5960x Overclock help !

Nickolp1974 said:
Yes ring voltage

Yep mems can be sensitive, 1.05v SA is a good starting point for 2666mhz
Click to expand...

Done everything you said and still not stable. This is really doing my head in ..still can't get it stable even using just aida64 stress test crashes after 8 mins and my cores are at 61c max at 4.5ghz with your settings and 1.35v. Now whocrashed is saying thermal issue ..what thermal issues ?..The crash before the 4.5ghz was at my settings of 4.375ghz and ram 3000 mhz xmp. 1.30v

then tried 2666mhz with your input and 43ghz ..and my max temps was 56c .the setings of ram at 2133mhz default without xmp and strap at 100MHz 1.35v

longe
On Wed 13/01/2016 18:28:07 GMT your computer crashed
crash dump file: C:\Windows\Minidump\011316-9859-01.dmp
This was probably caused by the following module: hal.dll (hal!HalBugCheckSystem+0xCF)
Bugcheck code: 0x124 (0x0, 0xFFFFE000618AC028, 0xBF800000, 0x124)
Error: WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERROR
file path: C:\Windows\system32\hal.dll
product: Microsoft® Windows® Operating System
company: Microsoft Corporation
description: Hardware Abstraction Layer DLL
Bug check description: This bug check indicates that a fatal hardware error has occurred. This bug check uses the error data that is provided by the Windows Hardware Error Architecture (WHEA).
This is likely to be caused by a hardware problem problem. This problem might be caused by a thermal issue.
The crash took place in a standard Microsoft module. Your system configuration may be incorrect. Possibly this problem is caused by another driver on your system that cannot be identified at this time.



On Wed 13/01/2016 18:28:07 GMT your computer crashed
crash dump file: C:\Windows\memory.dmp
This was probably caused by the following module: hal.dll (hal!HalBugCheckSystem+0xCF)
Bugcheck code: 0x124 (0x0, 0xFFFFE000618AC028, 0xBF800000, 0x124)
Error: WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERROR
file path: C:\Windows\system32\hal.dll
product: Microsoft® Windows® Operating System
company: Microsoft Corporation
description: Hardware Abstraction Layer DLL
Bug check description: This bug check indicates that a fatal hardware error has occurred. This bug check uses the error data that is provided by the Windows Hardware Error Architecture (WHEA).
This is likely to be caused by a hardware problem problem. This problem might be caused by a thermal issue.
The crash took place in a standard Microsoft module. Your system configuration may be incorrect. Possibly this problem is caused by another driver on your system that cannot be identified at this time.



On Wed 13/01/2016 17:57:42 GMT your computer crashed
crash dump file: C:\Windows\Minidump\011316-9843-01.dmp
This was probably caused by the following module: hal.dll (hal!HalBugCheckSystem+0xCF)
Bugcheck code: 0x124 (0x0, 0xFFFFE001F7EE2028, 0xBF800000, 0x124)
Error: WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERROR
file path: C:\Windows\system32\hal.dll
product: Microsoft® Windows® Operating System
company: Microsoft Corporation
description: Hardware Abstraction Layer DLL
Bug check description: This bug check indicates that a fatal hardware error has occurred. This bug check uses the error data that is provided by the Windows Hardware Error Architecture (WHEA).
This is likely to be caused by a hardware problem problem. This problem might be caused by a thermal issue.
The crash took place in a standard Microsoft module. Your system configuration may be incorrect. Possibly this problem is caused by another driver on your system that cannot be identified at this time.



