Hello everyone,

 

Since november 2011, I've been running my i5 2500K on 4.7GHz under 1.39 Volts without any problems (as far as I know). Since my Prime95 test passed, I've never had a BSOD or any strange crashes apart from a few CTDs in FSX that I'm not having anymore.

 

I am currently 90% happy with my performance. I'm using the VSync + 30 FPS tweak which creates big smoothness, but because the frame rate limiter inside FSX eats a bit of frames away there are still occasions where I cannot achieve 30 FPS. Still, FPS never drops below 25, ever. But, whenever I'm using the VSync tweak and FPS drops below 30, it has the exact opposite effect and creates big microstutters and makes FSX quite choppy despite achieving like 25 FPS.

 

So, I want to overclock even more just to minimize the chances of FPS dropping below 30. I always kept 1.4V and 75C as the safe limits. Well, because I have Intel Speed Step enabled, my CPU is running at 1.6 GHz and low voltage for 75% of the time. Only when I'm playing games (like FSX) or have demanding applications running, that's when my CPU goes to 4.7 GHz only, so in other words, it's not a 24/7 overclock. My temps on full load never exceed 70C despite my cheap (but very good)heatsink.

 

So I'm just wondering if it's safe to overclock even more to like 4.8 - 4.9 GHz. I'm probably going to need arond 1.45 - 1.48V for that. I know this will obviously degrade my CPU a bit but considering I'm only running at max speed for maybe 1-2 hours a day, this might not hurt too much, or will it?

 

I want my CPU to last AT LEAST until Haswell release, and preferably until Broadwell... Do you think it might last that long?

 

Maybe Intel Overclock Insurance is a good solution, but is this also applicable if the general warranty of the CPU has already expired?

You need to sign up for the Intel CPU warranty within one year of purchase. I signed up on day 364. I am no expert, and some will certainly chime in, but 1.48V would make me nervous even for an hour or two.

Ok, overclock warranty is no option then...

 

I just read that a motherboard with a good VRM design with 8 phases also magically helps you to reduce voltage. For example, somebody went from an Asus P8Z68-M Pro to an Asus Maximus V and managed to reduce his voltage from 1.4 to 1.33.

 

I can buy a new motherboard and an i7 2700K which will most likely allow me to overclock to 4.9 - 5.0 GHz but if Haswell will be good it's going to be a waste...

personally i find 70C a bit hot. iff you want to overclock further i would suggest you buy a little better CPU cooler. The small watercoolers bij Antec and Coolernaster aren't to expensive and will keep your CPU cooler without to much noise. You will defenitly need that when overclocking further. [or aircooling by a Scythe Mugen] But having said that, it doesn't seem to me you need any more overclocking. When framerates are as high as yours - even dropping to 25 that still is very nice for this monster called FSX.

personally i find 70C a bit hot. iff you want to overclock further i would suggest you buy a little better CPU cooler. The small watercoolers bij Antec and Coolernaster aren't to expensive and will keep your CPU cooler without to much noise. You will defenitly need that when overclocking further. [or aircooling by a Scythe Mugen] But having said that, it doesn't seem to me you need any more overclocking. When framerates are as high as yours - even dropping to 25 that still is very nice for this monster called FSX.

 

I'm not so worried about my temps, they never exceed 70C and maybe take 75C as a safe limit, even 80C is not too hot yet. And oh, if I want a watercooler this thing isn't gonna fit in my Antec 902 case. This case is the smallest case you can imagine for my hardware. A more expensive air cooler won't perform so much better too, maybe a couple of C. The Scythe Mugen coolers are usually the best ones for the price.

 

25 FPS might seem good to you, but I'd rather have a smooth and stable 15 FPS than a very choppy 25 FPS. As I said, this VSync tweak creates ultra smoothness but has the reverse effect when 30 FPS is not maintained. Also, Sandy Bridge systems are usually a bit more prone to microstutters despite the big FPS. On my older i7 860 system for example, I usually only achieved 15-20 FPS in PMDG planes but there was no microstuttering at all.

I hear you on the choppiness. It's pretty frustrating to have really good FPS but stutters too. But I don't get them automatically when I drop below the 30 FPS using Word Not Allowed's config. The only way I know I've dropped below 30 FPS is if I have the counter on, which I haven't done in ages.

So I'm just wondering if it's safe to overclock even more to like 4.8 - 4.9 GHz. I'm probably going to need arond 1.45 - 1.48V for that. I know this will obviously degrade my CPU a bit but considering I'm only running at max speed for maybe 1-2 hours a day, this might not hurt too much, or will it?

