F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Overclocking Is your 8700k overclocking affecting its longevity?

Is your 8700k overclocking affecting its longevity?

Is your 8700k overclocking affecting its longevity?

E
Eppikx
Senior Member
447
06-18-2017, 03:14 AM
#1
Hello everyone, I discovered three stable OC settings on my Dellided 8700K. The load line calibration is set high across all overclocks. I'm using a Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Ultra MB and have resolved the VRM heating problem completely. The cache ratio is 44% at 4.4 GHz on all OCs. My current settings are: first, 1.285V at 5.0 GHz core, second, 1.340V at 5.1 GHz, third, 1.395V at 5.2 GHz. My question is, which OC should I choose for optimal performance? I can keep the CPU under 65°C and plan to maintain it for at least 4-5 years. Since I mainly use this PC for gaming at 4K resolution, I tested 4.3 GHz versus 5.3 GHz and noticed a noticeable drop in FPS impact. However, I upgraded the chip and adjusted the settings, so I prefer keeping it overclocked as much as possible. Thanks for your understanding.
E
Eppikx
06-18-2017, 03:14 AM #1

Hello everyone, I discovered three stable OC settings on my Dellided 8700K. The load line calibration is set high across all overclocks. I'm using a Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Ultra MB and have resolved the VRM heating problem completely. The cache ratio is 44% at 4.4 GHz on all OCs. My current settings are: first, 1.285V at 5.0 GHz core, second, 1.340V at 5.1 GHz, third, 1.395V at 5.2 GHz. My question is, which OC should I choose for optimal performance? I can keep the CPU under 65°C and plan to maintain it for at least 4-5 years. Since I mainly use this PC for gaming at 4K resolution, I tested 4.3 GHz versus 5.3 GHz and noticed a noticeable drop in FPS impact. However, I upgraded the chip and adjusted the settings, so I prefer keeping it overclocked as much as possible. Thanks for your understanding.

F
foxkiuby123
Member
64
06-19-2017, 03:58 PM
#2
If you don’t notice any improvement from 4.3 to 5.3 then why increase the CPU stress? Also, your memory stays under pressure because you’re sending more voltage to the CPU when it’s overclocked.
My 8700k can reach 5.1Ghz but is limited by my 980sc which handles dual 4k monitors, so it only runs at its normal speed. Perhaps once I get a new Nvidia card soon I’ll see how the CPU performs and then consider overclocking.
F
foxkiuby123
06-19-2017, 03:58 PM #2

If you don’t notice any improvement from 4.3 to 5.3 then why increase the CPU stress? Also, your memory stays under pressure because you’re sending more voltage to the CPU when it’s overclocked.
My 8700k can reach 5.1Ghz but is limited by my 980sc which handles dual 4k monitors, so it only runs at its normal speed. Perhaps once I get a new Nvidia card soon I’ll see how the CPU performs and then consider overclocking.

H
haylie_ann
Junior Member
1
06-19-2017, 11:43 PM
#3
The optimal OC would be around 5.0GHz. You could expect roughly a 4-5% boost per 100MHz above that, and even an 8700k should perform well. It's not worth pushing too high, just to avoid overloading the CPU for minimal benefit.
H
haylie_ann
06-19-2017, 11:43 PM #3

The optimal OC would be around 5.0GHz. You could expect roughly a 4-5% boost per 100MHz above that, and even an 8700k should perform well. It's not worth pushing too high, just to avoid overloading the CPU for minimal benefit.

T
taeranghee
Member
148
06-20-2017, 11:58 AM
#4
Are you working on tasks that require additional speed? If your constraints lie elsewhere, then boosting the CPU won’t be effective. A rise from 5.0 to 5.1 represents a 2% boost in clock rate, which is the greatest improvement possible if everything functions optimally.
Overclocking might become more beneficial for you in the future when higher CPU performance is needed.
But as long as temperatures and voltages remain reasonable, I anticipate any CPU could remain functional for over a decade, and I haven’t encountered a failed processor before.
T
taeranghee
06-20-2017, 11:58 AM #4

Are you working on tasks that require additional speed? If your constraints lie elsewhere, then boosting the CPU won’t be effective. A rise from 5.0 to 5.1 represents a 2% boost in clock rate, which is the greatest improvement possible if everything functions optimally.
Overclocking might become more beneficial for you in the future when higher CPU performance is needed.
But as long as temperatures and voltages remain reasonable, I anticipate any CPU could remain functional for over a decade, and I haven’t encountered a failed processor before.

