - Lower “Dynamic Vcore(DVID)” using an offset of -0.024 to reach 1.344 V (= 1.368 V – 0.024 V)
9. - Save (F10) then completely shut down (not just a restart) to make sure that the offset is fully applied
10. Back in Windows you will still be at 4.6 GHz, but with VCore “idle” at 0.804 V and VCore “load” at 1.344 V

I know that LLC (Load Line Calibration) can also be disabled if it interferes, but in my case it makes no difference - no boot.

What do you think with your "hands-on" experience with DVID Offset? Shouldn't this method work? Am I missing something?

philipew - while I don't think we have found a definite answer, there is one additional step that I recommend adding which may or may not be contributing to my success as well as ZEBuckeye81's. (basically going from AUTO to NORMAL instead of going from a manual vcore to NORMAL.)

1. Go to the BIOS of your already stable overclocked CPU (e.g. 4.6 GHz OC and VCore value of 1.344 V) and set Vcore to AUTO.

1a. Save (F10) then completely shut down (not just a restart) to make sure that “AUTO” is applied to VCore

 

[philipew]

The same thing happens to me. I can get "Normal" and +0.000 V working but only at stock 3.5 GHz (not great). The moment I put in the CPU Clock multiplier (46), even with absolutely nothing else changed, it no longer boots. I tried multiple combinations but even a complete stock reset (3.5 GHz) and "Relax OC" for the memory (also unchanged at stock 2133 MHz) offers no more booting. Just bad luck I suppose.

Here is the method I had in mind, which I think is sound (the values are for illustrative purposes only of course) - I wrote it on the back of an envelope while sitting on the plane:
1. Go to the BIOS of your already stable overclocked CPU (e.g. 4.6 GHz OC and VCore value of 1.344 V)
2. Set CPU Vcore to “Normal”, the stock voltage recommended by Intel, based on the current settings
3. Keep “Dynamic Vcore(DVID)” (which lights up just under) unchanged at its default value of +0.000V (just enter 0.000)
4. Save (F10) then completely shut down (not just a restart) to make sure that “Normal” is applied to VCore
5. Back in Windows, read the “Normal” VCore value (e.g. 1.368) via CPUID HWMonitor and/or CPU-Z
6. Go back to the BIOS
7. To keep your existing OC running at 1.344 V, offset the Dynamic Vcore(DVID) by the right amount:
8. - Lower “Dynamic Vcore(DVID)” using an offset of -0.024 to reach 1.344 V (= 1.368 V – 0.024 V)
9. - Save (F10) then completely shut down (not just a restart) to make sure that the offset is fully applied
10. Back in Windows you will still be at 4.6 GHz, but with VCore “idle” at 0.804 V and VCore “load” at 1.344 V

I know that LLC (Load Line Calibration) can also be disabled if it interferes, but in my case it makes no difference - no boot.

What do you think with your "hands-on" experience with DVID Offset? Shouldn't this method work? Am I missing something?

philipew - while I don't think we have found a definite answer, there is one additional step that I recommend adding which may or may not be contributing to my success as well as ZEBuckeye81's. (basically going from AUTO to NORMAL instead of going from a manual vcore to NORMAL.)

1. Go to the BIOS of your already stable overclocked CPU (e.g. 4.6 GHz OC and VCore value of 1.344 V) and set Vcore to AUTO.

1a. Save (F10) then completely shut down (not just a restart) to make sure that “AUTO” is applied to VCore

It was difficult to get it to go into the "Auto" mode (3 attempts), then it took several more shutdown/restart sessions to get the "Normal" to stick. From there I never got Windows to complete its run. It would stop on the blue window (black background), with or without a few turning dots underneath, then freeze. On other attempts it would write under the blue window: "PREPARING AUTOMATIC REPAIR" (no turning dots) then feeze. It never got any further than that.. I must have tried a good dozen times. In the end I was afraid to cause problems in Windows (corruption, etc.). But after the last trial, when I restarted with my saved OC settings, it came back as before. There must be something in my settings. They also more extensive than yours. I will publish them later so that you can have a look. Maybe I should simplify them....

