Those of you with OcUK OEM 2700K Official OC Results thread!!

[demonstag]

cheers for the info

 

[bigtoygun]

Obviously not stable seeing as your last post was 40minutes before this one lol

I'm interested in hearing about the longterm users - It seems the more I play with this chip, it needs more vcore to become stable!

For example - last week 4.8Ghz needed 1.32v (fully IBT and prime stable)- This week I'm having to use 1.36v!.

EDIT: Scrap that - forgot about my memory upgrade doh!

Same here prime stable 12 hours 4.6GHz @ 1.290v one week later 1.300v. 4.8GHz 1.340v and now needed 1.365v.

 

[zoomee]

Same here prime stable 12 hours 4.6GHz @ 1.290v one week later 1.300v. 4.8GHz 1.340v and now needed 1.365v.

Thanks for confirming mate. It seems these chips degrade pretty quickly. I thought it was my mainboard with instabilities!!

I WAS getting 4.6 @ 1.28v, 4.8 @ 1.32v, and 5Ghz @ 1.41v all fully IBT and prime stable. As the weeks have progressed I can't seem to get 5Ghz stable anymore (without going above 1.45v which I refuse to) and 4.8 requires 1.36v. 4.6 is slightly higher too

I find all chips do degrade slightly when extreme overclocking them, but one week is bloody quick!! - unlike say for example my 1090T which took nearly 6 months to require a tad more vcore - hmmmmm, maybe I should just settle with 4.8 @ 1.36v, don't want to push it too much tbh.



be warned 2700k users!!

 

[fowler002]

Thanks for confirming mate. It seems these chips degrade pretty quickly. I thought it was my mainboard with instabilities!!

I WAS getting 4.6 @ 1.28v, 4.8 @ 1.32v, and 5Ghz @ 1.41v all fully IBT and prime stable. As the weeks have progressed I can't seem to get 5Ghz stable anymore (without going above 1.45v which I refuse to) and 4.8 requires 1.36v. 4.6 is slightly higher too

I find all chips do degrade slightly when extreme overclocking them, but one week is bloody quick!! - unlike say for example my 1090T which took nearly 6 months to require a tad more vcore - hmmmmm, maybe I should just settle with 4.8 @ 1.36v, don't want to push it too much tbh.



be warned 2700k users!!

ask gibbo if he's having that problem with the maximus iv extreme-z

 

[zoomee]

ask gibbo if he's having that problem with the maximus iv extreme-z

I doubt very much he has the time to play with one single board and cpu for weeks like we do. It can't be the board if another user has confirmed it.

Still interested in hearing if others are coming across this too....

 

[gareth170]

I WAS getting 4.6 @ 1.28v, 4.8 @ 1.32v, and 5Ghz @ 1.41v all fully IBT and prime stable. As the weeks have progressed I can't seem to get 5Ghz stable anymore (without going above 1.45v which I refuse to) and 4.8 requires 1.36v. 4.6 is slightly higher too

well mine needs 1.30v for 4.6ghz

i don't think it starts degrading until u go over 1.38-1.4v also high temps can degrade it

I find all chips do degrade slightly when extreme overclocking them, but one week is bloody quick!! - unlike say for example my 1090T which took nearly 6 months to require a tad more vcore - hmmmmm, maybe I should just settle with 4.8 @ 1.36v, don't want to push it too much tbh.

only 6 months?

my 1090t as been at 4ghz 1.425v for well over a year.

 

[zoomee]

well mine needs 1.30v for 4.6ghz

i don't think it starts degrading until u go over 1.38-1.4v also high temps can degrade it

only 6 months?

my 1090t as been at 4ghz 1.425v for well over a year.

Hmmmm - you may be right my friend!.
It was longer than 6 months though (more like 8-10months thinking about it)- but I was always stress testing it allot as I changed motherboard and memory about 20 times lol.