On Wed 13/01/2016 17:35:04 GMT your computer crashed
crash dump file: C:\Windows\Minidump\011316-9718-01.dmp
This was probably caused by the following module: hal.dll (hal!HalBugCheckSystem+0xCF)
Bugcheck code: 0x124 (0x0, 0xFFFFE000676E1028, 0xBF800000, 0x124)
Error: WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERROR
file path: C:\Windows\system32\hal.dll
product: Microsoft® Windows® Operating System
company: Microsoft Corporation
description: Hardware Abstraction Layer DLL
Bug check description: This bug check indicates that a fatal hardware error has occurred. This bug check uses the error data that is provided by the Windows Hardware Error Architecture (WHEA).
This is likely to be caused by a hardware problem problem. This problem might be caused by a thermal issue.
The crash took place in a standard Microsoft module. Your system configuration may be incorrect. Possibly this problem is caused by another driver on your system that cannot be identified at this time.



On Wed 13/01/2016 03:55:15 GMT your computer crashed
crash dump file: C:\Windows\Minidump\011316-9515-01.dmp
This was probably caused by the following module: hal.dll (hal!HalPutScatterGatherListV3+0xD1AB)
Bugcheck code: 0xC5 (0x100000000, 0x2, 0x0, 0xFFFFF800C3E48840)
Error: DRIVER_CORRUPTED_EXPOOL
file path: C:\Windows\system32\hal.dll
product: Microsoft® Windows® Operating System
company: Microsoft Corporation
description: Hardware Abstraction Layer DLL
Bug check description: This indicates that the system attempted to access invalid memory at a process IRQL that was too high.
This appears to be a typical software driver bug and is not likely to be caused by a hardware problem. This might be a case of memory corruption. More often memory corruption happens because of software errors in buggy drivers, not because of faulty RAM modules.
The crash took place in a standard Microsoft module. Your system configuration may be incorrect. Possibly this problem is caused by another driver on your system that cannot be identified at this time.



On Wed 13/01/2016 03:50:01 GMT your computer crashed
crash dump file: C:\Windows\Minidump\011316-9375-01.dmp
This was probably caused by the following module: cpuz138_x64.sys (cpuz138_x64+0x2084)
Bugcheck code: 0xA (0x14E748, 0xF, 0x1, 0xFFFFF801EB5F5197)
Error: IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL
Bug check description: This indicates that Microsoft Windows or a kernel-mode driver accessed paged memory at DISPATCH_LEVEL or above.
This appears to be a typical software driver bug and is not likely to be caused by a hardware problem.
A third party driver was identified as the probable root cause of this system error. It is suggested you look for an update for the following driver: cpuz138_x64.sys .
Google query: cpuz138_x64.sys IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL
 
Last edited:
why would i have a thermal issue crash when its only 61c on the hottest core ? starting to think its a very bad chip for overclocking ..i had the same whocrashed BSODS in the Alienware (Thermal issue) with the exact same chip .


These were all at 4.5ghz








 
Last edited:
0x0A is unstable ram which will limit your oc, set everything mem related to auto, concentrate on cpu OC, once done save a profile then work on getting your mems stable
 
Nickolp1974 said:
0x0A is unstable ram which will limit your oc, set everything mem related to auto, concentrate on cpu OC, once done save a profile then work on getting your mems stable
Click to expand...

I'm just testing my ram and 4 hours in with no errors yet ..

Can you explain the auto on the ram ..? You meen default ? As I've ran default of 2133mhz a few times ..With everything on auto on memory . And still crashes .

just a little question . i been having problems with my Killer drivers from MSI and even though I've uninstalled them there could be still traces of the errors . im going to re install windows 10 pro and go from there once im happy with the ram .
 
Last edited:
My ram was fine . I updated my bios .I started from scratch and just ran the cpu on default settings and I was getting 1.12v on 3.5ghz on auto everything , 4ghz was getting 1.277v auto so I manually went to 1.18v it crashes after 2 minutes in XTU ..so I jumped to 1.2v and stable for 3 hours in XTU . 4.2ghz I kept same voltage and it crashed at 1 minute 25 seconds . So uped the voltage and stable with 1.26v. tried 4.3ghz crashed ..then went to 128v it was stable for 1 hour 12 minutes then crashed .upped it to 1.31 and stable for 2 hours .went to 4.4 and had stable at 1.39v . Haven't tried 4.5ghz as I think I'm now at my limit with this CPU and just think its so power hungry . I also had 1.92 on input and 1.25 on 4.4ghz on the cache ..I also had my droop at 75% ..so it has to be just a bad clocker.
 
