Consider a setup using Intel 285k processor
Consider a setup using Intel 285k processor
Hey everyone, things aren’t going great so far. Here’s the setup: CPU is an Intel 285k, mainboard Asrock Z890i Nova. RAM is G.SKILL CUDIMM 8800mhz with two 24gb modules (in MB mode). The graphics card is XFX 9070 XT Mercury Magnetic Air OC. Power supply is Corsair SF1000 NVME with two Samsung 990 Pro 1TB drives (dual boot W11 Enterprise + Ubuntu 24.02 LTS). Case is Lian Li A3 matte, cooling is custom watercooling with AC Kryos Cuplex Vision block, AMS 480, D5 pump, and EKWB QSC D5 top. RAM is 1/4" tubing, cooler is Koolance 702 coolant, fans are Phanteks T-30.
I’m using a few BIOS profiles: Extreme profile mode, XMP 1, GEAR 2, D2D-30, NGU-30, RING 38 (stock). Running tests show Memtest86 passed after about three hours. Prime95 ran fine with no issues. OCCT and Cinebench23 also reported no errors.
From what I’ve seen, people say my CPU is a decent chip—probably okay for stock Pcore-5.5/5.6GHz. I tried boosting the P and E cores to 5.5/5.6GHz with D2D 32, NGU 32, RING 40, but it would crash sometimes in games or when playing C23. After adjusting the voltage settings, it stabilized a bit, but still had issues.
I’m aiming for only a slight performance boost on P and E cores (not pushing to max OC), just enough to lower latency a bit—maybe around 72-73ns instead of 78ns. I want smooth browsing, light gaming, and basic tasks without stressing the system too much. I’m not looking for maximum overclocking or top-tier speeds; this is more about comfort and reliability.
If you can help me understand what TM5 said about instability under weak SSE loads, or suggest tweaks to make it run smoother, that would be really appreciated. Thanks for any guidance!
Your aim is to boost performance, but it’s best to tailor the process yourself. Using others’ configurations won’t work because each component varies, and copying settings without adjustment will likely lead to disappointment.
Thanks for your message. I didn’t simply replicate someone else’s configuration. It was provided specifically for me, tailored to my requirements and the advice given by the person who knows this well. They are recognized as an experienced overclocker. Since I only wanted a gentle adjustment without pushing for maximum performance or records, they suggested starting with your "Extreme profile mode" and using D2D 32, NGU 32, Ring 40 while applying the voltage changes from my first post. Of course, I’m not mimicking another setup—this is meant to be unique to my needs.
Your TM5 issue after the second cycle sounds concerning. The message "Your TM5 froze after the 2nd cycle. CPU cores instability on weak SSE load" suggests problems with stability under light workloads. It could indicate either a faulty CPU or an incorrect extreme profile BIOS setup. To resolve this, you might want to check the CPU health, ensure proper cooling, and verify the BIOS version matches your hardware. If the problem persists, consider consulting a specialist or updating your firmware.
Ask the person who shared it directly. My interpretation would be they're implying: when the CPU executes a certain instruction type, instability appears only in that scenario, hinting that adjusting settings could fix overall stability. I’m familiar with AVX having frequency offsets on Intel boards for a while, but I haven’t heard anything about a specific setting for SSE. It might be relevant mainly for overclockers. Bad CPU: I’m not sure that was their main point.
Yes ive heard that latest intel cpu's dont really need "SSE". I was just very concerned about my expensive cpu because i have TILL Friday IF i want to RMA the cpu in case of fault and get a new one or money back. I have asked the one who gave me these settings still waiting for his reply tho....Seeing people commend me with my "won the silicon lottery cpu" ie SP-107....i was hesistant to believe that. Just with only Asrock's "extreme profile" BIOS option and NGU-32, D2D-32, RING ratio-40 = crash on gaming this with stock voltages they gave me changed voltage settings but they failled too see my first post for the voltage changes. My guess they give me certain settings in THE perspective of hardcore overclocking for every ounce of performance while maybe not seeing a guy who just want a stable system for gaming with some mild OC on Pcores and Ecores plus higher D2D/NGU and RING value that's it. Il have to wait and see.
