F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Overclocking Initial OC Configuration (4,8 GHz)

Initial OC Configuration (4,8 GHz)

Initial OC Configuration (4,8 GHz)

P
PonchiClient
Junior Member
17
05-13-2017, 08:20 PM
#1
I just wanted to check if I made a mistake. I have an i7 7700k on an MSI MPower Z270 Titanium board, changed the cores from 4,2 to 4,8 with a voltage of 1.200, and thought everything was working well until I realized that even under load I’m stuck at 4,8018 GHz but only need 1.016 Volt. Am I missing something or did I just hit a 1 in a Million chip? If so, could someone clarify if I got the settings wrong?
P
PonchiClient
05-13-2017, 08:20 PM #1

I just wanted to check if I made a mistake. I have an i7 7700k on an MSI MPower Z270 Titanium board, changed the cores from 4,2 to 4,8 with a voltage of 1.200, and thought everything was working well until I realized that even under load I’m stuck at 4,8018 GHz but only need 1.016 Volt. Am I missing something or did I just hit a 1 in a Million chip? If so, could someone clarify if I got the settings wrong?

S
SkyInsane
Senior Member
718
05-18-2017, 01:07 AM
#2
CPU-Z has its limitations. HWinfo provides significantly more details. HWmonitor, Open hardware monitor, Realtemp, Speccy, Speedfan, various Windows utilities, CPU-Z and most bundled motherboard tools are often not ideal since they can be unreliable. Certain chipsets or sensors may perform poorly or fail to work effectively. I've discovered HWinfo or CoreTemp to be the most accurate across a wide range of chipsets and sensors, and they are regularly updated.

CoreTemp excels at tracking CPU temperatures, such as core temperatures or proximity to TJmax on AMD systems.
S
SkyInsane
05-18-2017, 01:07 AM #2

CPU-Z has its limitations. HWinfo provides significantly more details. HWmonitor, Open hardware monitor, Realtemp, Speccy, Speedfan, various Windows utilities, CPU-Z and most bundled motherboard tools are often not ideal since they can be unreliable. Certain chipsets or sensors may perform poorly or fail to work effectively. I've discovered HWinfo or CoreTemp to be the most accurate across a wide range of chipsets and sensors, and they are regularly updated.

CoreTemp excels at tracking CPU temperatures, such as core temperatures or proximity to TJmax on AMD systems.

K
Keanei
Member
103
05-23-2017, 06:59 AM
#3
No, there are no chips that can handle even stock speeds at 1.016v, let alone at 4.8Ghz with 1.2v. Never. Ever. You're focusing on the core VID, not the CPU voltage. For a 4.8Ghz OC on modern Intel CPUs, you'll need voltages around 1.35v or higher with a high line load calibration or a setting between 4 to 6, depending on your board and LLC options. Even if it boots and runs, stability is unlikely—make sure thermal and stability requirements are met before assuming success. Start here, then refine the settings once you're confident about compatibility.
K
Keanei
05-23-2017, 06:59 AM #3

No, there are no chips that can handle even stock speeds at 1.016v, let alone at 4.8Ghz with 1.2v. Never. Ever. You're focusing on the core VID, not the CPU voltage. For a 4.8Ghz OC on modern Intel CPUs, you'll need voltages around 1.35v or higher with a high line load calibration or a setting between 4 to 6, depending on your board and LLC options. Even if it boots and runs, stability is unlikely—make sure thermal and stability requirements are met before assuming success. Start here, then refine the settings once you're confident about compatibility.

I
IcemanLFC
Member
175
05-23-2017, 11:31 AM
#4
Sure, I'd be happy to receive your CPU-Z statistics to help me better understand your situation.
I
IcemanLFC
05-23-2017, 11:31 AM #4

Sure, I'd be happy to receive your CPU-Z statistics to help me better understand your situation.