F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Overclocking Running AMD FX-6300 at high speeds with Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 R5

Running AMD FX-6300 at high speeds with Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 R5

Running AMD FX-6300 at high speeds with Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 R5

J
Josi802
Member
100
03-07-2016, 11:10 AM
#1
I have a new system (installed April 1, 2016) built with an AMD FX-6300 on a GA-990FXA-UD3 R5 motherboard. I’m currently running it overclocked to 4007 MHz (229.0 BCLK, 17.5x multiplier) at a stable 1.4 volts for the core voltage, with no temperature problems using a Cryorig H7. My RAM is also overclocked to 2133 MHz from 1866MHz.

I’m curious about the safe maximum voltage for this motherboard and CPU. I understand it’s difficult to get precise numbers since each component varies, but I’d appreciate any general guidance. Since I have such a powerful cooler, I want to maximize performance, but right now at 4GHz it runs smoothly without overheating, even at idle on an AMD chip.

I’m hoping you can offer some advice. CPU spec in Piriform:
J
Josi802
03-07-2016, 11:10 AM #1

I have a new system (installed April 1, 2016) built with an AMD FX-6300 on a GA-990FXA-UD3 R5 motherboard. I’m currently running it overclocked to 4007 MHz (229.0 BCLK, 17.5x multiplier) at a stable 1.4 volts for the core voltage, with no temperature problems using a Cryorig H7. My RAM is also overclocked to 2133 MHz from 1866MHz.

I’m curious about the safe maximum voltage for this motherboard and CPU. I understand it’s difficult to get precise numbers since each component varies, but I’d appreciate any general guidance. Since I have such a powerful cooler, I want to maximize performance, but right now at 4GHz it runs smoothly without overheating, even at idle on an AMD chip.

I’m hoping you can offer some advice. CPU spec in Piriform:

S
Starlord167
Junior Member
44
03-07-2016, 11:39 AM
#2
The maximum voltage is 1.5V according to AMD guidelines for that CPU. Even though some people consider it higher (with personal risk), why might someone be focusing only on increasing the bclk rather than the CPU multiplier?
S
Starlord167
03-07-2016, 11:39 AM #2

The maximum voltage is 1.5V according to AMD guidelines for that CPU. Even though some people consider it higher (with personal risk), why might someone be focusing only on increasing the bclk rather than the CPU multiplier?

S
Seoulsib
Member
192
03-10-2016, 06:24 AM
#3
1.5V is the upper limit according to AMD for that CPU. Even though some users opt for higher values (at their own risk), why do you only adjust the BCLK instead of the CPU multiplier? I experimented a bit, and some have advised that BCLK overclocking is the most secure approach.
S
Seoulsib
03-10-2016, 06:24 AM #3

1.5V is the upper limit according to AMD for that CPU. Even though some users opt for higher values (at their own risk), why do you only adjust the BCLK instead of the CPU multiplier? I experimented a bit, and some have advised that BCLK overclocking is the most secure approach.

V
Viitin7
Member
214
03-10-2016, 07:06 AM
#4
BeholdenCypress :
1.5V is the upper limit according to AMD for that CPU. While some might push it higher (at their own risk), why are you merely boosting the BCLK? Is there a valid reason behind this approach?
I experimented and heard some suggest BCLK overclocking is the safest method.
In reality, I’d advise the contrary. Unlocked multipliers serve a purpose—start by raising the clock speed first. Reset everything to its default setting. Turn off turbo mode, then increment the multiplier gradually... checking stability and temperatures at each step. Only increase the vcore when instability appears.
Raising the BCLK affects all components dependent on it. If you face instability, it’s hard to pinpoint the exact cause. Therefore, if you choose to adjust the BCLK, consider also slowing down memory speeds to isolate issues.
V
Viitin7
03-10-2016, 07:06 AM #4

BeholdenCypress :
1.5V is the upper limit according to AMD for that CPU. While some might push it higher (at their own risk), why are you merely boosting the BCLK? Is there a valid reason behind this approach?
I experimented and heard some suggest BCLK overclocking is the safest method.
In reality, I’d advise the contrary. Unlocked multipliers serve a purpose—start by raising the clock speed first. Reset everything to its default setting. Turn off turbo mode, then increment the multiplier gradually... checking stability and temperatures at each step. Only increase the vcore when instability appears.
Raising the BCLK affects all components dependent on it. If you face instability, it’s hard to pinpoint the exact cause. Therefore, if you choose to adjust the BCLK, consider also slowing down memory speeds to isolate issues.