That’s what I was aiming to clarify: simply applying settings without a gradual increase and testing won’t yield consistent outcomes. I’m doubting the reliability of the information provided, as I wouldn’t claim victory in the silicon lottery without a strong overclock on a thoroughly tested chip. If a setup isn’t stable at a certain overclock level, it fails testing and no conclusions can be drawn. Also, if you’re confused about what they’re saying, seek clarification. It seems they’re using overly technical language and focusing on specific instruction sets that don’t pass the required tests—this doesn’t assist you unless you understand their points. Moreover, poor overclock performance doesn’t automatically mean you can return a product for repair. They might accept it or reject it, but it’s not a certainty. No vendor backs performance claims beyond what’s listed. I’m not trying to spread only negative messages; I just want to help you set realistic expectations and ask the right questions. If they’re focusing on technical jargon to impress you, they’re not helping unless you’re prepared to engage meaningfully.
Really? Retail boxed CPUs should have a 3 year warranty and tray CPUs at least 1 year? In any case, you'd need to run your CPU at stock settings and I can't see any evidence so far that your CPU is broken? Instability when OCed is normal, until you find stable settings. Yeah, pretty much. To be honest, most overclockers nowadays are doing it for fun, just for benchmarks, or for social media. They're really only interested in stability in one or two apps that they use for testing and scores, not for a 24/7 build. Overclocking for regular use is pretty much dead, because modern CPUs are pushed very hard "out of the box". If you want a stable system for gaming, I'd look into Intel's "200S boost" which is supposed to be announced today and I believe is covered by the warranty. Better yet, I'd just put everything back to stock and enjoy your games.
I kept seeking more details about what these outcomes signify. So far, they haven’t replied, though they did mention my posts after two days without responding. I’d suggest waiting a bit longer before replying. I didn’t exaggerate about my SP rating; they mentioned it in the thread, saying “well nice… but seeing is believing, but there’s a reason for the SP rating on chips.” It might be possible to improve performance with adjustments and patience, though certain parts could still be mediocre. Overall, I’d lean toward sticking with the “Asrock Extreme Profile” – XMP1-8800mhz G2, D2D-30, NGU-30, RING-38. That’s not a big jump, but it’s stable right now. As long as crashes aren’t happening during gameplay, it seems acceptable. I tried setting it to 30/30 after experimenting with different voltages and ratios, which helped avoid crashes in D2D-32 and NGU-32. This process was stressful, especially since I wasn’t satisfied with the build beforehand.
Before this, I tested my system on the Extreme Profile stock version: Memtest86 twice for XMP1-8800mhz G4 at 8800mhz (G2), full pass in about three hours; Prime95 ran “IMC stress + RAM stress” for an hour without issues; OCCT with large datasets and Extreme Preset for one hour also passed without errors. My Cinebench23 results were solid—no crashes on GPU, 3Dmark, and even with a slight dip in P-core performance (around 5.5GHz), it stayed stable.
The only hiccups came when I increased the ring voltage and ratio to 40 + NGU-32. While it still passed, it didn’t perform well in games. The crashes were linked to the voltage adjustments they provided on Asrock’s Extreme profile power plan (XMP1-300W PL1, PL2, D2D at 32, NGU at 32). They suggested a voltage override of 0.900V and 1.200V, which confused me since the profile already had 0.850V. I was unsure whether it was an Intel default (0.770V) or if they were adjusting for something else.
I also received advice about changing the RING cache voltage from 1.250V to 1.200V, but they mentioned the Extreme profile already set it at that level. It seems like a newbie might not be ready yet—we all had to start somewhere. Ultimately, I’m taking responsibility and agreeing with their stance, though I’d have appreciated more guidance. As I often do on this forum, I’d appreciate some clearer explanations or tips for similar setups.
I share your thoughts on most of them. The 285k could be even better, but Intel hesitated to apply more aggressive settings. A few adjustments—like boosting D2D and NGU + RING ratio, and slightly increasing P and E cores—seem feasible with just a couple of tweaks. This might be because the Raptor Lake chip had performance issues, so Intel reduced its potential. I aimed for around 70–73ns latency, happy with a modest increase in D2D, NGU, and RING ratios, plus a small boost in P and E cores. In most overclockers' minds, just a simple overclock is enough. I hope Intel releases an updated BIOS with the "IPO" standard, which is already used in China for OEM PCs and has improved those settings. In the meantime, follow my advice: stock the extreme profile (XMP1-8800mhz g2), a slight increase in D2D-30, NGU-30, RING at 38, and nothing else. It worked well so far with latencies around 77–78ns. Thanks for the update on the "200S boost."