Check if the I5 6600k can be overclocked further at 4.7 ghz.
Check if the I5 6600k can be overclocked further at 4.7 ghz.
Hello, I recently increased my CPU speed to 4.7 ghz with a 1.35 vcore. During 100% load in Cinebench and AIDA64, temperatures stayed at 65°C or below. I'm using the Corsair H100i v2 cooler. I'm curious how much further I can push my CPU since I'm just starting out with overclocking. I've heard that the motherboard must be capable of handling high overclocks and I have the ASUS SABERTOOTH Z170 MARK S. Do you know the maximum capabilities of this board? I appreciate any advice or assistance from someone more experienced in overclocking, and feel free to comment with any questions about my system—I'll get back to you quickly! Thanks for your help!
I believe you shouldn't go any further. The voltage is 1.35v, which is the recommended safe level. It wouldn't be worthwhile to try to extract an additional 0.2 ghz from it.
I don't believe you should go any higher. The safe voltage limit is around 1.35v, and the extra 0.2ghz isn't worth the risk. Thank you for your advice! I've heard it's possible to reach up to 1.4 if temperatures stay under control, isn't that right? I'm also curious about pushing overclocking further, but I want to stay safe—don't want to damage anything. It seems like I've got a decent CPU since I managed 4.7 with just 1.35vcore. Now I'm more concerned about my motherboard. Should I worry? Is it okay? Also, I read somewhere that the motherboard can handle a base clock of 400mhz—does that really help? I just want to understand overclocking better!
Increasing the base clock affects other components like RAM and can impact overall performance. I haven’t really suggested overclocking with the base clock because it’s quite challenging and won’t significantly boost your CPU’s speed. You can reach up to 1.4v, but it will likely shorten the CPU’s lifespan more than expected. The exact improvement is uncertain. It’s best to experiment with 1.4v and see how much you can achieve—my estimate is around 4.9ghz. You should consider whether the 200MHz gain is worth it, as it only gives a small difference in performance (about 3 fps). In my view, it’s not very valuable. I also recommend trying Prime95 for at least three hours to test stability and temperature. Based on AIDA64 and Cinebench results, your CPU should exceed 65°C after three hours of Prime95, which is more than what these benchmarks typically achieve.
It's a question of whether to ask or not. There won't be a noticeable change in performance with the slightly higher overlcock, but the extra power and heat will harm your chip. Not worth it... Adam
Thank you for your message. I've been using AIDA for about five hours and the temperature remains under 65°C, but I'm facing an issue with Prime because it indicates that two of my cores aren't working. It's unusual since Prime always shows all cores as functioning in AIDA and the system is stable after 15 runs in IntelBurn, yet Prime isn't. Could this be related to software? My CPU has been performing well after over ten hours of gaming and Cinebench runs of 4-5 times, while Prime only works for a few hours.
Prime95 hasn't been refreshed in years. It was thoroughly explained when Ivy Bridge and Haswell were released in 2012/2013 that Prime95 wasn't built or configured for today's processors, leading many users to experience strange issues, crashes, and blue/black displays even on stable CPUs. Some even claimed it might cause harm. Download the free trial of AIDA 64 Extreme, which is current and regarded as the top stress test tool. Perform comprehensive tests for CPU, cache, FPU, and RAM to push your system to its absolute limits and achieve peak temperatures.
Euphoria4949 shares concerns about Prime95's lack of updates since its release in 2012/2013, noting that it wasn't built for modern CPUs and often caused issues like crashes or blue screens. They mention some even feared potential damage. They recommend using the free trial version of AIDA 64 Extreme for thorough stress testing. They also ask about their motherboard's overclocking capabilities and its limits.
Euphoria4949 :
Prime95 hasn't been refreshed for years. It was clearly explained back in 2012/2013 when Ivy Bridge and Haswell were released—that Prime95 wasn't built or configured for today's processors. This often led to strange glitches, crashes, and blue/black displays even on CPUs that had previously run perfectly stable. Some claimed it might even cause damage.
I downloaded the free trial of AIDA 64 Extreme, which is current and regarded as one of the most reliable stress tests. Performing comprehensive tests on CPU, cache, FPU, and RAM will push your system to its limits and help you achieve maximum temperatures.
Thank you for the clarification! I've already used the free trial, but I'm considering buying AIDA64 Extreme since the trial ended. If AIDA64 remains stable after four hours, should everything be fine? Also, do you know anything about my motherboard regarding overclocking capabilities and its limits?
Honestly, four hours seems too short. Over the years, I've seen systems run stably for 8–10 hours without issues—everything was fine then. After that, BSODs started appearing. People might give different advice, but most agree: the longer you run it, the better.
Personally, I always opt for at least 12 hours. It's tedious and sometimes frustrating, but safer than risking damage.
Regarding my motherboard, the Sabertooth series isn't in ASUS's overclocking range (per an ASUS representative), though they are still decent boards. No one can guarantee exactly what voltage will work without testing each board individually. However, using monitoring tools like HWInfo64 is a good idea. Keep an eye on VRM temperatures and other sensors. Make sure your case provides proper airflow to prevent overheating.
VRMs typically range from around 70°C on budget boards up to over 100°C on high-end ones. Remember, 1.35V for Intel chips is generally considered the safe upper limit. If you're using a custom loop or a good AIO cooler, you might push it to 1.40V or higher without noticeable issues. But again, every component differs—what works for one may not work for another.
It's all about experimenting and staying cautious. Overclocking is unpredictable until you try it yourself.
Thank you very much for your detailed response and helpful advice. I really value the time and information you've shared, especially since I'm eager to deepen my knowledge about OC. I'm using the same monitor for temperatures as you mentioned, and ASUS offers its own software with around 7-8 sensors on the motherboard that I keep track of closely. I have a Corsair H100i v2 cooler, which I find quite effective so far. It operates at about 1500 RPM when the CPU is under load, and according to ATTAReatests it runs more efficiently, though not quite at full capacity to maintain the CPU below 70°C. I've customized the fan curve to help keep things stable.
Additionally, my setup includes three 120mm intake fans on the front of my case (NZXT H440W), a radiator mounted at the top with push configuration, and a single 140mm AF exhaust fan at the rear. This configuration seems to provide good airflow.
I'm wondering if pushing my CPU to 4.9 or even 5.0 GHz is worth it in terms of performance, considering the risks to temperatures or stability? Or should I stick with what I have now? Your suggestions are really appreciated!