F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Overclocking Safe Overclock for a 5820k?

Safe Overclock for a 5820k?

Safe Overclock for a 5820k?

Pages (2): 1 2 Next
S
Sangna123
Junior Member
16
12-14-2025, 03:39 AM
#1
I achieved a speed of 4.4k Ghz on my i7 5820k at 1.265 V. Is this an acceptable overclock for the CPU? Or should I lower the settings?
S
Sangna123
12-14-2025, 03:39 AM #1

I achieved a speed of 4.4k Ghz on my i7 5820k at 1.265 V. Is this an acceptable overclock for the CPU? Or should I lower the settings?

M
Mr_Floobiful
Posting Freak
890
12-20-2025, 10:15 PM
#2
Should be fine. I've been running mine @4.4Ghz at 1.325v since about October '14. You'll see 1.3v is commonly recommended max, but this number is not set in stone. It's not like 1.3v is totally safe, and 1.31 is bad. Any voltage above stock can lower CPU lifespan, so the risk is going to be there when OCing. However, the higher the voltage and temps, the higher the risks. Comes with the territory. Still, I'd prefer 1.285 if I were you. Maybe not the best out there, but a good amount less voltage than I need.
M
Mr_Floobiful
12-20-2025, 10:15 PM #2

Should be fine. I've been running mine @4.4Ghz at 1.325v since about October '14. You'll see 1.3v is commonly recommended max, but this number is not set in stone. It's not like 1.3v is totally safe, and 1.31 is bad. Any voltage above stock can lower CPU lifespan, so the risk is going to be there when OCing. However, the higher the voltage and temps, the higher the risks. Comes with the territory. Still, I'd prefer 1.285 if I were you. Maybe not the best out there, but a good amount less voltage than I need.

L
Lucmus3
Member
60
12-20-2025, 10:49 PM
#3
As long as you've confirmed its stability and temperature consistency, everything is in order. The motherboard supports overclocking, and the CPU model includes an 'K' designation for a valid reason.
L
Lucmus3
12-20-2025, 10:49 PM #3

As long as you've confirmed its stability and temperature consistency, everything is in order. The motherboard supports overclocking, and the CPU model includes an 'K' designation for a valid reason.

B
BluRamzy
Member
166
12-27-2025, 12:20 PM
#4
Mines operating at 4.5 Ghz using 1.3V under identical cooling setup
B
BluRamzy
12-27-2025, 12:20 PM #4

Mines operating at 4.5 Ghz using 1.3V under identical cooling setup

M
MANPERSON
Junior Member
19
12-27-2025, 01:53 PM
#5
Operating at 4.5 Ghz using 1.3V with the identical cooler
Attempted to reach 4.5 at 1.3 V but stability failed completely—I never managed to boot into Windows.
M
MANPERSON
12-27-2025, 01:53 PM #5

Operating at 4.5 Ghz using 1.3V with the identical cooler
Attempted to reach 4.5 at 1.3 V but stability failed completely—I never managed to boot into Windows.

G
Goldenowl01
Member
204
01-03-2026, 11:48 PM
#6
_TheD0ct0r_:
As long as you've confirmed its stability and consistent temperatures, it's all good. Your motherboard is built for overclocking, and the CPU has a K in its name for a reason. I understand, but I was curious about whether that voltage was too high for the overclock I received. I'm struggling to get stable results at lower settings, so I was hoping to see what others experienced :|
G
Goldenowl01
01-03-2026, 11:48 PM #6

_TheD0ct0r_:
As long as you've confirmed its stability and consistent temperatures, it's all good. Your motherboard is built for overclocking, and the CPU has a K in its name for a reason. I understand, but I was curious about whether that voltage was too high for the overclock I received. I'm struggling to get stable results at lower settings, so I was hoping to see what others experienced :|

M
MrsSupess
Junior Member
28
01-04-2026, 08:08 AM
#7
I achieved my i7 5820k up to 4.4GHz at 1.265V. Is this a secure overclock for the CPU? Or should I reduce the settings?
Details:
Intel i7 5820k
Asus x99 Sabertooth
Corsair H100i GTX AIO cooler
Corsair vengence LPX RAM 16 GB 4x4 at 2667
EVGA GTX 970 SLI
Corsair RM 850i
That's ideal, I’d keep it as is.
M
MrsSupess
01-04-2026, 08:08 AM #7

I achieved my i7 5820k up to 4.4GHz at 1.265V. Is this a secure overclock for the CPU? Or should I reduce the settings?
Details:
Intel i7 5820k
Asus x99 Sabertooth
Corsair H100i GTX AIO cooler
Corsair vengence LPX RAM 16 GB 4x4 at 2667
EVGA GTX 970 SLI
Corsair RM 850i
That's ideal, I’d keep it as is.

G
GotEide
Member
202
01-05-2026, 04:04 AM
#8
I'm using 1.325v with a 4.4Ghz setting, started after the X99 launch. I can boot and run benchmarks at 4.5 at this voltage, though some tests crash.
G
GotEide
01-05-2026, 04:04 AM #8

I'm using 1.325v with a 4.4Ghz setting, started after the X99 launch. I can boot and run benchmarks at 4.5 at this voltage, though some tests crash.

K
kulan3
Member
174
01-23-2026, 11:37 AM
#9
1LiquidPC :
I'm using 1.325v for mine @ 4.4Ghz. Been running this way since shortly after X99 launch. I can boot and run some benchmarks at 4.5 at this voltage, but crashes in other benchmarks.
There's some variance. My first chip was similar to yours. It also seems like the more recently produced chips are
better overclockers than the earlier batches. I've had 3: First one did [email protected] and hit a wall above 4.5; next did [email protected] and hit a wall above 4.7, and the third does [email protected], hits a wall above 4.8. What's interesting is that on my current chip, each individual core can do [email protected], but with all cores enabled, [email protected] is impossible. My second chip had the best cache - it was the only one that could run at 1:1 at any speed I tried.
K
kulan3
01-23-2026, 11:37 AM #9

1LiquidPC :
I'm using 1.325v for mine @ 4.4Ghz. Been running this way since shortly after X99 launch. I can boot and run some benchmarks at 4.5 at this voltage, but crashes in other benchmarks.
There's some variance. My first chip was similar to yours. It also seems like the more recently produced chips are
better overclockers than the earlier batches. I've had 3: First one did [email protected] and hit a wall above 4.5; next did [email protected] and hit a wall above 4.7, and the third does [email protected], hits a wall above 4.8. What's interesting is that on my current chip, each individual core can do [email protected], but with all cores enabled, [email protected] is impossible. My second chip had the best cache - it was the only one that could run at 1:1 at any speed I tried.

R
Rafa
Member
58
01-23-2026, 06:39 PM
#10
Thanks for the update. I've also noticed similar mentions. The newer batches appear to offer better overclocking potential. I'm using a cache at 4Ghz as well. I thought about the i7 6800k Broadwell-E, but after reviewing the feedback, it seems it might end up with less OC than my current setup based on average results. Even with the higher performance per clock, I don't believe it would be worth it unless I matched the frequency there.
R
Rafa
01-23-2026, 06:39 PM #10

Thanks for the update. I've also noticed similar mentions. The newer batches appear to offer better overclocking potential. I'm using a cache at 4Ghz as well. I thought about the i7 6800k Broadwell-E, but after reviewing the feedback, it seems it might end up with less OC than my current setup based on average results. Even with the higher performance per clock, I don't believe it would be worth it unless I matched the frequency there.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next