F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Overclocking Inconsistant V-core at stock

Inconsistant V-core at stock

Inconsistant V-core at stock

Pages (2): 1 2 Next
T
Th3G4merX
Senior Member
700
02-10-2016, 02:12 PM
#1
Hey everyone,
I’m planning to boost my CPU’s speed and need it to handle my 3200MHz RAM. I’m new to overclocking and was browsing some forum posts for guidance. While benchmarking at stock settings, I saw CPUID’s Hardware monitor showing a very high Vcore (~1.45v). Comparing with the hardware monitor that came with my motherboard utilities, it looks much lower.

If CPUID is accurate, then my CPU at stock is running above its recommended maximum of 1.35v. I’m curious if this discrepancy is due to software issues or if the actual voltage is indeed higher than expected.

My setup:
Intel i5 6600K
Corsair H60 SE
Gigabyte Z170X - Gaming 5
Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB @ 3200Mhz (currently at 2133Mhz)
Antec High Current Gamer (900W)
XFX Radeon R9 380 (4GB)

Vcore readings:
I hope this helps clarify the situation.
T
Th3G4merX
02-10-2016, 02:12 PM #1

Hey everyone,
I’m planning to boost my CPU’s speed and need it to handle my 3200MHz RAM. I’m new to overclocking and was browsing some forum posts for guidance. While benchmarking at stock settings, I saw CPUID’s Hardware monitor showing a very high Vcore (~1.45v). Comparing with the hardware monitor that came with my motherboard utilities, it looks much lower.

If CPUID is accurate, then my CPU at stock is running above its recommended maximum of 1.35v. I’m curious if this discrepancy is due to software issues or if the actual voltage is indeed higher than expected.

My setup:
Intel i5 6600K
Corsair H60 SE
Gigabyte Z170X - Gaming 5
Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB @ 3200Mhz (currently at 2133Mhz)
Antec High Current Gamer (900W)
XFX Radeon R9 380 (4GB)

Vcore readings:
I hope this helps clarify the situation.

S
Slaythoms
Member
139
02-29-2016, 02:42 AM
#2
The new Skylake CPU has shifted the voltage regulator from the CPU to the motherboard. Intel hasn't given a specific recommended Vcore for these unclocked chips at stock. Consequently, motherboard makers have chosen their own values. To be sure about the new Skylake chip, they often set a higher Base Vcore that the CPU can adjust as needed. Several users have noted significantly higher Vcores on certain motherboards.

You might want to try using the UEFI/BIOS to lower your CPU's voltage. If you intend to overclock, you can either combine both approaches or undervolt now and then overclock later.
S
Slaythoms
02-29-2016, 02:42 AM #2

The new Skylake CPU has shifted the voltage regulator from the CPU to the motherboard. Intel hasn't given a specific recommended Vcore for these unclocked chips at stock. Consequently, motherboard makers have chosen their own values. To be sure about the new Skylake chip, they often set a higher Base Vcore that the CPU can adjust as needed. Several users have noted significantly higher Vcores on certain motherboards.

You might want to try using the UEFI/BIOS to lower your CPU's voltage. If you intend to overclock, you can either combine both approaches or undervolt now and then overclock later.

F
Frizouille64
Junior Member
4
02-29-2016, 11:01 AM
#3
Hey DonkeyOatie, Yeah I do plan to overclock, I'm just a little confused is all because one of the stickies on this forum "Intel temperature guide" states that the i series 6th gen max recommended Vcore was 1.35v.
However I had noted a few posts about the Vcore for this generation being unusually high. So I'd believe what you are saying.
As I am completely new to this and know that there is always more to learn and read about overclocking any help with the process would be greatly appreciated.
Are there any potential BIOS settings or otherwise that would be boosting the Vcore past what is actually set to in the BIOS? From memory it's currently set to something around 1.1-1.2
F
Frizouille64
02-29-2016, 11:01 AM #3

Hey DonkeyOatie, Yeah I do plan to overclock, I'm just a little confused is all because one of the stickies on this forum "Intel temperature guide" states that the i series 6th gen max recommended Vcore was 1.35v.
However I had noted a few posts about the Vcore for this generation being unusually high. So I'd believe what you are saying.
As I am completely new to this and know that there is always more to learn and read about overclocking any help with the process would be greatly appreciated.
Are there any potential BIOS settings or otherwise that would be boosting the Vcore past what is actually set to in the BIOS? From memory it's currently set to something around 1.1-1.2

R
Rubb_
Member
123
03-01-2016, 12:12 AM
#4
I don't agree. I believe you're seeing the default settings of the board. My doubt comes from not having your system in front of me to examine and test. The first step would be to enter BIOS/UEFI and manually adjust the Vcore to 1.200V before performing any tests or stress checks. Do you know how to do this? If not, start reading and researching. I'll be happy to answer questions, but you need to understand this on your own.
R
Rubb_
03-01-2016, 12:12 AM #4

I don't agree. I believe you're seeing the default settings of the board. My doubt comes from not having your system in front of me to examine and test. The first step would be to enter BIOS/UEFI and manually adjust the Vcore to 1.200V before performing any tests or stress checks. Do you know how to do this? If not, start reading and researching. I'll be happy to answer questions, but you need to understand this on your own.

R
RamboAllie
Junior Member
4
03-01-2016, 12:33 AM
#5
Yeah, I get it. As a quick thought, could turbo mode be influencing the Vcore? Usually I'd run Prime95 with Small FFTs since the change mainly affects the CPU, and I don't think we need to test RAM at that time.
R
RamboAllie
03-01-2016, 12:33 AM #5

Yeah, I get it. As a quick thought, could turbo mode be influencing the Vcore? Usually I'd run Prime95 with Small FFTs since the change mainly affects the CPU, and I don't think we need to test RAM at that time.

K
Kecs
Member
204
03-21-2016, 05:47 PM
#6
Yes, Turbo is influencing Vcore, which is expected. The real issue is the excessive $%^$#@# level of the Vcore. If you run Prime95 (version 26.6), it's safe; newer versions could harm these processors. OCCT and ASUS RealBench offer solid benchmarks and stress tests. OCCT tends to cause failures quickly, while Prime95 might take longer but can detect stable components after hours. You should monitor temperatures with tools like OCCT or HWMonitor, which you already use.
K
Kecs
03-21-2016, 05:47 PM #6

Yes, Turbo is influencing Vcore, which is expected. The real issue is the excessive $%^$#@# level of the Vcore. If you run Prime95 (version 26.6), it's safe; newer versions could harm these processors. OCCT and ASUS RealBench offer solid benchmarks and stress tests. OCCT tends to cause failures quickly, while Prime95 might take longer but can detect stable components after hours. You should monitor temperatures with tools like OCCT or HWMonitor, which you already use.

H
HitsLikeNoah_
Member
138
03-23-2016, 01:20 AM
#7
Right now I'm really hoping I made a good decision by purchasing the MSI Mboard, because it had built-in check points.
Now that I've adjusted the Vcore in BIOS from auto (showing 1.125V) to manual 1.2V, the CPUID HW monitor is displaying 1.5V and Gigabyte's SIV is showing 1.14V.
I'm becoming quite worried about this situation. Why are the software tools that most people trust providing such high readings? I do notice that regardless of whether the system is running lightly or Prime95, the Vcore remains fairly steady... But the only consistent reading is between 1.5 and 1.6V. It should be decreasing when the system isn't under heavy load, yet it doesn't seem to be.
H
HitsLikeNoah_
03-23-2016, 01:20 AM #7

Right now I'm really hoping I made a good decision by purchasing the MSI Mboard, because it had built-in check points.
Now that I've adjusted the Vcore in BIOS from auto (showing 1.125V) to manual 1.2V, the CPUID HW monitor is displaying 1.5V and Gigabyte's SIV is showing 1.14V.
I'm becoming quite worried about this situation. Why are the software tools that most people trust providing such high readings? I do notice that regardless of whether the system is running lightly or Prime95, the Vcore remains fairly steady... But the only consistent reading is between 1.5 and 1.6V. It should be decreasing when the system isn't under heavy load, yet it doesn't seem to be.

T
ThatMiningGuy
Senior Member
704
03-23-2016, 08:40 AM
#8
When using BIOS to adjust Vcore to 1.200V, what method were you employing?
T
ThatMiningGuy
03-23-2016, 08:40 AM #8

When using BIOS to adjust Vcore to 1.200V, what method were you employing?

X
xMrAlexYTx
Junior Member
1
04-06-2016, 05:23 AM
#9
From BIOS I navigated to advanced voltage settings and then to CPU core voltage control, adjusting the CPU Vcore from auto to 1.2v. I kept the CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration as auto (under advanced power settings), but switching it to normal reduced the variation a bit, though it remains quite high compared to expected levels.

The CPUID's HW Monitor reads around 1.57v and the SIV Hardware monitor shows approximately 1.18V. Ignoring the fluctuations for now, could there really be a solid explanation for why these two tools display such different readings? Gigabyte's SIV tends to stay close to the intended Vcore, whereas CPUID's value is nowhere near its target.
X
xMrAlexYTx
04-06-2016, 05:23 AM #9

From BIOS I navigated to advanced voltage settings and then to CPU core voltage control, adjusting the CPU Vcore from auto to 1.2v. I kept the CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration as auto (under advanced power settings), but switching it to normal reduced the variation a bit, though it remains quite high compared to expected levels.

The CPUID's HW Monitor reads around 1.57v and the SIV Hardware monitor shows approximately 1.18V. Ignoring the fluctuations for now, could there really be a solid explanation for why these two tools display such different readings? Gigabyte's SIV tends to stay close to the intended Vcore, whereas CPUID's value is nowhere near its target.

M
MadMats100
Member
129
04-06-2016, 06:26 AM
#10
I'm not sure why I prefer ASRock boards, though Gigabyte offers quality products too; Skylake is still relatively new, and I don't have much specific experience with it. I plan to work on this during the summer vacation. What about your temperatures? 1.5°C or higher should be quite warm.
M
MadMats100
04-06-2016, 06:26 AM #10

I'm not sure why I prefer ASRock boards, though Gigabyte offers quality products too; Skylake is still relatively new, and I don't have much specific experience with it. I plan to work on this during the summer vacation. What about your temperatures? 1.5°C or higher should be quite warm.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next