 

[burnhamjs]

It was difficult to get it to go into the "Auto" mode (3 attempts), then it took several more shutdown/restart sessions to get the "Normal" to stick. From there I never got Windows to complete its run. It would stop on the blue window (black background), with or without a few turning dots underneath, then freeze. On other attempts it would write under the blue window: "PREPARING AUTOMATIC REPAIR" (no turning dots) then feeze. It never got any further than that.. I must have tried a good dozen times. In the end I was afraid to cause problems in Windows (corruption, etc.). But after the last trial, when I restarted with my saved OC settings, it came back as before. There must be something in my settings. They also more extensive than yours. I will publish them later so that you can have a look. Maybe I should simplify them....

Wow - yea, I didn't have those kind of issues. I have never had any issues going between a manual Vcore and AUTO Vcore. What BIOS are you running?

 

[philipew]

It was difficult to get it to go into the "Auto" mode (3 attempts), then it took several more shutdown/restart sessions to get the "Normal" to stick. From there I never got Windows to complete its run. It would stop on the blue window (black background), with or without a few turning dots underneath, then freeze. On other attempts it would write under the blue window: "PREPARING AUTOMATIC REPAIR" (no turning dots) then feeze. It never got any further than that.. I must have tried a good dozen times. In the end I was afraid to cause problems in Windows (corruption, etc.). But after the last trial, when I restarted with my saved OC settings, it came back as before. There must be something in my settings. They also more extensive than yours. I will publish them later so that you can have a look. Maybe I should simplify them....

Wow - yea, I didn't have those kind of issues. I have never had any issues going between a manual Vcore and AUTO Vcore. What BIOS are you running?

I am using the latest F6 BIOS (this build is only 6 months old) but likely gave up on this "DVID Offset" VCore and further trying to get it doesn't seem worth it IMO. In the end, it doesn't offer anywhere near the level of flexibility I was hoping for with regard to the "load" VCore value as it still remains on the 12mV range values (... 1.260, 1.272, 1.284, 1.296, 1.308, 1.320, 1.332, 1.344, 1.356, 1.368, 1.380, 1.392, 1.404, 1.416, 1.428, 1.440, etc...) and possibly (as it has been mentioned in various posts) even without being able to return to the "before DVID offset" perfectly stable "load" VCore (like you now at 1.296 V instead of your previously stable 1.284 V).

I was hoping to tune the "load" value within the operating 12 mV voltage range by slightly lowering it, like setting it to 1.280 V instead of 1.284 V, even if it's a minute drop. The significant DVID offset drop of over 0.5 V in VCore is still good (don't get me wrong), but unfortunately applies solely to the "idle" voltage. At idle, the current is significantly (immensely) lower than under load. The resulting power (W = V x A) reduction is therefore extremely low. And power is what we are paying at a few cents per kW/H. The corresponding temp reduction (at idle) is therefore negligible. What I am after is temp reduction "under load". What's more, besides saving a handful of coins every year, this setting of VCore to "Normal" (DVID offset) doesn't bring any gain in CPU performance.

I am used to setting BIOS parameters to "Normal" like I did for VCCIO, VCCSA, and PCH (all three at "Normal" in my BIOS). This has a (small) positive effect under load by reducing the overall power consumption (and therefore temp). As we know, "Normal" is no good for memory which is better left at "Relax OC". What I mean is I am not convinced that the benefits outweigh the downside of using DVID offset, and this may explain why Gigabyte do not promote it (not even a mention in their documentation), and its implementation is far from being "user friendly" (it looks like an afterthought at best). It's not used by "super" overclockers like TweakTown and others who provide overclocking guides. It certainly has a rather low profile within the Gigabyte user community and few even heard about it.

So I am still looking for "an elusive gem". For example, unlike the i7, the 6600K does not seem to have a BIOS parameter allowing to improve the quality of the current by increasing the performance level of the PWM phase control (e.g. Extreme Performance). This is the kind of thing I am looking for because a better current means a more stable OC which may allow for a reduction of "load" VCore to the 12mV range just below.

Anyway, thank you for sharing. It is an interesting feature of the Gigabyte landscape.