 

FWIT, I degraded an expensive Extreme processor and killed it. I was careful never to run the processor beyond it's 'absolute maximum voltage' rating on the data sheet--in fact I never ran it at this setting except for one boot up at 4.5Ghz. Though I wasn't using Speed Step, I ran two boot configs and for general computing ran at default settings so most of its 'on' time was at default everything. I had great temp control. If you think you are going to have meaningful improvements by adding another few % higher clock speeds I think you're gravely mistaken. You will get whatever the % increase in clock speed will do if you're lucky: so if you now run at 4.7 and go to 4.8, that's a 2% change. If you're seeing FSX run at 27fps in demanding situations now, you can expect 27.5fps at 4.8. If you want to keep your CPU you should rethink this as bang for buck it is not going to be there. Bragging rights is 98% of what you will accomplish w/ this. Just my opinion, but I think it's sound. Because I want my machine to make it to Haswell (or IB-E perhaps now if they solve the bad TIM issue) I decided to cool my jets and run the sim now on my replacement Q9650 at 3.72Ghz, and truth be told--it runs great within it limits, i.e. I respect its limits. By running at 3.72 instead of 4.2, the machine runs cool, and yes I lose a few frames but hey it's smooth, looks great, etc. It's a 12% difference, so that 27 fps goes down to 24 fps and it hardly matters.

Why don't you try the OC and fire up FSX and see if it fixes the stutters? If not, then you don't have to make a decision, if so then you have some thinking to do!

Hello everyone,

 

Since november 2011, I've been running my i5 2500K on 4.7GHz under 1.39 Volts without any problems (as far as I know). Since my Prime95 test passed, I've never had a BSOD or any strange crashes apart from a few CTDs in FSX that I'm not having anymore.

 

I am currently 90% happy with my performance. I'm using the VSync + 30 FPS tweak which creates big smoothness, but because the frame rate limiter inside FSX eats a bit of frames away there are still occasions where I cannot achieve 30 FPS. Still, FPS never drops below 25, ever. But, whenever I'm using the VSync tweak and FPS drops below 30, it has the exact opposite effect and creates big microstutters and makes FSX quite choppy despite achieving like 25 FPS.

 

So, I want to overclock even more just to minimize the chances of FPS dropping below 30. I always kept 1.4V and 75C as the safe limits. Well, because I have Intel Speed Step enabled, my CPU is running at 1.6 GHz and low voltage for 75% of the time. Only when I'm playing games (like FSX) or have demanding applications running, that's when my CPU goes to 4.7 GHz only, so in other words, it's not a 24/7 overclock. My temps on full load never exceed 70C despite my cheap (but very good)heatsink.

 

So I'm just wondering if it's safe to overclock even more to like 4.8 - 4.9 GHz. I'm probably going to need arond 1.45 - 1.48V for that. I know this will obviously degrade my CPU a bit but considering I'm only running at max speed for maybe 1-2 hours a day, this might not hurt too much, or will it?

 

I want my CPU to last AT LEAST until Haswell release, and preferably until Broadwell... Do you think it might last that long?

 

Maybe Intel Overclock Insurance is a good solution, but is this also applicable if the general warranty of the CPU has already expired?

 

Okay, ask yourself a question. Be logical. How much extra performance will you gain for such a minor increase in CPU frequency???

 

The answer is absolutely minimal!

 

So, therefore, why on Earth would you want to push your CPU to the absolute max, for a microscopic inincrease in performance. You will be lucky if you get one, maybe two frames per second.

 

Simply tweak your FSX sliders, and you will gain the same increase in performance and smoothness, or more, and probably not even notice the reduction in image quality.

 

If you want to "minimise the chances of dropping below 30" adjust your sliders! Better that than pushing your CPU to the max.

 

As for the Vsync tweak, many love it, I know. But I don't use it at all, and don't have an issue with stutters. So don't just accept the wisdom of others, test for yourself. I know for example, from my testing, that the Vsync tweak can introduce stutters on my system.

 

Consider my case. I DON'T have sliders high, and I don't have detailed payware airports, and I sit in the NGX, at EGLL, in bad REX weather at 44 frames per second... and very, very rarely do I see any kind of stutter. I tell you this, so you can see the other side of the coin, and thus appreciate difference between excessive slider settings, and sensible slider settings. The difference between overloading the sim with ultra heavy payware airport titles, and not doing so. And don't think my sim doesn't look good. It looks great with REX, GEX and UTX. Some sliders I have high, some I don't.

 

To be honest, if you can't get excellent performance, very good frame rate, and minimal stutters from the sim at 4.7 GHz, then perhaps you are asking too much from an archaic title like FSX.

 

Just my opinion. :smile:

Okay, ask yourself a question. Be logical. How much extra performance will you gain for such a minor increase in CPU frequency???

 

The answer is absolutely minimal!

 

So, therefore, why on Earth would you want to push your CPU to the absolute max, for a microscopic inincrease in performance. You will be lucky if you get one, maybe two frames per second.

 

Simply tweak your FSX sliders, and you will gain the same increase performance and smoothness, or more, and probably not even notice the reduction in image quality.

