[SOLVED] Should I try to push my 8700k to 5.1GHZ with these temperatures?

[testtube5]

My Full Build is in my signature.

I overclocked the 8700k to 5.0GHZ with the following settings;

MCE Disabled
AVX Offset – 3
Sync Cores/Ratio – 50
SVID DIsabled
Enter External Digi → Load-Line – Level 6
Enter Internal CPU → Set Long/Short to Max
Core Cache Limit Max – Max
Min CPU Cache Ratio – 42
Max CPU Cache Ratio – 42
BCLK Adaptive Voltage – Always Disable (What is BCLK Adaptive Voltage?)
CPU Core/Cache Voltage – Manual
^Under This → Override – 1.350V

I ran AIDA64 for about an hour and the highest temperature I saw was 78C, average around 73C give or take.

I haven't tried to lower voltage to see if anything lower can also be stable at 5.0GHZ so the actual temperatures may be a bit lower.

I also did these tests with the side panel on, while running the 3000RPM Noctua Industrial Fans at 2000RPM.

I have no problem turning them up to 3000RPM (even permanently) as I do not care about noise. Just performance.

I've been told that 5.1GHZ usually isn't achievable without delidding. However, I am unwilling to do this at this time.

What I do on my computer is extremely CPU and RAM intensive (No need for a good graphic's card, etc).

What do you guys think? Is it safe to try to push to 5.1GHZ at those temperatures, or should I leave it at that?

 

[diellur]

I'd not be so concerned about the temps as I would the voltage. You don't want to go above 1.4V if you can help it, especially for extended usage. Given you're below that and the temps are acceptable, I'd be inclined to try to see how far I can go.

Bear in mind Intel offers an overclocking guarantee, so if you really want to go for it and have this then you don't have much to lose really.

 

[testtube5]

I'd not be so concerned about the temps as I would the voltage. You don't want to go above 1.4V if you can help it, especially for extended usage. Given you're below that and the temps are acceptable, I'd be inclined to try to see how far I can go.

Bear in mind Intel offers an overclocking guarantee, so if you really want to go for it and have this then you don't have much to lose really.

Well before I overclocked, for some reason the VCore was jumping up to 1.42 right out of the box. No idea why.

I'll stay at 1.4 or lower and see how far I can push it, slow and steady. Pretty sure I'd rather just stick to 5.0 if I can't push higher with crazy voltages than spend whatever it is for an OC warranty.

Question though, if voltage is the issue rather than temperature, why do people delid their CPUs to push higher OCs considering all that does is help with temperatures?

 

[diellur]

Question though, if voltage is the issue rather than temperature, why do people delid their CPUs to push higher OCs considering all that does is help with temperatures?

In some cases, I expect people are at <1.4V but hitting thermal limits due to the poor heat conduction from beneath the IHS. In that scenario, they're temp limited before voltage becomes an issue, hence delidding gives them more scope for pushing things further.

 

[Dragos Manea]

Also lowering cpu temperature can lead to a lower voltage for the core. The lower the temperature the more efficient is the power transfer.

 

[nikoli707]

2% overclock isn't worth the vcore. raise your cache and avx offset though as im sure you still have headroom there.

 

[urbancamper]

I am assuming you tried to achieve your current overclock with a lower vcore, and it was not stable? I realize your want to try 5.1ghz, but to do it on air with the voltage your already using plus what I suspect your will need(somewhere just shy of 1.4), the temps are going to take a tremendous jump upward. You would be better served to either get a 360 aio, or just be happy with what you have. The difference you will get going from 5.0 to 5.1 is minor and not worth the extra stress on your system.

 

[testtube5]

I am assuming you tried to achieve your current overclock with a lower vcore, and it was not stable? I realize your want to try 5.1ghz, but to do it on air with the voltage your already using plus what I suspect your will need(somewhere just shy of 1.4), the temps are going to take a tremendous jump upward. You would be better served to either get a 360 aio, or just be happy with what you have. The difference you will get going from 5.0 to 5.1 is minor and not worth the extra stress on your system.

I actually did not test to see if 1.35v was the lowest voltage that would allow 5.0ghz to be stable. I simply followed a guide for all those settings. I don't know very much about overclocking.

Oh, and like I said my computer specs are in my signature, I'm using the h115i.

Should I try to see the lowest voltage I can get 5.0GHZ stable at, and then come back and tell you guys what it is so you can suggest where to go from there?

 

[testtube5]

I am assuming you tried to achieve your current overclock with a lower vcore, and it was not stable? I realize your want to try 5.1ghz, but to do it on air with the voltage your already using plus what I suspect your will need(somewhere just shy of 1.4), the temps are going to take a tremendous jump upward. You would be better served to either get a 360 aio, or just be happy with what you have. The difference you will get going from 5.0 to 5.1 is minor and not worth the extra stress on your system.

I actually did not test to see if 1.35v was the lowest voltage that would allow 5.0ghz to be stable. I simply followed a guide for all those settings. I don't know very much about overclocking.

Oh, and like I said my computer specs are in my signature, I'm using the h115i.

