F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Overclocking Get guidance on boosting your i5 6600k's performance

Get guidance on boosting your i5 6600k's performance

Get guidance on boosting your i5 6600k's performance

Pages (2): 1 2 Next
D
147
03-16-2016, 01:44 AM
#1
I recently increased my i5 6600K to 4.2 GHz, but the core temperatures are reaching 72°C. I’m unsure if this is within safe limits or if lowering the overclock would be better. I ran a stress test using CPUID CPU-Z for ten minutes to check for temperature spikes and stability. Thank you to everyone who assists, and please accept my apologies for any grammatical mistakes—I’ve always struggled with spelling and grammar.
D
DGfanboyiscool
03-16-2016, 01:44 AM #1

I recently increased my i5 6600K to 4.2 GHz, but the core temperatures are reaching 72°C. I’m unsure if this is within safe limits or if lowering the overclock would be better. I ran a stress test using CPUID CPU-Z for ten minutes to check for temperature spikes and stability. Thank you to everyone who assists, and please accept my apologies for any grammatical mistakes—I’ve always struggled with spelling and grammar.

L
Lovechurros
Member
197
03-16-2016, 03:51 AM
#2
TJ Hooker:
What voltage are you using for 4.2 GHz?
1.270V
Have you noticed instability at 4.2 GHz with any lower voltage? I just wanted to check, as it seems quite high. I have a 6700K at 4.5 GHz with 1.215V. Obviously, CPU overclocking varies a lot.
L
Lovechurros
03-16-2016, 03:51 AM #2

TJ Hooker:
What voltage are you using for 4.2 GHz?
1.270V
Have you noticed instability at 4.2 GHz with any lower voltage? I just wanted to check, as it seems quite high. I have a 6700K at 4.5 GHz with 1.215V. Obviously, CPU overclocking varies a lot.

X
x15Ghost15x
Member
183
03-16-2016, 05:24 PM
#3
It's completely safe. I wouldn't attempt to go further without improved cooling, but it should function adequately
X
x15Ghost15x
03-16-2016, 05:24 PM #3

It's completely safe. I wouldn't attempt to go further without improved cooling, but it should function adequately

K
Kiablo
Junior Member
6
03-29-2016, 08:17 AM
#4
That's completely fine. I wouldn't attempt higher speeds without improved cooling, but it should be manageable. Thanks for the response—it's my first overclocking experience, so I'm a bit anxious about handling my PC. I built it a few months ago and it's been my first build yet. I'm happy with it so far, but I'm eager to get the best performance from my components.
K
Kiablo
03-29-2016, 08:17 AM #4

That's completely fine. I wouldn't attempt higher speeds without improved cooling, but it should be manageable. Thanks for the response—it's my first overclocking experience, so I'm a bit anxious about handling my PC. I built it a few months ago and it's been my first build yet. I'm happy with it so far, but I'm eager to get the best performance from my components.

S
Samu02
Member
184
04-18-2016, 02:06 PM
#5
The voltage you are using for 4.2 GHz is 4.2 GHz.
S
Samu02
04-18-2016, 02:06 PM #5

The voltage you are using for 4.2 GHz is 4.2 GHz.

C
CuzImSlasher
Member
114
04-18-2016, 09:09 PM
#6
What voltage are you employing for 4.2 GHz?
1.270V
C
CuzImSlasher
04-18-2016, 09:09 PM #6

What voltage are you employing for 4.2 GHz?
1.270V

S
Sheep_VeNoM
Member
112
04-19-2016, 12:36 AM
#7
CPU Z isn't an effective stress test, even AIDA64 performs better and doesn't reveal much. Consider using Prime95 and running a small FFT. You might also try keeping the voltage unchanged and increasing the clock speed. Your motherboard has four power phases, which suggests it's not ideal for overclocking.
S
Sheep_VeNoM
04-19-2016, 12:36 AM #7

CPU Z isn't an effective stress test, even AIDA64 performs better and doesn't reveal much. Consider using Prime95 and running a small FFT. You might also try keeping the voltage unchanged and increasing the clock speed. Your motherboard has four power phases, which suggests it's not ideal for overclocking.

A
Amtrak10
Senior Member
639
04-26-2016, 04:58 AM
#8
TJ Hooker:
What voltage are you using for 4.2 GHz?
1.270V
Have you noticed instability at 4.2 GHz with any lower voltage? I just wanted to check, as it seems quite high. I have a 6700K at 4.5 GHz with 1.215V. Obviously, CPU overclocking varies a lot.
A
Amtrak10
04-26-2016, 04:58 AM #8

TJ Hooker:
What voltage are you using for 4.2 GHz?
1.270V
Have you noticed instability at 4.2 GHz with any lower voltage? I just wanted to check, as it seems quite high. I have a 6700K at 4.5 GHz with 1.215V. Obviously, CPU overclocking varies a lot.

F
flappykat
Junior Member
4
05-04-2016, 12:11 AM
#9
TJ Hooker:
What voltage are you using for 4.2 GHz?
1.270V
Did you notice it became unstable at 4.2 GHz with any voltage below that? I just wanted to check, since that seems a bit high. I have a 6700K at 4.5 GHz with 1.215V. Obviously, every CPU overclocks differently.
I haven’t tried lower when I overclocked my motherboard; it raised the voltage I could test with and I think I should try even lower to keep things cooler.
F
flappykat
05-04-2016, 12:11 AM #9

TJ Hooker:
What voltage are you using for 4.2 GHz?
1.270V
Did you notice it became unstable at 4.2 GHz with any voltage below that? I just wanted to check, since that seems a bit high. I have a 6700K at 4.5 GHz with 1.215V. Obviously, every CPU overclocks differently.
I haven’t tried lower when I overclocked my motherboard; it raised the voltage I could test with and I think I should try even lower to keep things cooler.

M
Mobarley7
Member
186
05-04-2016, 04:19 AM
#10
TJ Hooker:
What voltage are you using for 4.2 GHz?
I checked and it's 1.270V. Did you notice instability at 4.2 GHz with any lower voltage? That seems a bit high, but I have a 6700K running at 4.5 GHz with 1.215V. Every CPU overclocks differently, though. Oh, I was mistaken in my previous message—the correct value is 1.625 if I recall right.
M
Mobarley7
05-04-2016, 04:19 AM #10

TJ Hooker:
What voltage are you using for 4.2 GHz?
I checked and it's 1.270V. Did you notice instability at 4.2 GHz with any lower voltage? That seems a bit high, but I have a 6700K running at 4.5 GHz with 1.215V. Every CPU overclocks differently, though. Oh, I was mistaken in my previous message—the correct value is 1.625 if I recall right.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next