[SOLVED] My 9600K was stable and now it is not

ghezziryan

Commendable
Jul 19, 2018
13
0
1,520
I have a kraken x62 cooler and my 9600k at 5.0ghz 1.4v, it ran without a problem for two days, then, during a skyrim session, it randomly blue screened. I was scared I had degraded the chip, but then I remembered how my Realbench test was just barely passing with a 15 minute test. So I backed my clock down to 4.9ghz at 1.34v and I ran the test for 3 hours and it was fine. Did I damage my cpu and should I go above 1.4 to get 5ghz?
 
Solution
... kraken x62 ... 9600k ... should I go above 1.4 to get 5ghz?

ghezziryan,

My esteemed colleague, Darkbreeze, is correct, as is mdd1963. Further, you've made no mention of Core temperatures or ambient temperature, both of which can contribute to instabilities, as well as excessive Core voltage.

Overclocking is always limited by two factors; voltage and temperature. Although "Throttle" temperature for your 9600K is 100°C, you should never allow your CPU to approach its Core temperature "limit". The consensus among well informed and highly experienced reviewers, system builders expert overclockers and Intel Engineers is that it's prudent to observe a reasonable thermal...
No, you shouldn't. What do you think that extra 100mhz is really buying you? Not much, that's what. If you have to increase the voltage more than 1.4v to get it stable, then it is not worth it. At 1.4v you are already at the very edge of what we'd consider safe, and going beyond that is going to definitely take you into electromigration and VT shift territory for long term use. Possibly even for short term use depending on what it takes to get it stable.

Few users can reliably, and stably run full time, all core 5Ghz overclocks on Coffee lake without a flagship motherboard, only two DIMMs, substantially excellent cooling and/or a delid.

If your system is stable at 4.9Ghz with 1.34v, I'd consider that fortunate, considering the stock all core boost is only 4.3Ghz, and call it a day.

Determining that it IS stable, requires a hell of a lot more than a 15 minute run of Realbench though. Try 8 hours, minimum. Full procedures can be found here:

 
  • Like
Reactions: CompuTronix
No, you shouldn't. What do you think that extra 100mhz is really buying you? Not much, that's what. If you have to increase the voltage more than 1.4v to get it stable, then it is not worth it. At 1.4v you are already at the very edge of what we'd consider safe, and going beyond that is going to definitely take you into electromigration and VT shift territory for long term use. Possibly even for short term use depending on what it takes to get it stable.

Few users can reliably, and stably run full time, all core 5Ghz overclocks on Coffee lake without a flagship motherboard, only two DIMMs, substantially excellent cooling and/or a delid.

If your system is stable at 4.9Ghz with 1.34v, I'd consider that fortunate, considering the stock all core boost is only 4.3Ghz, and call it a day.

Determining that it IS stable, requires a hell of a lot more than a 15 minute run of Realbench though. Try 8 hours, minimum. Full procedures can be found here:

Do you think that I experienced degradation on the second day or that the OC wasn’t stable to begin with (it barely passed the 15 minute test as each increase in voltage would allow me for 4 more minutes without crashing) Also, I heard that new CPUs take time to settle in and can become unstable after a couple days?
 
There are many cases of 'must have 5 GHz!' , because any less, and, 'the CPU and myself are failures!'

Just out of curiosity, how does one determine that something barely passed a 15 minute test? (Did it fail at 10 or 13 minutes several times previously, and once it passed 15 minutes once with no changes in settings, it was called good/'stable'?) :)

Take the 4.9 GHz and call it success.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CompuTronix
Do you think that I experienced degradation on the second day or that the OC wasn’t stable to begin with (it barely passed the 15 minute test as each increase in voltage would allow me for 4 more minutes without crashing) Also, I heard that new CPUs take time to settle in and can become unstable after a couple days?
No, I don't think that. I think that it was never stable to begin with. I think that you lack the necessary experience to be taking your overclock to this level in the first place with a piece of hardware that even experienced overclockers have a very difficult time getting stable at the level you are trying to configure it at.

