Question Preferred overclock method?

instawookie

Commendable
Jun 13, 2021
128
24
1,585
Is any method better than another when it comes to overclocking? My guess is doing everything through bios is the safest route, however I'm intrigued with the other alternatives such as XTU or gigabytes software(most limited option) Also in my scenario is it even worth an overclock? Primary use is just a gaming rig with periodic 3dmark Timespy runs. It was suggested from a friend a simple under volt could get me some gains that aren't really needed, but if I got the hardware why not use it. I usually game on my 4k 144hz monitor and fps in COD and Forza Horizon 5 are pretty well stuck @ 144fps and seldom drop below 140.

Average temps during gaming GPU (55-60C) CPU ( 51-55C, with an occasional 60C spike)
Timespy averages 36400k GPU score and CPU usually is around 19200-19400 with an average temp of 61C

Rig specs

13700k
Gigabyte z690 aorus ultra
DDR5 5200
1200w evga platinum psu
H150i elite
gigabyte OC 4090
Samsung 980 Pro/970 plus m.2
Phantek G500A

Monitors Aorus FV43U
Gigabyte G27QC
 

Eximo

Titan
Ambassador
Not really worth it. The boost clocks on Intel and AMD are pretty much already at their peak. You can dump more power into them and get a 100 or 200Mhz, but you tend to sacrifice single core for all core speeds.

If the primary use case is gaming, leave it alone, or even set a lower power target to save a little excess heat output.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roland Of Gilead

zx128k

Reputable
There is a full guide here for the 13700k.

Intel Core i7-13700K: Conclusion

Alright, let us wrap this up.

The Core i7-13700K overclocking experience was a mixed bag.

On the upside, the 13700K shows huge overclocking potential. Hitting 6 GHz on all but one core and 5.7 GHz in all-core workloads is extremely impressive. Furthermore, I’m glad to see this overclocking potential can be extracted on even a low-end Z690 motherboard like the Torpedo EK X.

It was pretty neat to see that the LiteBlock concept worked well with Raptor Lake. The maximum VRM temperature during a Prime95 workload was less than 60 degrees Celsius.

On the downside, tuning the voltage remains quite a challenge. While the V/F points have improved from Alder Lake, the overclocking headroom of Raptor Lake warrants more flexibility. Since there are unused V/F points available, why not open these up to user configuration? That would help enthusiasts build their own V/F curve on top of the factory-fused curve.

However, I want to be clear: the minor downsides fade away compared to the significant upsides. Raptor Lake is a fantastic overclocking platform. I’m sure enthusiasts will find joy in pushing their 13700K to their limit.
 
Last edited:

zx128k

Reputable
Thanks for the guide, more than informative enough lol.

Note that different overclocking method give different results. As you can see OC Strategy #1: Unleashed Turbo + XMP 3.0 gives very little.
  • SuperPI 4M: +0.50%
  • Geekbench 5 (single): +2.24%
  • Geekbench 5 (multi): +8.06%
  • Cinebench R23 Single: +0.43%
  • Cinebench R23 Multi: +2.24%
  • CPU-Z V17.01.64 Single: +0.58%
  • CPU-Z V17.01.64 Multi: +0.18%
  • V-Ray 5: +3.92%
  • AI Benchmark: +7.09%
  • 3DMark Night Raid: +0.90%
  • CS:GO FPS Bench: +1.44%
  • Tomb Raider: +4.40%
  • Final Fantasy XV: +0.48%
3DMark CPU Profile scores at stock
  • CPU Profile 1 Thread: +0.18%
  • CPU Profile 2 Threads: +0.27%
  • CPU Profile 4 Threads: +0.45%
  • CPU Profile 8 Threads: +0.45%
  • CPU Profile 16 Threads: +1.54%
  • CPU Profile Max Threads: +2.11%
If you go the best way for his sample. OC Strategy #4: Manual + XMP 3.0
  • SuperPI 4M: +20.31%
  • Geekbench 5 (single): +16.72%
  • Geekbench 5 (multi): +16.08%
  • Cinebench R23 Single: +13.81%
  • Cinebench R23 Multi: +5.88%
  • CPU-Z V17.01.64 Single: +12.12%
  • CPU-Z V17.01.64 Multi: +8.18%
  • V-Ray 5: +12.20%
  • AI Benchmark: +21.94%
  • 3DMark Night Raid: +7.89%
  • CS:GO FPS Bench: +2.98%
  • Tomb Raider: +9.52%
  • Final Fantasy XV: +2.94%
Here are the 3DMark CPU Profile scores at stock
  • CPU Profile 1 Thread: +12.62%
  • CPU Profile 2 Threads: +13.03%
  • CPU Profile 4 Threads: +10.86%
  • CPU Profile 8 Threads: +9.29%
  • CPU Profile 16 Threads: +10.47%
  • CPU Profile Max Threads: +4.09%
With the right overclocking strategy you can get better performance but this is workload dependant. Note RAM is just XMP here. Aorus DDR5-6200 which can be a target for overclocking and getting even more performance. Its worth it to the right person who doesn't mind spending a lot of time and effort for >3% performance in games. Getting the DDR5 latency down as low as possible will net big gains with the overclock to the cpu. Basically high cache and tightened timings will give lower latency, very close to DDR4.