T
TheHobbit10
Junior Member
14
06-20-2017, 01:28 PM
#5
Are you working on a project where extra performance matters? If your constraints lie elsewhere, increasing the CPU clock won’t be effective. A jump from 5.0 to 5.1 is only a 2% boost, which is the highest possible improvement if everything runs smoothly. Overclocking might become more beneficial in a few years when additional CPU power is needed. Still, as long as temperatures and voltages stay reasonable, I’d expect any CPU to remain functional for over a decade—never have seen one fail. I’m just gaming on that PC and that’s it; I have a Gigabyte 1080Ti Aorus Extreme 11G, watercooled/modified BIOS, and the RAM is 3200MHz CL16, Samsung Pro NVMe. I don’t see any restrictions in my setup for that processor.
T
TheHobbit10
06-20-2017, 01:28 PM #5

Are you working on a project where extra performance matters? If your constraints lie elsewhere, increasing the CPU clock won’t be effective. A jump from 5.0 to 5.1 is only a 2% boost, which is the highest possible improvement if everything runs smoothly. Overclocking might become more beneficial in a few years when additional CPU power is needed. Still, as long as temperatures and voltages stay reasonable, I’d expect any CPU to remain functional for over a decade—never have seen one fail. I’m just gaming on that PC and that’s it; I have a Gigabyte 1080Ti Aorus Extreme 11G, watercooled/modified BIOS, and the RAM is 3200MHz CL16, Samsung Pro NVMe. I don’t see any restrictions in my setup for that processor.

L
Lucianyourgod
Member
134
06-20-2017, 06:11 PM
#6
If you don’t see improvement from 4.3 to 5.3 then why increase the CPU stress? You’re also stressing your memory because you’re sending more voltage to the CPU when it’s overclocked. My 8700k can reach 5.1Ghz, but it’s limited by my 980sc which is running dual 4k monitors, so it just stays at normal speeds. Perhaps once I get a new Nvidia card soon I’ll check how the CPU performs and then consider overclocking again. No real gain from 4.3 to 5.3 at 1.465v (just for testing), but you know I did it by opening it with a knife from a local store 😄. So I tried everything else—Dellid, liquid metal—and this chip is K. I think there’s no reason not to try overclocking when I can handle any stress test under 65°C even at 1.4v, and gaming temps are between 45-55°C.
L
Lucianyourgod
06-20-2017, 06:11 PM #6

If you don’t see improvement from 4.3 to 5.3 then why increase the CPU stress? You’re also stressing your memory because you’re sending more voltage to the CPU when it’s overclocked. My 8700k can reach 5.1Ghz, but it’s limited by my 980sc which is running dual 4k monitors, so it just stays at normal speeds. Perhaps once I get a new Nvidia card soon I’ll check how the CPU performs and then consider overclocking again. No real gain from 4.3 to 5.3 at 1.465v (just for testing), but you know I did it by opening it with a knife from a local store 😄. So I tried everything else—Dellid, liquid metal—and this chip is K. I think there’s no reason not to try overclocking when I can handle any stress test under 65°C even at 1.4v, and gaming temps are between 45-55°C.

N
nuubibuubi
Junior Member
1
06-22-2017, 02:16 PM
#7
Can't pick between 5.1 and 5.2hz. I need the CPU to last only 4-6 years, after which I'll replace it. If it lasts that long at 1.4v, 5.2 seems perfect for me, but I'm not sure if it's enough. That's why I'm asking you guys.
N
nuubibuubi
06-22-2017, 02:16 PM #7

Can't pick between 5.1 and 5.2hz. I need the CPU to last only 4-6 years, after which I'll replace it. If it lasts that long at 1.4v, 5.2 seems perfect for me, but I'm not sure if it's enough. That's why I'm asking you guys.

T
tamemarco
Senior Member
482
06-24-2017, 07:51 AM
#8
For 4 to 5 years, that's a clear choice, reduced voltage means cooler performance and extended durability!
But remember, sir, there are no assurances with overclocking, don't you realize?
T
tamemarco
06-24-2017, 07:51 AM #8

For 4 to 5 years, that's a clear choice, reduced voltage means cooler performance and extended durability!
But remember, sir, there are no assurances with overclocking, don't you realize?

I
Ignorance69
Junior Member
40
06-28-2017, 02:32 AM
#9
4Ryan6 :
For 4 to 5 years, that's a clear choice, less voltage means lower temperature and extended lifespan!
But remember, sir, there are no guarantees when it comes to overclocking, don't you forget that.
1st 1.285v 5hz core
I plan to run it at 5.2hz with 1.380v, I believe it will last another 5 years, after which I'll replace it.
I
Ignorance69
06-28-2017, 02:32 AM #9

4Ryan6 :
For 4 to 5 years, that's a clear choice, less voltage means lower temperature and extended lifespan!
But remember, sir, there are no guarantees when it comes to overclocking, don't you forget that.
1st 1.285v 5hz core
I plan to run it at 5.2hz with 1.380v, I believe it will last another 5 years, after which I'll replace it.

R
Rub3nrub3n
Junior Member
40
06-29-2017, 03:20 PM
#10
Why seek guidance if you don’t plan to use it to extend your CPU’s life?
It’s your equipment and your budget, so go ahead and try. You’ll likely avoid the situation of wondering why things went wrong later.
Good luck!
R
Rub3nrub3n
06-29-2017, 03:20 PM #10

Why seek guidance if you don’t plan to use it to extend your CPU’s life?
It’s your equipment and your budget, so go ahead and try. You’ll likely avoid the situation of wondering why things went wrong later.
Good luck!