 

Consider my case. I DON'T have sliders high, and I don't have detailed payware airports, and I sit in the NGX, at EGLL, in bad REX weather at 44 frames per second... and very, very rarely do I see any kind of stutter. I tell you this, so you can see the other side of the coin, and thus appreciate difference between excessive slider settings, and sensible slider settings. The difference between overloading the sim with ultra heavy payware airport titles, and not doing so.

 

To be honest, if you can't get excellent performance, very good frame rate, and lack of stutters from the sim at 4.7 GHz, then perhaps you are asking too much from an archaic title like FSX.

 

Just my opinion. :smile:

Okay, ask yourself a question. Be logical. How much extra performance will you gain for such a minor increase in CPU frequency???

 

The answer is absolutely minimal!

 

So, therefore, why on Earth would you want to push your CPU to the absolute max, for a microscopic inincrease in performance. You will be lucky if you get one, maybe two frames per second.

 

Simply tweak your FSX sliders, and you will gain the same increase performance and smoothness, or more, and probably not even notice the reduction in image quality.

 

Consider my case. I DON'T have sliders high, and I don't have detailed payware airports, and I sit in the NGX, at EGLL, in bad REX weather at 44 frames per second... and very, very rarely do I see any kind of stutter. I tell you this, so you can see the other side of the coin, and thus appreciate difference between excessive slider settings, and sensible slider settings. The difference between overloading the sim with ultra heavy payware airport titles, and not doing so.

 

To be honest, if you can't get excellent performance, very good frame rate, and lack of stutters from the sim at 4.7 GHz, then perhaps you are asking too much from an archaic title like FSX.

 

Just my opinion. :smile:

 

Like the Rolling Stone song, I cant always get what you want. Be happy with 4.5 and call it day

Do you guys really think I would ask this question if I didn't know what performance increase it would give? In the beginning I ran 4.5 GHz for a while, and after going to 4.7 I got 10-15% more. Might not seem like much. But imagine taxiing on a big payware airport in the PMDG 737NGX using the VSync tweak with 30 FPS locked, but you get only 28 FPS. Then you'll microstutters. Then 4.8 GHz might give just that little bit extra headroom I need.

 

If it really wouldn't make a difference, nobody would overclock anymore.

 

And Martin, you might not get stutters at 44 FPS, but so didn't I at my old i7 860 system. But as I said, the Sandy Bridge system is much more prone to microstuttering despite the big FPS. There is reason, why people adore the VSync tweak so much...

 

My question was not "Will this give extra performacne?", no my question was, will it be safe to overclock further.

Arjen, you're right, sometimes that last little bit can make the difference. It must be frustrating that nobody is addressing the question...

Arjen, you're right, sometimes that last little bit can make the difference. It must be frustrating that nobody is addressing the question...

 

I'm used to that anyway as it happens on nearly every forum. You make a topic and one person takes note of one single word or sentence you said, and makes that the new topic, lol.

Do you guys really think I would ask this question if I didn't know what performance increase it would give? In the beginning I ran 4.5 GHz for a while, and after going to 4.7 I got 10-15% more. Might not seem like much. But imagine taxiing on a big payware airport in the PMDG 737NGX using the VSync tweak with 30 FPS locked, but you get only 28 FPS. Then you'll microstutters. Then 4.8 GHz might give just that little bit extra headroom I need.

 

If it really wouldn't make a difference, nobody would overclock anymore.

 

And Martin, you might not get stutters at 44 FPS, but so didn't I at my old i7 860 system. But as I said, the Sandy Bridge system is much more prone to microstuttering despite the big FPS. There is reason, why people adore the VSync tweak so much...

 

My question was not "Will this give extra performacne?", no my question was, will it be safe to overclock further.

 

Wy not if you have good temps, 1.45-1,48v for 10 months you ar not over 1.5v

 

I understand your point Arjen

 

Its one thing to tune the sliders and one thing to tune the system power.

 

To get most out of Fsx you need both

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm used to that anyway as it happens on nearly every forum. You make a topic and one person takes note of one single word or sentence you said, and makes that the new topic, lol.

 

Read my post fully.

 

 

Its one thing to tune the sliders and one thing to tune the system power.

 

To get most out of Fsx you need both

 

Of course you do, precisely why I overclock and behave sensibly with sliders. The OP most definately has the option of making a "minor" adjustment to his sliders, to gain the "minor" improvement he desires. After all, we are talking about a small improvement that's required.

 

Is it logical to increase CPU degradation unnecessarily when there's a feasible alternative, that's quick and easy and has no risks?

 

Of course, a minor tweak to a slider or two, isn't as glamorous as a high overclock, but some times we need to consider whether overclocking is a rational alternative or not.

 

I'll leave you to decide.

 

If you agree with me, I'm happy.

If you don't agree with me, i'm happy.

 

But at least i've given the OP an alternative to consider.

 

Good luck.