Intel Core i7-13700K: Conclusion

Alright, let us wrap this up.

The Core i7-13700K overclocking experience was a mixed bag.

On the upside, the 13700K shows huge overclocking potential. Hitting 6 GHz on all but one core and 5.7 GHz in all-core workloads is extremely impressive. Furthermore, I’m glad to see this overclocking potential can be extracted on even a low-end Z690 motherboard like the Torpedo EK X.

It was pretty neat to see that the LiteBlock concept worked well with Raptor Lake. The maximum VRM temperature during a Prime95 workload was less than 60 degrees Celsius.

On the downside, tuning the voltage remains quite a challenge. While the V/F points have improved from Alder Lake, the overclocking headroom of Raptor Lake warrants more flexibility. Since there are unused V/F points available, why not open these up to user configuration? That would help enthusiasts build their own V/F curve on top of the factory-fused curve.

However, I want to be clear: the minor downsides fade away compared to the significant upsides. Raptor Lake is a fantastic overclocking platform. I’m sure enthusiasts will find joy in pushing their 13700K to their limit.

Remember he is concluding based on a sample of one. It could be a lot of effort for little return.
 
Last edited:
Form my experience with current hardware, overclocking is more of a wash or a waste of time for more power consumption with little return in my opinion.

Wasn't like it was back 10 years ago, or even in the 90s, the 90s early 2000s was interesting and rewarding where 10% gains was considered great unlike today.

But yeah overclocking I would recommend you doing in the bios, software, well I've never had good luck with CPU or memory overclocking via software.
 

instawookie

Commendable
Jun 13, 2021
128
24
1,585
I think it has a place still in some situations, not so much necessarily mine just yet though. Currently my rig pretty well eats any game I throw at it other than the select few titles that are poorly optimized. Current 4k monitor is only 144hz and 43" which can be a little much for some games(alot of screen real-estate to grasp lol), and my next best option is to downsize my screen to like a Samsung g7 165hz or the g8 240hz 4k. Not buying either anytime soon, I'll wait for the price drops. But in the meantime I'm curious of the limits of the 4090 @ 4k. No point in buying a 240hz 4k if the 4090 can't push it, however as new monitors release maybe a 175hz or 190hz monitor may be in its grasp and I would need to overclock slightly to achieve those goals.
 

Eximo

Titan
Ambassador
Not really now. You can push like 500W through a GPU, but you only gain a tiny amount of performance and add a lot of unnecessary heating to the GPU.

They are basically selling overclocked GPUs, that is why the power requirements are so high. Setting lower power limits seems more worth it to me. Get 90% of the performance at nearly half the power requirements.
 

zx128k

Reputable
Basically even on a 10900k, you are messing with the v/f curve settings. With that you can set the LLC low at 4-5 (max is 8). It takes so long to get right, testing each point you change. For each point you have to run prime 95 small ffts and a full past takes 1 hour and 40 mins approx.

With that you can get the power draw down. Also you need to keep cache at stock. Cache speed increases cause a higher need for vcore and more power draw.

The end result is more performance but at great time expenditure.

Doing this and using voltage offset. I was able to get a SP63 10900k to 5.2GHz SSE and 5.1GHz AVX. Basically I had to tweak everything myself, reduce every bit of power draw I could. This way I could do prime 95 small ffts with AVX and not hit 100c. More 80's and low 90's.

This is for 200MHz over the motherboard's MCE and 100MHz over the AI overclock. What I get from the 100MHz in performance I lose from the reduction in cache speed from 47 to 43. This is because the lower cache means less vcore. 43 is stock.

I have a benchmark overclock that is Prime95 small fft/large fft stable (I guess I could 24/7 it) but I don't 24/7 that kind of overclock. The CPU-z result is the same. Lose some cpu in time spy but its far safer overclock.

There is performance to be had if you don't care about spending, a lot of time and effort.