Should I try to see the lowest voltage I can get 5.0GHZ stable at, and then come back and tell you guys what it is so you can suggest where to go from there?

Bumping this. I would like to safely get as much as I possibly can out of my CPU because my job depends on it.

If someone would be so kind as to tell me my what my next step should be (Read the quotes).

Thanks

 

[urbancamper]

You already told yourself find the lowest stable voltage for your current overclock. Then you can think about bumping up the multiplier and do the same process again.

 

[testtube5]

You already told yourself find the lowest stable voltage for your current overclock. Then you can think about bumping up the multiplier and do the same process again.

Well it was more of a question asking if that is what I should do but I suppose you just answered it there lol.

Thanks, I'll give it a shot in a day or two when I get some time and then post back to ask what my next step should be...I feel like I should still add that I'm so incredibly new at this it isn't even funny.

Couple questions in the meantime:

1. Earlier I mentioned that I copied those settings from a guide without knowing what any of them meant, and someone in this thread mentioned that although I may or may not have any more room for clock speed left, but they said I should try raising the cache and/or lowering AVX so...

1a: How do should I go about raising the cache? Just increment each 1 higher until I get something that is no longer stable or?...and...

1b: What does this setting do?

2. I was told that the AVX offset lowers CPU clock speed by x*100mhz under load. However, I assumed this meant only when the CPU was completely maxxed out at 100%. However, it's happening when I'm in games even at 50-60% load. So...is that what "under load" means? 50%? And also, why can't I just disable the offset. I'd like it to run at 5.0ghz permanently if I can.

 

[urbancamper]

Um leave the cache alone. It seems to me your making this more difficult then it has to be. This is how I overclocked my i5 8600k: Raised the multiplier to 50, Set LLC at 5(out of 10), Changed CPU Core/GT Voltage Mode to Adaptive+Offset Mode from auto, Found a cpu vcore that is stable in prime 95 and aida 64.

That was it. I did not mess with the cache or AVX.

 

[testtube5]

Um leave the cache alone. It seems to me your making this more difficult then it has to be. This is how I overclocked my i5 8600k: Raised the multiplier to 50, Set LLC at 5(out of 10), Changed CPU Core/GT Voltage Mode to Adaptive+Offset Mode from auto, Found a cpu vcore that is stable in prime 95 and aida 64.

That was it. I did not mess with the cache or AVX.

So, you're saying I should just be able to completely ignore AVX (Set it back to 0)? Just to clarify.

 

[urbancamper]

yes sir.

 

[testtube5]

yes sir.

Alright. Thanks for all the help man (And the rest of you).

I'll post back in a (couple) day(s) with some updates.

 

[Johan Kryger Haglert]

Was the 1.42 volt with MCE on?
Had you turned on XMP?
I wouldn't trust the motherboards on auto at all.
XMP on change SA and VCCIO voltages without saying anything. Simple changing RAM frequency got way higher voltage on RAM on an ASUS board too.
Complete grbage for all I care. I don't want a motherboard to destroy my processor.

If the voltages you mention are from settings in BIOS and hwmonitor/cpu-z then don't trust them as the actual voltages going to the processor. See the GamersNexus video about 1.2 -> 1.4 volt and destroying the CPU.

The question you ask can always be answered with no. There's good reasons to not even use the settings you use now. But in the end only you can decide. The Intel OC warranty/insurance cost 50 dollars.

For very important even higher demands of total compute power I would had gotten with a CPU with more cores and if it's just clock speed which matter and you earn money with it then of course maybe risking the CPU make economical sense to you.

 

[chrysalis]

I would just drop your max clock to your stable AVX clock, as you have an offset of 3 meaning I would set your clock to 4.7ghz with a 0 offset.

Me and someone else discovered that so much software triggers the offset, that its not even worth trying to get a higher non AVX mode, with resulting higher voltage/temps.

I would either get 5.0 or 4.8 stable with a 0 offset and leave it at that.

I also think 1.35v is high for a 24/7 overclock especially if its in fixed not offset mode, that cpu will degrade, usually actual voltage is higher than whats set and reported by software.

 

[urbancamper]

1.35 is fine for that cpu as long as the temps stay low. Max recommended vcore is 1.4v and the tmax is 100c which obviously you never want to get close to.
It is best to stay around 70c max.

Also that cpu will last for many years at 1.35v. Way more then the next upgrade beyond it.

 

[chrysalis]

Just to say there is no public data from intel about expected lifetime at specific voltages, even gamernexus admitted in a recent video "safe" voltages for new hardware when the data is not published is basically "guess work". Intel have not published safe voltages for coffee lake.

But there is reports on the internet (including this week on this form) of voltage degradation at or around 1.4v, also that AVX will spike voltage higher than whats set and the actual voltage is often higher than what software reports, hence my suggestion.

For reference my haswell has voltage degredated twice within 5 years at only 1.15v.

If you going to run 1.35v+ I would at least buy intels tuning warranty which covers damage caused by overclocking. (doesnt cover delidding).

https://click.intel.com/tuningplan/