F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Overclocking 6700K OC followed by Pc failure.

6700K OC followed by Pc failure.

6700K OC followed by Pc failure.

A
amigosdoPVP
Junior Member
11
09-15-2016, 04:14 PM
#1
Hi. This morning before starting work, I experimented with Asus Intelligent processors, specifically the TPU section for overclocking my 6700K on an Asus Maximus VIII Hero. I've been learning about overclocking and wanted to try something without too many issues. My cooler is a Zalman CNPS 9900Max. At stock, I achieved a maximum of 68°C during a Stress Test AIDA64. I always stress test for around 10 minutes. I set it to 4.5Ghz at 1.300V and got 73°C, which was unexpected. At the same voltage and 4.6Ghz, I experienced an immediate BSOD, dropped to 4.5°C and then reached 71°C before recovering. As both temperature and voltage ranges remained valid, I tried 4.6Ghz at 1.320V. AIDA64 reported a hardware error after 30 seconds, then 1.330V and 1.340V also failed with similar issues. After a short pause, restarting helped it turn on again. I think I should stick to 4.5Ghz and see how much lower the temperature goes with higher voltage. The 1.400V margin mentioned is still too high, and I might be able to push it further, though temperatures will likely rise significantly. After this experience, I’m wondering why my PC didn’t power on again and why I seem to need such a big voltage jump to reach 4.6Ghz. Anyone have any thoughts?
A
amigosdoPVP
09-15-2016, 04:14 PM #1

Hi. This morning before starting work, I experimented with Asus Intelligent processors, specifically the TPU section for overclocking my 6700K on an Asus Maximus VIII Hero. I've been learning about overclocking and wanted to try something without too many issues. My cooler is a Zalman CNPS 9900Max. At stock, I achieved a maximum of 68°C during a Stress Test AIDA64. I always stress test for around 10 minutes. I set it to 4.5Ghz at 1.300V and got 73°C, which was unexpected. At the same voltage and 4.6Ghz, I experienced an immediate BSOD, dropped to 4.5°C and then reached 71°C before recovering. As both temperature and voltage ranges remained valid, I tried 4.6Ghz at 1.320V. AIDA64 reported a hardware error after 30 seconds, then 1.330V and 1.340V also failed with similar issues. After a short pause, restarting helped it turn on again. I think I should stick to 4.5Ghz and see how much lower the temperature goes with higher voltage. The 1.400V margin mentioned is still too high, and I might be able to push it further, though temperatures will likely rise significantly. After this experience, I’m wondering why my PC didn’t power on again and why I seem to need such a big voltage jump to reach 4.6Ghz. Anyone have any thoughts?

M
MeadowSkii
Junior Member
31
10-04-2016, 07:39 AM
#2
Silicon lottery. Certain CPUs require lower voltages to achieve higher frequencies. Beyond a specific point, the needed voltage rises sharply, leading to increased power use and heat generation. Once the CPU hits its limit, adding more than 100MHz becomes impossible—unless you use special cooling methods like liquid or LN2. In any scenario, your BIOS blocked the motherboard from starting up for safety reasons. Often it's wiser to accept a lower voltage, even if it means sacrificing a few MHz, as this difference won't be noticeable in real-world performance.
M
MeadowSkii
10-04-2016, 07:39 AM #2

Silicon lottery. Certain CPUs require lower voltages to achieve higher frequencies. Beyond a specific point, the needed voltage rises sharply, leading to increased power use and heat generation. Once the CPU hits its limit, adding more than 100MHz becomes impossible—unless you use special cooling methods like liquid or LN2. In any scenario, your BIOS blocked the motherboard from starting up for safety reasons. Often it's wiser to accept a lower voltage, even if it means sacrificing a few MHz, as this difference won't be noticeable in real-world performance.

I
internettrash
Junior Member
14
10-24-2016, 08:18 PM
#3
Silicon lottery. Certain CPUs require lower voltages to achieve higher frequencies. Beyond a specific point, voltage demands rise sharply; power use and heat also increase. Once the CPU hits its limit, adding more than 100MHz becomes impossible (unless using special cooling like liquid or LN2). In any scenario, your BIOS blocked the motherboard from starting up for safety reasons. Often it's wiser to accept lower voltage, even at the cost of 100MHz, because the performance gain is negligible in real-world use.
I
internettrash
10-24-2016, 08:18 PM #3

Silicon lottery. Certain CPUs require lower voltages to achieve higher frequencies. Beyond a specific point, voltage demands rise sharply; power use and heat also increase. Once the CPU hits its limit, adding more than 100MHz becomes impossible (unless using special cooling like liquid or LN2). In any scenario, your BIOS blocked the motherboard from starting up for safety reasons. Often it's wiser to accept lower voltage, even at the cost of 100MHz, because the performance gain is negligible in real-world use.

A
ADM_YT
Member
50
10-30-2016, 02:47 PM
#4
Yeah, I think the change isn't that big. The main things should remain the same, just by tweaking the vcore and multiplyer in the Asus software. As for the CPU speed and voltage, do they slow down when not needed? C-state and similar settings should stay consistent.
A
ADM_YT
10-30-2016, 02:47 PM #4

Yeah, I think the change isn't that big. The main things should remain the same, just by tweaking the vcore and multiplyer in the Asus software. As for the CPU speed and voltage, do they slow down when not needed? C-state and similar settings should stay consistent.

U
UnicornNutella
Junior Member
28
11-01-2016, 02:00 AM
#5
Correct!
U
UnicornNutella
11-01-2016, 02:00 AM #5

Correct!

F
FireFly510
Junior Member
48
11-09-2016, 08:35 PM
#6
Thanks!
F
FireFly510
11-09-2016, 08:35 PM #6

Thanks!