My Q6600 performed the same too - @ 3ghz ran spot on (what ever volts I used - cant remember) but then slowly needed slightly more to become stable (about 12months later)

 

[gareth170]

i don't understand why ocuk changed the guidelines to this

***OVERCLOCKING GUIDELINES***

- Do not exceed 1.425-1.450v core voltage, doing so could limit lifespan of the CPU
- Do not overclock with BCLK, again doing so could limit lifespan of the CPU
- Recommended memory voltage is 1.50v, so make sure to run your memory at 1.50v, higher than 1.60v could limit lifespan of the CPU
- These recommendations come from OcUK and Intel, your warranty is un-affected but we highly recommend you adhere to the above to make sure your CPU lifespan is un-affected
- All Sandybridge CPU's worldwide should be run at the above or lower voltages, no higher!

so which is right?

 

[zoomee]

Agreed - To use that kind of Vcore its literally impossible keeping these babies sub 80Degrees C without some super duper cooling. Fair enough for prime95 you can get sub 70 temps but as soon as you fire up IBT on standard (let alone maximum) your easy getting into the high 70's if not hitting 80 EVEN with a 120.3 Radiator watercooling these things!!

 

[gareth170]

yeah i think it's more of a heat issue here than voltage tbh

keeping temps under 70c shouldn't let it degrade the cpu.

at 4.6 1.30v i was getting 59c~ in ibt

 

[Ghostdog]

My ram is rated at 1.5 volts, but the MB has set it at 1.6, should it be set to 1.5?!

 

[Surveyor]

My ram is rated at 1.5 volts, but the MB has set it at 1.6, should it be set to 1.5?!

If 1.5V is the correct voltage then manually set that in the BIOS.

 

[bulldog147]

mine 5GHz at 1.48v no degrading for 6 months and still the same ongoing ! Before I notice 4.4GHz on auto vcore but no longer now, need to push vcore up 1.30v.

 

[demonstag]

i don't understand why ocuk changed the guidelines to this

***OVERCLOCKING GUIDELINES***

- Do not exceed 1.425-1.450v core voltage, doing so could limit lifespan of the CPU
- Do not overclock with BCLK, again doing so could limit lifespan of the CPU
- Recommended memory voltage is 1.50v, so make sure to run your memory at 1.50v, higher than 1.60v could limit lifespan of the CPU
- These recommendations come from OcUK and Intel, your warranty is un-affected but we highly recommend you adhere to the above to make sure your CPU lifespan is un-affected
- All Sandybridge CPU's worldwide should be run at the above or lower voltages, no higher!

so which is right?

I am sure I read in one of Gibbos posts that they had discussed this with Intel recently, and also with OCUK experience with test units since Sandybridge came out. I do agree that they need to clarify this situation, if only to put peoples minds at rest.

EDIT: just found this: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...=6&subcat=1859

 

[demonstag]

With regards to my last post it appears that there is different info regarding those with an i5 -http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CP-360-IN. Compared with those with an i7 - http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...=6&subcat=1859. So I think the original Sandybridge guidelines need to show that there are different voltages depending on the chip unless the i5 info is now outdated?

 

[mmj_uk]

What's safe for i7 should be safe for i5 because they're the same aside from HT being disabled, I guess OCUK have just not bothered to update the i5 page.

 

[gareth170]

As i said i think it's more of a heat issue here than voltage tbh

keep the temps under 70c u shouldn't see any degrading.

 

[Geeman1979]

Where is the proof by keeping the temps under 70c as apposed to 75 for eg! stopping degrading?

 

[gareth170]

Where is the proof by keeping the temps under 70c as apposed to 75 for eg! stopping degrading?

its common sense tbh.

running an oc'ed cpu close to it max safety temp limit of course would degrade it a lot quicker.

lower the temp the less likely it'll degrade. same with voltage.

just because a chip is rated at lets say 90c doesn't mean it's ok to run the oc'ed cpu close to it max safety temp limit let's say 82c.

at min u should at least 20c+ below max safety temp limit

 

[Geeman1979]

Give or take 5c difference between 70c to 75c is splitting hairs regarding how much the Cpu will degrade.If its degrading at 75c it will also be degrading at 70c the difference will be negligible considering if the Cpu is rated at 98.