Unable to get to 4.9ghz?

Rooster212 · 10 Aug 2011 at 00:26

I don't know why, but i am 4.8ghz stable, with settings as follows:

Multi-Steps Load-Line: Lvl 5
CPU Vcore: 1.46v (seems VERY high to me)
QPI/VTT: 1.14v
PLL: 1.84v
PLL Overvoltage DISABLED

I can't seem to reach 4.9ghz by changing the multiplyer to x49, i wouldn't think i would need to push up the voltage up any more? I have tried enabling PLL overvoltage. Is there something i am missing, or other settings that should be changed?

CPU Enhanced Halt, C3/C6 states, Thermal Monitor, EIST Function all disabled.

Thanks in advance

James J · 10 Aug 2011 at 00:33

I personally wouldn't run the vcore anywhere near that high for 24/7 use. If you can't hit x49 using that vcore, you will have to push it higher but I really wouldn't recommend it unless your doing a 1 off benchmark then lowering the overclock and vcore for 24/7 settings.

Rooster212 · 10 Aug 2011 at 00:38

No absolutely, wouldn't be a 24/7 at all, just for benchmarks. It just seems high, I see people hit 4.7/4.8 with a 1.39v Vcore, i just feel there is a setting i am missing or something!! Right now I am running 4.2ghz at 1.38v, I could probably put that voltage down if i wanted to, just haven't tested it any lower.

Justintime · 10 Aug 2011 at 00:46

Your chip might just need more voltage for that clock, not all are created equal. Is this a 2500k or 2600k?

koooowweeee · 10 Aug 2011 at 06:34

Bit more info about you rig would help.

What temps have you got.

What happens at 49x

have you tried upping the bclk

Clum · 10 Aug 2011 at 08:28

Try a mult of 48 then up the clock to 102. might require a small bump on the core, but should get you 4.9, at least stable enough for some benching.

MooMoo444 · 10 Aug 2011 at 08:42

I'd hope its just for benching, it wont last too long at 1.46

HiVizMan · 10 Aug 2011 at 09:53

You will need to enable PLL Overvoltage. That is all you need to make the next step up.

Clum · 10 Aug 2011 at 11:18

MooMoo444 said:
I'd hope its just for benching, it wont last too long at 1.46

Based on what? You don't know that. There have been people running 24/7 at 1.5v+ for 8 months now, with no signs of degradation.

Best not to make comments like that unless it's either founded on something, or you make clear that it's just your opinion.

Surveyor · 10 Aug 2011 at 11:34

Clum said:
Based on what? You don't know that. There have been people running 24/7 at 1.5v+ for 8 months now, with no signs of degradation.