OCCT has some strenuous FPU routines. I would start as Nick has suggested with something like AIDA with Cache, System Memory and Core ticked, then Real Bench.

Make sure you are simply overclocking the core at this point. From the thread so far it seems like you're trying to run before you can walk.

Also you're pushing your cache quiet hard already which may cause confusion when stability comes into question. AIDA's cache routines are good at routing out instability. Run the cache test isolated for 2 hours, perhaps after you've decided to work with the memory overclocked.
 
Last edited:
Silent_Scone said:
OCCT has some strenuous FPU routines. I would start as Nick has suggested with something like AIDA with Cache, System Memory and Core ticked, then Real Bench.

Make sure you are simply overclocking the core at this point. From the thread so far it seems like you're trying to run before you can walk.

Also you're pushing your cache quiet hard already which may cause confusion when stability comes into question. AIDA's cache routines are good at routing out instability. Run the cache test isolated for 2 hours, perhaps after you've decided to work with the memory overclocked.
Click to expand...

I actually had 1.15 on cache not 1.25 lol .I never went above and only used this at 4.4ghz and stopped using OCCT and just use aida and XTU .

I've already tried to walk with everything and just upping the vcore and that was even worse .read a couple of reviews on my board and they suggest using 2.5 on input volts with the 5960x .

My temps don't even change either with fans and pump on 50% or 100% ..maybe 1 or 2c cooler ..I've also noticed which is strange that when my 2 x 980ti hit 50c on same loop I can feel the warm air coming out of side and at the top rad..with the cpu hitting 60c the air comng out of side and top is freezing cold ..It really is nothing but cold air ..
 
Last edited:
i going to be replacing the chip , as this chip is OEM an from My Alienware which has been split and sold in bits and no warranty (computer was a replacement a year ago ) so will sell this chip and buy a retail (already bought). now lets see if its the chip or the motherboard .
 
I personally wouldnt. The difference gaming wise and even multi-tasking wise is minimal from 4.4-4.7. I can run mine from 4.5-5ghz with no difference in gaming. If you have the box for the cpu that will be perfectly enough if it dies.

I once bought a 3770k off ebay sold as working but it was dead and buyer refused refund. Sent it to intel. They sent me a new one within a week with free postage aswell so they really dont mess around. No proof of purchase or anything.

With regards to rads the CPU is only dumping a small amount of heat compared to the GPU's and a lot of that is down to the VRMS from the GPU block as they are watercooled. My rads are cool with cpu on 100% but with GPU's running heavily then there is a lot of heat coming through the rads. Still they sit around 37c and peak at around 42-44c. CPU pushing 100ish watts. GPU's will be pushing 300+ each.

Pump speed also doesnt make a huge difference as long as the flow is moving. I can set my pump from 3-1 and see a degree or two difference but 3-5 i cant see any improvement.
 
its not the reason why im selling mate ,im selling as it has no warranty as its OEM from my Alienware pc (12 months old) , the alienware has no warranty and it was also a replacement pc from an 3 year old Alienware and just think im better off buying a retail CPU i want at least 4.5ghz its the reason why i built the pc , it just seems ive built it for nothing , ive got £480 for my cpu and sold with no warranty . and purchased a sealed retail for £590 ..so for £110 i have a retail cpu and 3 year warranty.

I dont want to have built this pc and not even get 4.5ghz on full water loop and even chose this board as some have got 4.8ghz on water . pc has cost me to much to give up . its for benching and not just for gaming and i only game at 4ghz anyway . I like to get on score boards lol
 
Last edited:
Ahh ok i see. Lets hope this will be the golden chip :). I do doubt it will be the board as they can push wayyy more power than stock or even overclocked. These types of boards are designed for LN2 which would be wattage and voltage many times over. Definately sounds to me like the chip, where it just hit its wall where no extra voltage can make it stable.

