F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Overclocking Overclocking the i5 4690k to 4.2ghz resulted in a temporary jump to 5ghz during tasks.

Overclocking the i5 4690k to 4.2ghz resulted in a temporary jump to 5ghz during tasks.

Overclocking the i5 4690k to 4.2ghz resulted in a temporary jump to 5ghz during tasks.

Pages (3): Previous 1 2 3
T
TP98
Member
174
02-08-2017, 08:50 PM
#21
Just tried another adjustment to the bios, setting each core to 42 and using a different CPU monitor called 'Open hardware monitor'. I also switched back to dynamic mode and played Star Wars Battlefront 40 player online.
I saw around 50-70% core usage on all of them.
Then I returned to bios, set it back to all cores at 42 with dynamic mode enabled, and the usage spread evenly across all cores—looking more balanced. When I closed the game, everything dropped to 1-5% and the GPU dropped to as low as 800, which seems like a better overclock and a more accurate monitor.
It never stayed above 42 during gameplay.
The task manager keeps showing it at 4.17 all the time, which isn’t great for accuracy.
For safety, I’ll run all benchmarks in static mode just in case it overclocks my CPU, especially during long tests like 9 hours.
T
TP98
02-08-2017, 08:50 PM #21

Just tried another adjustment to the bios, setting each core to 42 and using a different CPU monitor called 'Open hardware monitor'. I also switched back to dynamic mode and played Star Wars Battlefront 40 player online.
I saw around 50-70% core usage on all of them.
Then I returned to bios, set it back to all cores at 42 with dynamic mode enabled, and the usage spread evenly across all cores—looking more balanced. When I closed the game, everything dropped to 1-5% and the GPU dropped to as low as 800, which seems like a better overclock and a more accurate monitor.
It never stayed above 42 during gameplay.
The task manager keeps showing it at 4.17 all the time, which isn’t great for accuracy.
For safety, I’ll run all benchmarks in static mode just in case it overclocks my CPU, especially during long tests like 9 hours.

P
Prawnflakes
Member
204
02-11-2017, 09:23 PM
#22
ORION85 continued discussing their recent overclocking experience, mentioning adjustments to the BIOS settings, using a specific CPU monitor, and testing in various modes. They reported achieving 50-70% core usage and noted improved stability after switching back to dynamic mode. The system remained balanced, with low temperatures and reduced GPU load when shutting down. However, they observed the task manager frequently displaying an incorrect version number, indicating potential accuracy issues. They also mentioned running benchmarks in static mode for safety, especially for longer tests, and recommended using Realbench after stress testing AIDA64.
P
Prawnflakes
02-11-2017, 09:23 PM #22

ORION85 continued discussing their recent overclocking experience, mentioning adjustments to the BIOS settings, using a specific CPU monitor, and testing in various modes. They reported achieving 50-70% core usage and noted improved stability after switching back to dynamic mode. The system remained balanced, with low temperatures and reduced GPU load when shutting down. However, they observed the task manager frequently displaying an incorrect version number, indicating potential accuracy issues. They also mentioned running benchmarks in static mode for safety, especially for longer tests, and recommended using Realbench after stress testing AIDA64.

T
TheTrueDarkOne
Junior Member
47
02-11-2017, 09:42 PM
#23
I plan to run Aida now and test real bench when I go to work.
For pushing it further it didn’t seem to want to go any higher than 4.3ghz at 1.25, and I wouldn’t want to increase the voltage to 1.3 - 1.4 since that’s quite high for chip temperature and lifespan.
Plus, I only have a £130 gaming board; if I had an x99 deluxe 2 I’d feel more confident about it, especially in terms of build quality.
I’m satisfied with the good temperature results so far. It must be a good chip and I also tuned my own custom fan curve in the BIOS.
It was laughably set at 85 degrees before, and even though I wasn’t planning to overclock, I thought it was a foolish idea to push it that high. I lowered it to 75 degrees at 100%, then adjusted the curve down by 10-20 degrees. It seems to be working well.
T
TheTrueDarkOne
02-11-2017, 09:42 PM #23

I plan to run Aida now and test real bench when I go to work.
For pushing it further it didn’t seem to want to go any higher than 4.3ghz at 1.25, and I wouldn’t want to increase the voltage to 1.3 - 1.4 since that’s quite high for chip temperature and lifespan.
Plus, I only have a £130 gaming board; if I had an x99 deluxe 2 I’d feel more confident about it, especially in terms of build quality.
I’m satisfied with the good temperature results so far. It must be a good chip and I also tuned my own custom fan curve in the BIOS.
It was laughably set at 85 degrees before, and even though I wasn’t planning to overclock, I thought it was a foolish idea to push it that high. I lowered it to 75 degrees at 100%, then adjusted the curve down by 10-20 degrees. It seems to be working well.

Z
Zedsw
Junior Member
18
02-14-2017, 11:56 PM
#24
Real bench completed 8 hours without issues. Tomorrow's event.
Z
Zedsw
02-14-2017, 11:56 PM #24

Real bench completed 8 hours without issues. Tomorrow's event.

I
ItsTimeBomb
Member
119
02-15-2017, 01:11 AM
#25
ORION85 shared that the real bench ran for 8 hours without any issues. The next day will be important. I think you're almost there now. 😉
I
ItsTimeBomb
02-15-2017, 01:11 AM #25

ORION85 shared that the real bench ran for 8 hours without any issues. The next day will be important. I think you're almost there now. 😉

K
kaloood23
Member
165
02-16-2017, 05:16 PM
#26
It's nice to hear from you, Seanie, thank you so much again for your assistance.
K
kaloood23
02-16-2017, 05:16 PM #26

It's nice to hear from you, Seanie, thank you so much again for your assistance.

Pages (3): Previous 1 2 3