Best not to make comments like that unless it's either founded on something, or you make clear that it's just your opinion.

~~~~~IMPORTANT SANDYBRIDGE OC INFO: Voltages & OC Guide!!~~~~~

Not all CPU's are as fragile as others, we have experimented upto 1.50v Vcore and 1.70v memory and had zero issues with reliability, so it seems some of fine when pushing hard.

Some may get away with it, some may not.

Clum · 10 Aug 2011 at 11:51

That's absolutely meaningless; seriously meaningless. It was posted in January for god sake. Further, OCUK have themselves now even abandoned those pseudo limits and started selling chips they rate for 1.4v! (actually even more as they use extreme LLC to configure the OC)

The ONLY way to know the voltage limits of these chips is to either run them for several years, or to wait for a decisive answer from intel. Neither of these have been realised yet so nobody knows.

All these assumed limits that are floating around on the internet are just opinions that people have read on a forum, then repeated to someone else as the gospel truth. This is a prime example of how misinformation is spread. All I'm saying is if you're going to advise on a voltage limit, make sure to be clear that it's just your opinion.

Surveyor · 10 Aug 2011 at 12:33

Clum said:
That's absolutely meaningless; seriously meaningless. It was posted in January for god sake. Further, OCUK have themselves now even abandoned those pseudo limits and started selling chips they rate for 1.4v! (actually even more as they use extreme LLC to configure the OC)

The ONLY way to know the voltage limits of these chips is to either run them for several years, or to wait for a decisive answer from intel. Neither of these have been realised yet so nobody knows.

All these assumed limits that are floating around on the internet are just opinions that people have read on a forum, then repeated to someone else as the gospel truth. This is a prime example of how misinformation is spread. All I'm saying is if you're going to advise on a voltage limit, make sure to be clear that it's just your opinion.

You should really take your own advice.

You advised someone already at 1.46V to bump the voltage higher.

You should make it known that it is only your opinion that this won't damage their chip in the short, medium or long term.

Just because "there have been people running 24/7 at 1.5v+ for 8 months now, with no signs of degradation" doesn't mean it's safe for everyone to do so.

Offering more cautious advice is the better option, advising of the potential for causing damage and then let the OP decide how far they want to go.

Clum · 10 Aug 2011 at 12:41

What? He knows it's already a high voltage, and he's only doing so for some benching. Did I explicitly tell him that he should run 1.46+ for 24/7 use and that it would be perfectly safe? No. Your argument here is way off the mark of what's actually happening.

Surveyor · 10 Aug 2011 at 13:16

Clum said:
What? He knows it's already a high voltage, and he's only doing so for some benching. Did I explicitly tell him that he should run 1.46+ for 24/7 use and that it would be perfectly safe? No. Your argument here is way off the mark of what's actually happening.

No it isn't.

The OP may know what he is doing but he was advised to be cautious and you slated that advice.

You advised the OP to bump the voltage further without indicating the possible consequences.

Your statement "there have been people running 24/7 at 1.5v+ for 8 months now, with no signs of degradation" suggests that it's OK to do that without considering the consequences.

You're entitled to your view and other people to theirs.

The OP has been given advice to bump the voltage further and then advised of the possible consequences.

They can make their own mind up having been given advice from both perspectives.

koooowweeee · 10 Aug 2011 at 13:18

Clum said:
Based on what? You don't know that. There have been people running 24/7 at 1.5v+ for 8 months now, with no signs of degradation.

Best not to make comments like that unless it's either founded on something, or you make clear that it's just your opinion.

this.

im sick of seeing people keep making this comment about volts

Clum · 10 Aug 2011 at 13:29

Surveyor said:
No it isn't.

The OP may know what he is doing but he was advised to be cautious and you slated that advice.

You advised the OP to bump the voltage further without indicating the possible consequences.

Your statement "there have been people running 24/7 at 1.5v+ for 8 months now, with no signs of degradation" suggests that it's OK to do that without considering the consequences.

You're entitled to your view and other people to theirs.

The OP has been given advice to bump the voltage further and then advised of the possible consequences.

They can make their own mind up having been given advice from both perspectives.

What the hell are you all about? I did no such thing! My original comment wasn't even directed at the OP, but instead made to point out to someone else, that the advice he gave shouldn't be given in the factual manner in which he portrayed it.

You're making an argument for arguments sake, about something else entirely.

Surveyor · 10 Aug 2011 at 13:38

You did advise the OP to bump the voltage further if required without any warning.

Clum said:
Try a mult of 48 then up the clock to 102. might require a small bump on the core, but should get you 4.9, at least stable enough for some benching.

MooMoo444 may have phrased the warning too much as if it was absolute fact but the warning is still valid.

All I have said is that it's still a fair warning to give.

If you don't agree with that then so be it.

Clum · 10 Aug 2011 at 13:42

Yes, but he already knows that the voltage is high so no advice is really necessary unless you deem the OP to be an idiot, or you feel like being a pedant. It was also already established that he wasn't going to be running these volts/speeds for 24/7 use.

You're late to your own party here. Read the threads properly in future before jumping on someone's back.

Surveyor · 10 Aug 2011 at 13:53

Clum said:
Yes, but he already knows that the voltage is high so no advice is really necessary unless you deem the OP to be an idiot, or you feel like being a pedant. It was also already established that he wasn't going to be running these volts/speeds for 24/7 use.

You're late to your own party here. Read the threads properly in future before jumping on someone's back.

Don't put words in my mouth. I've never suggested the OP to be an idiot.

The OP realises the voltage is already high and yet some feel the need to advise him to go further without any warning.

There's nothing pedantic about offering the OP some further advice. That's what the forum is here for.

The OP can consider all the advice given and choose to accept or ignore it.

Simple_Steve · 10 Aug 2011 at 14:14

I wonder if he ever did get to 4.9...