And whoever told you that new CPUs take time to "settle in and can become unstable after a couple of days" is somebody you should add to your short list of people to NEVER listen to EVER again, because they are a complete (Insert word here I can't use) idiot.

Personally, if you can get it stable at 4.9Ghz with 1.34v, and it can pass the full test regiment I outlined in my overclocking guide for beginners, I'd say quit while you're ahead.

And, if you want it to LAST a while, I'd recommend that you actually drop the all core OC down to 4.8Ghz, see what voltage you can get it stable with at that frequency, and then after you verify stability, add another .005 to .01v and call it a good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CompuTronix
... kraken x62 ... 9600k ... should I go above 1.4 to get 5ghz?

ghezziryan,

My esteemed colleague, Darkbreeze, is correct, as is mdd1963. Further, you've made no mention of Core temperatures or ambient temperature, both of which can contribute to instabilities, as well as excessive Core voltage.

Overclocking is always limited by two factors; voltage and temperature. Although "Throttle" temperature for your 9600K is 100°C, you should never allow your CPU to approach its Core temperature "limit". The consensus among well informed and highly experienced reviewers, system builders expert overclockers and Intel Engineers is that it's prudent to observe a reasonable thermal margin below Throttle temperature for ultimate stability, performance and longevity.

Here's the nominal operating range for Core temperature:

Core temperatures above 85°C are not recommended.

Core temperatures below 80°C are ideal.

PdancCI.jpg


We know that over time, excessive voltage and heat causes accelerated "Electromigration". Processors have multiple layers of hundreds of millions of microscopic nanometer scale components. Electromigration erodes fragile circuit pathways and transistor junctions which results in the degradation of overclock stability.

Here's the Maximum Recommended Vcore per Microarchitecture from 14 to 65 nanometers since 2006:

qmcaTkx.jpg


Although your initial overclock may be stable, degradation doesn't appear until later, when increasingly frequent blue-screen crashes indicate a progressive loss of stability. The more excessive the levels of voltage and heat and the longer they're sustained determines how long until transistor degradation destabilizes your overclock. Extreme overvolting can cause degradation in minutes, but a sensible overclock remains stable for years.

Each Microarchitecture also has a "Degradation Curve".

Here's how the Degradation Curves correspond to Maximum Recommended Vcore for 14 nanometer 5th through 10th Generation, which differs from 22 nanometer 3rd and 4th Generation:

iQuLSzu.jpg


Degradation Curves are relative to the term “Vt (Voltage threshold) Shift” which is expressed in millivolts (mv). Users can not monitor Vt Shift. With respect to overclocking and overvolting, Vt Shift basically represents the potential for permanent loss of normal transistor performance. Excessively high Core voltage drives excessively high Power consumption and Core temperatures, all of which contribute to gradual Vt Shift over time. Core voltages that impose high Vt Shift values are not recommended.

Here’s an example of a CPU Voltage / Frequency Curve:

6MNWMZw.jpg


To achieve the highest overclock, keep in mind that for your final 100 MHz increase, a corresponding increase in Core voltage of about 50 millivolts (0.050) is needed to maintain stability. If 70 millivolts (0.070) or more is needed for the next stable 100 MHz increase, it means you're attempting to overclock your processor beyond its capability.

With high-end cooling you might reach your Maximum Recommended Vcore limit before you reach the ideal Core temperature limit at 80°C. With low-end cooling you’ll reach 80°C before your Vcore limit. Regardless, whichever overclocking limit you reach first is where you should stop.

Overclocking is not an instant gratification endeavor; there's a learning curve involved, which when carefully followed, will yield successful results.

Read: CPU overclocking guide and tutorial for beginners
Read: Intel CPU Temperature Guide 2020

Remember to keep overclocking in perspective. For example, the difference between 5.0 and 4.9 GHz is only about 2%, which has no noticeable impact on overall system performance. It simply isn’t worth pushing your processor beyond recommended Core voltage and Core temperature limits just to squeeze out another 100 MHz.

You have some homework to do.

CT :sol:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darkbreeze
Solution