Are you leaving the GPU's at stock or are you going to re-flash them? ;)
 
Not sure if I'm going to flash the gpus . But my cpu came yesterday and it's a J batch . These are meant to overclock very well indeed with low voltage .can't drain system until weekend grrrrrr.
 
Can confirm the J chips are phenomenal. Got one today. 1.29 volts runs at 4.65 Ghz stable in all the bench's I have thrown at it. not tried for 4.8 Ghz yet, but 4.7 was stable at 1.31 volts. Expect 4.8 is doable but need to learn what the other bits are, just manipulating the core, bus and multiplier atm, could probably refine it somewhat.

Using 125 on the bus and 37 on the multiplier if that's of any use.
 
Radox-0 said:
Can confirm the J chips are phenomenal. Got one today. 1.29 volts runs at 4.65 Ghz stable in all the bench's I have thrown at it. not tried for 4.8 Ghz yet, but 4.7 was stable at 1.31 volts. Expect 4.8 is doable but need to learn what the other bits are, just manipulating the core, bus and multiplier atm, could probably refine it somewhat.

Using 125 on the bus and 37 on the multiplier if that's of any use.
Click to expand...

What board are you using ?

Trying to get help with folk who have MSI boards with the extra overclocking pins . There is so many things on the Godlike board some are worded different to the asus ROG boards .
 
Radox-0 said:
Using the ASUS X99-E WS board so most the stuff is similar to the terminology on the ROG boards.
Click to expand...

so you only mess with the vcore voltage and but and multi to get that speed on the J chip ?

is your vdroop on normal ? is your long term and short term power (watts) on auto ? and is your input on auto ?

just trying to get a picture on how you done it ..ive not drained my system yet and its going to be a nightmare getting my full cover water block off . 2 man job it is as pc weighs a ton . on my current chip its awful even messing with all those settings i have mentioned i cant even get 4.3ghz stable . the reason why i have got hold of another chip and glad its a J chip .
 
killswitch73 said:
so you only mess with the vcore voltage and but and multi to get that speed on the J chip ?

is your vdroop on normal ? is your long term and short term power (watts) on auto ? and is your input on auto ?

just trying to get a picture on how you done it ..ive not drained my system yet and its going to be a nightmare getting my full cover water block off . 2 man job it is as pc weighs a ton . on my current chip its awful even messing with all those settings i have mentioned i cant even get 4.3ghz stable . the reason why i have got hold of another chip and glad its a J chip .
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Full on noob here so no clue what most the stuff means. Will dig into it this weekend to try and stabilise higher the 4.75 as I think I am doing the most rudimentary and raw over clocking method possible.

All I do atm is enable XMP which automatically sets the CPU strap to 125. for 4.65 just set the multiplier to 37. Go down to voltage and set that to manual and put in 1.3 and that's it really. Obviously go in to windows and blast it with benchmarks and what not to make sure its stable. I leave everything else on the default setting which is usually auto.
 
Radox-0 said:
Pretty much. Full on noob here so no clue what most the stuff means. Will dig into it this weekend to try and stabilise higher the 4.75 as I think I am doing the most rudimentary and raw over clocking method possible.

All I do atm is enable XMP which automatically sets the CPU strap to 125. for 4.65 just set the multiplier to 37. Go down to voltage and set that to manual and put in 1.3 and that's it really. Obviously go in to windows and blast it with benchmarks and what not to make sure its stable. I leave everything else on the default setting which is usually auto.
Click to expand...

damn that's a good chip you got there too , hope mine is as good as that but i would be extremely happy with 4.5ghz stable and would like to bench with 4.7ghz just to get those physx scores on 3Dmark firestrike extreme and other gaming benchmarks .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom