i5 2500k unable to get past 4.2ghz

Neil79 · 30 Nov 2014 at 01:01

So come on own up, how many 4.8GHZ i5 2500k's, what's your volts?

jacob1995knight · 30 Nov 2014 at 01:31

Neil79 said:
So come on own up, how many 4.8GHZ i5 2500k's, what's your volts?

I will happily own up

4.8Ghz, i5 2500K 1.40v

P4Clock · 30 Nov 2014 at 09:07

Neil79 said:
So come on own up, how many 4.8GHZ i5 2500k's, what's your volts?

4.8Ghz was stable around 1.485V for me and that was run for about 20mins but i decided ever with VERY good watercooling temps that was too high

jacob1995knight · 30 Nov 2014 at 16:58

P4Clock said:
4.8Ghz was stable around 1.485V for me and that was run for about 20mins but i decided ever with VERY good watercooling temps that was too high

Them volts be high :eek:

IceShock · 30 Nov 2014 at 22:55

jacob1995knight said:
haha i wanna see proof of this 1.38v at 5ghz please

Bos · 1 Dec 2014 at 07:25

Nice cpu you got there Ice!

Here's another low voltage 2500K

jacob1995knight · 1 Dec 2014 at 09:51

Bos said:
Nice cpu you got there Ice!

Here's another low voltage 2500K

Im sorry, but i dont believe this

dont take it personally, but when i got to 5Ghz with CPUZ it showed my voltage as 1.41v, unlike Core Temp that had a voltage of 1.44v witch was accurate.

Neil79 · 1 Dec 2014 at 10:46

jacob1995knight said:
I will happily own up 4.8Ghz, i5 2500K 1.40v

I hate you

I want 4.8ghz

jacob1995knight · 1 Dec 2014 at 10:49

Neil79 said:
I hate you

I want 4.8ghz

Every processor if different

IceShock · 1 Dec 2014 at 12:19

my old p67 board would require 1.42v in bios to get 5ghz, it dropped to hmm 1.36v under load which was pretty bad, this z77 board, set to 1.380v drops to 1.37v or so under load which is all good

Bos · 1 Dec 2014 at 15:25

jacob1995knight said:
Im sorry, but i dont believe this dont take it personally, but when i got to 5Ghz with CPUZ it showed my voltage as 1.41v, unlike Core Temp that had a voltage of 1.44v witch was accurate.

Hehe its true

been running like this for well over 2 years now.

Also CPUZ shows your actual vCore which is pretty accurate but Core Temp only shows the cpu's VID which isn't the same thing.

jacob1995knight · 1 Dec 2014 at 19:18

Bos said:
Hehe its true been running like this for well over 2 years now.

Also CPUZ shows your actual vCore which is pretty accurate but Core Temp only shows the cpu's VID which isn't the same thing.

If i put the voltage to 1.44v in the bois, then get 1.44v in core temp, this is correct, unlike cpuz that says its 1.41v.

The voltage cannot change as its locked by me.

stooeh · 1 Dec 2014 at 19:27

Coretemp shows the VID which I believe is set using some intel algorithm which is basically what the CPU is 'asking' for at a given speed?

CPUz shows the actual voltage which will change under different loads regardless of what you have set in BIOS. Normally the voltage will drop under load which is why you can set LLC in bios to counter this.

jacob1995knight · 1 Dec 2014 at 19:55

stooeh said:
Coretemp shows the VID which I believe is set using some intel algorithm which is basically what the CPU is 'asking' for at a given speed?

CPUz shows the actual voltage which will change under different loads regardless of what you have set in BIOS. Normally the voltage will drop under load which is why you can set LLC in bios to counter this.

Your missing what im saying, its not possible for the clock speed to cope with that voltage, as 1.41 is what i was running at 4.8Ghz.

So what im saying is that the voltage cannot drop below what i set as it would BSOD on me, even just ticking over / idle.

I have always found core temp to be more accurate, an example being:

Set clock speed to 5Ghz

Opened core temp - voltage was 1.44v at idle, so on desktop only

Restart machine and go into bois

"current configuration"

Clock speed at 5Ghz with a voltage of 1.44v

This is really hard to explain in words -_-

stooeh · 1 Dec 2014 at 21:16

Except that if you set 1.41 and 4.8 and all other settings being equal the actual vcore would be a bit less (vdroop) ?

I haven't run CoreTemp in a while but from what i remember it doesn't show Vcore only VID which is not the same thing.

jacob1995knight · 1 Dec 2014 at 21:28

stooeh said:
Except that if you set 1.41 and 4.8 and all other settings being equal the actual vcore would be a bit less (vdroop) ?

I haven't run CoreTemp in a while but from what i remember it doesn't show Vcore only VID which is not the same thing.

Now im confused, as im comparing my 4.8 voltages to my 5.0 overclock records,

For 4.8Ghz using CPUZ i get 1.39v? yet with Core temp i get 1.41v that was correct for that overclock.

Yet for 5.0Ghz using CPUZ i get 1.44v that is correct and for core temp i get 1.41v?

Agghhhh this is a pain in the ass!

P4Clock · 1 Dec 2014 at 21:32

stooeh said:
Except that if you set 1.41 and 4.8 and all other settings being equal the actual vcore would be a bit less (vdroop) ?

but the input Vcore is still 1.41? so to go to 5ghz it would be the same or more?
forget vdroop what was the Vcore setting?

jacob1995knight said:
1.44v

that is VID, you have helped me over clock my 2500k and no matter hot high i put my Vcore 1.6(max) the VID was still at 1.411(HWMonitor)

yes i went to 1.6 and didnt say anything

, i had a little poo when i booted it. but will would not pass 5ghz

P4Clock · 1 Dec 2014 at 21:40

HWMonitor F-T-W

jacob1995knight · 1 Dec 2014 at 22:01

Ahhh many thanks to the above two posts

stooeh · 1 Dec 2014 at 22:28

I wouldn't worry about it too much, if you are happy and stable at 5GHz then it doesn't really matter

This 2700K will do 5GHz at 1.42V in BIOS + LLC on but it will actually hit 1.45 under stress testing (IBT) in CPUz. Not sure I want to run it that high so sticking to 4.8GHz