Seeking advice with i9-10900K overclock

[TheFamilyMan 279]

9 hours ago, Tomaz Drnovsek said:

But does it work?

As mentioned it does, but using Offset voltage is a less than optimal way to go about it considering the alternatives available.

8 hours ago, martin-w said:

I don't think people give it a chance.

I did and found it lacking.  I consider the current Asus AI Overclock implementation as having potential but definitely in the realm of YMMV.

What is really bad is using XMP sets SA and IO voltages, if they are left at their default settings, at nasty high, and considered by some dangerous, levels.

[martin-w 3,234]

27 minutes ago, TheFamilyMan said:

 

What is really bad is using XMP sets SA and IO voltages, if they are left at their default settings, at nasty high, and considered by some dangerous, levels.

 

Huh... that's XMP, not the auto overclock software. 

[TheFamilyMan 279]

Hence that info is not in the same paragraph.  I guess I should have been a bit clearer on that point, but it's something people really got to know when using XMP.  Seeing those voltages around 1.3v was panic inducing for me.

[martin-w 3,234]

14 hours ago, TheFamilyMan said:

Hence that info is not in the same paragraph.  I guess I should have been a bit clearer on that point, but it's something people really got to know when using XMP.  Seeing those voltages around 1.3v was panic inducing for me.

 

Well yes, but 1.3 for SA and IO is actually a safe voltage for Intel.  The motherboard is changing SA and IO when you activate XMP to accommodate the higher RAM frequency. It's not the XMP profile itself that's doping it. And the motherboard manufacturer is probably aware of what a safe voltage is rather than the "some people" that consider it isn't. 

Can you lower it? Yes, but that doesn't mean the voltage the motherboard has set is dangerous. 

As for 5WO, I wrote about it in a post here. After I flashed to the latest BIOS it was very good indeed. As for the new AI Overclock, I'll test it when I finally build. 

Edited February 23, 2021 by martin-w

[TheFamilyMan 279]

Panic inducing was a bit of hyperbole, and even though you state 1.3v is withing Intel's voltage limit (whatever that really may be, for Intel has decided that the general public will not have access to the 10th gen CPU technical documentation), I would never recommend using that high a voltage, and I've yet to read anywhere about really needing that much even with massively OCed DDR4.  BTW, NickN points out this fact in his guide.

OK, yeah 5WO works, but as mentioned YMMV.  I got meh 4.8Ghz all core out of it with my i7 10700k.  Hand tuning got me 5.0Htz all core, and 5.2Ghz no HT.

Edited February 24, 2021 by TheFamilyMan

[martin-w 3,234]

39 minutes ago, TheFamilyMan said:

 and I've yet to read anywhere about really needing that much even with massively OCed DDR4. 

 

Yep, probably don't. Most people can back it down. Auto has to accommodate components that are lower down the rankings in the silicon lottery.

Just saying its safe. 

 

Quote

I got meh 4.8Ghz all core out of it with my i7 10700k.  Hand tuning got me 5.0Htz all core

 

Yep, like I said, before updating my BIOS it wasn't too good for me either. So there are variables at play. Tell you what though, given that overlocking a reassembly well balanced system is linear, that 200 MHz you obtained was a mere 4%. So at 30 frames per second that's a mere 1.2 frames per second. 🙂

[TheFamilyMan 279]

Well in that light, considering that the stock all core boost clock is 4.7, seeing a 4.8 OC isn't getting one much anyways.   When I first saw what Intel was doing with their 10th gen, it seemed to me that they decided to "pre-OC" out of the box.   I am just glad a little headroom was there for me to exploit.  Bottom line if you want to OC it, top end cooling is a must.  I could complain that my NH-D15s is a limiting factor, but I knew that before building my system.

In the end my 7/24 OC is 4.9.  Though that's a 2% loss as you mentioned, its lower voltage and temps are well worth the trade-off.  My 5.0 OC is little more than 6% faster than stock, 5.2 is 10% faster though without HT (yet only 4% faster than 5.0).  Most of this is peanuts when you think about it, almost not worth the bother.  But heck, when you pay for the best you want the best out of it...right?  (plus it's fun 😁)

Edited February 24, 2021 by TheFamilyMan

[martin-w 3,234]

Quote

Well in that light, considering that the stock all core boost clock is 4.7, seeing a 4.8 OC isn't getting one much anyways. When I first saw what Intel was doing with their 10th gen, it seemed to me that they decided to "pre-OC" out of the box.

 

Yep, that's precisely what Intel did.  Intel pushed the 10900K to the max to compete with AMD. Its pretty much overclocked out of the factory. So not much headroom remaining.  So yes, you are right. Overclocking isn't really worth it with AMD now either, in that if you keep them cool they overclock themselves, similar to GPU Boost for graphics cards.

 

Quote

I could complain that my NH-D15s is a limiting factor, but I knew that before building my system.

 

My favourite cooler. In fact I'll pick up a NH-D15S Chromax  for when I build my 10900K rig. The D15 is 8 degrees warmer than the very best AIO. So not huge really. I will overclock to see where the chip is in the silicon lottery, just for interest, but I won't bother to overclock it in normal use. As I said, just for fun, out of interest, I'll try out the AI Overclock for the Maximus XII Hero too.

I have most of the parts, just not the monitor, D15 and case. Case will be the Phanteks EvolvX when I get round to ordering. Not sure which monitor.

 

Quote

(plus it's fun 😁)

 

Precisely. 👍😁

Edited February 24, 2021 by martin-w

[TheFamilyMan 279]

The Asus Maximus bios ranks your cooler; my build's NH-D15s scores in the range of AIOs with a 63.  This scoring is a component of their AI 5WO.  One really nice bios feature is that you can set the max power, in watts, at which your cpu will automatically downclock, great for load level tuning your cpu with your cooler.  Out of frustration on the lack of concise information when setting up my OC, I wrote this guide on using Adaptive Mode when overclocking a 10th gen cpu.  This guide is a big departure from what was once done, possibly that's why NickN dismissed the info in it.

Edited February 25, 2021 by TheFamilyMan

[martin-w 3,234]

12 hours ago, TheFamilyMan said:

The Asus Maximus bios ranks your cooler; my build's NH-D15s scores in the range of AIOs with a 63.  This scoring is a component of their AI 5WO.  One really nice bios feature is that you can set the max power, in watts, at which your cpu will automatically downclock, great for load level tuning your cpu with your cooler.  

 

Yes, I read about that. It's what I mean when I say there are features available with the auto overclock that are quite useful. Something I used to do a while back with the old Asus Auto overclock software, was to use it as a starting point. Then I would tweak it to my liking beyond that point. 

The old Asus OC software was different to the new AI Overclock of course. Different in that it would overclock the same way a human would manually overclock. What it would do, was to nudge the frequency up till it crashed, then add a little voltage. It would do this until a stable overclock was reached. All the time monitoring temperature. It was a good system, I'm not sure why Asus changed it to the new AI "estimation"  system.

The new system doesn't overclock like the old auto OC, like a human would. Instead it refers to its algorithm and estimates what your system can "probably" do. It then monitors the system as you use it, watching for temperature and instability and tweaks the overclock as required. I think this why some people get into trouble with it. They assume the first ESTIMATE is the final overclock when it's not. They also fail to realise that its imperative to run plenty of stress tests plus your normal software prior to letting the AI Overclock do its thing. It needs that experience of your system before it can give you an accurate estimate and then a  stable overclock.

[Tomaz Drnovsek 440]

I followed NickNs guide and I successfully overclocked to 5.0GHz on all cores with HT on. Sadly I just lost the lottery too much and wasn't able to get past that without heating the CPU way too much. The 5.1GHz I thought it was stable at the beginning wasn't stable at all when I used the proper stress tests. With the Youtube methods I wasn't able to get it stable at 5.0GHz so that's why this guide really helped. I'm happy with 5.0GHz, it's a huge improvement over my old 4790k.

[martin-w 3,234]

2 hours ago, Tomaz Drnovsek said:

 when I used the proper stress tests. 

 

Which were the "proper" stress tests? 

 

[Tomaz Drnovsek 440]

18 minutes ago, martin-w said:

 

Which were the "proper" stress tests? 

 

OCCT Linpack and OCCT CPU Large data set, both run for an hour (I did it for an hour and a half).

Before I just used whatever prime95 and Cinebench were set by default which didn't stress the CPU nearly enough. That's why I was getting the temps in the 60s. When I selected OCCT Linpack or prime95 Small data set the temps went through the roof and I got BSOD almost immediately. Now I can run OCCT Linpack without any issues.

It's all in the guide.

[martin-w 3,234]

17 minutes ago, Tomaz Drnovsek said:

OCCT Linpack and OCCT CPU Large data set, both run for an hour (I did it for an hour and a half).

 

 

I wouldn't use any of them these days.  RealBench is more applicable for our needs. And for a tough test Cinebench.

If they are running AVX they will be hammering the CPU and generating high temps, workloads that you will pretty much never see in normal use. 

If you are running RealBench for a couple of hours, and perhaps looping Cinebench for an hour and not seeing stability issues and all okay in the software you usually run you are good to go. We build systems to run games and the sim, we do not build systems designed to run ultra tough stress tests for hours.

Obviously if you are running something like blender all the time, or anything that requires the most demanding AVX instruction sets, then fair enough.

 

Quote

Now I can run OCCT Linpack without any issues.

 

A level of stress you will never see in normal use. How does it run in the sim, or whatever you use your system for? That's the question. 

Just my opinion. 

The last long term, stable overclock I used was stress tested with just RealBench and nothing else. All good. if you worry about the occasional encounter with AVX, then use an AVX offset. 

Edited February 25, 2021 by martin-w

[Ted Striker 338]

40 minutes ago, Tomaz Drnovsek said:

It's all in the guide.

Glad to hear it worked out for you. I recommend Nick's guide because he tries to get you to think about what you are doing and why. I hope you have a better understanding of how your system works after having read it.

Ted