S
SonyVegas_
Member
179
03-14-2016, 11:38 PM
#5
BeholdenCypress :
clutchc :
1.5V is the upper limit according to AMD for that CPU. Some people claim it can be higher (at their own risk). Why are you only boosting the BCLK instead of the CPU multiplier? I experimented a bit, and some have advised that BCLK overclocking is the safest approach.
I’d recommend doing the opposite. Unlocked multipliers serve a purpose. Start by raising the clock speed first. Restore everything to its default setting. Turn off turbo mode, then gradually increase the multiplier one step at a time... testing stability and temperature after each change. Only raise the vcore when instability appears.
Raising the BCLK raises the clock speed of all components dependent on it. If you end up with unstable overclocking, it becomes hard to pinpoint the exact cause. Therefore, if you choose to increase BCLK, consider slowing down other clocks like memory to isolate the issue.
I reset my BCLK to 200 (the stock value for this board) and incrementally increased the multiplier as you suggested. After booting up, I ran Prime95 for about 30 minutes each time. I achieved stable performance at 4.3 GHz with a 1.5V Vcore.
Is there anything else I can try to push it further, or did I miss an opportunity?
S
SonyVegas_
03-14-2016, 11:38 PM #5

BeholdenCypress :
clutchc :
1.5V is the upper limit according to AMD for that CPU. Some people claim it can be higher (at their own risk). Why are you only boosting the BCLK instead of the CPU multiplier? I experimented a bit, and some have advised that BCLK overclocking is the safest approach.
I’d recommend doing the opposite. Unlocked multipliers serve a purpose. Start by raising the clock speed first. Restore everything to its default setting. Turn off turbo mode, then gradually increase the multiplier one step at a time... testing stability and temperature after each change. Only raise the vcore when instability appears.
Raising the BCLK raises the clock speed of all components dependent on it. If you end up with unstable overclocking, it becomes hard to pinpoint the exact cause. Therefore, if you choose to increase BCLK, consider slowing down other clocks like memory to isolate the issue.
I reset my BCLK to 200 (the stock value for this board) and incrementally increased the multiplier as you suggested. After booting up, I ran Prime95 for about 30 minutes each time. I achieved stable performance at 4.3 GHz with a 1.5V Vcore.
Is there anything else I can try to push it further, or did I miss an opportunity?

I
iRaine
Posting Freak
800
03-14-2016, 11:49 PM
#6
It seems the answer hinges on how rigid you are about the OC requirements. Running at P95 for extended periods works, but I've been testing with IBT at its standard settings recently. So far, no crashes during gaming or regular use if it passes IBT at default.
The board itself might also be a factor. In my experience, I haven't had much success with the two Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 boards I tried. Eventually, I got an Asrock Extreme6 and achieved up to 4.7 GHz using my FX-6350 with IBT for stress testing.
I
iRaine
03-14-2016, 11:49 PM #6

It seems the answer hinges on how rigid you are about the OC requirements. Running at P95 for extended periods works, but I've been testing with IBT at its standard settings recently. So far, no crashes during gaming or regular use if it passes IBT at default.
The board itself might also be a factor. In my experience, I haven't had much success with the two Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 boards I tried. Eventually, I got an Asrock Extreme6 and achieved up to 4.7 GHz using my FX-6350 with IBT for stress testing.

S
Skeletore
Junior Member
24
03-16-2016, 02:00 PM
#7
I'm using my 6350 at 4,8 GHz with the same MB running continuously under Scythe Mugen3 air cooler. I'm only using Kingston HyperX 1866 MHz RAM. It's not exceeding 1.4 volts and mostly maintaining around 1.327v unless all cores are pushed to their limit. The LLC is set to Normal. There was no noticeable improvement from adding BLCK beyond the multiplier setting.
S
Skeletore
03-16-2016, 02:00 PM #7

I'm using my 6350 at 4,8 GHz with the same MB running continuously under Scythe Mugen3 air cooler. I'm only using Kingston HyperX 1866 MHz RAM. It's not exceeding 1.4 volts and mostly maintaining around 1.327v unless all cores are pushed to their limit. The LLC is set to Normal. There was no noticeable improvement from adding BLCK beyond the multiplier setting.