Bought an OCUK '4.8Ghz' chip, can barely get to 4.6Ghz.
- Thread starter joxang
- Start date
Soldato
My 2500k did 4.8Ghz @ under 1.325v, you just got a bad chip
Soldato
Hardly, i've had 2 do around the same.. maybe 1.33v or so but very similar.
then you have some kind of godlike CPU. I would really like to see some prime stable screen shots of a CPU with that capability.
I overclock around 20 CPUs a day and haven't ever seen a CPU that good before...
not really. the return rates on our overclocked bundles are less than half that of the individual components!
you see people experiencing trouble post on the forums admittedly, but nobody has any interest in posting "hey look guys I got this bundle from OcUK and it works exactly as expected..."
I'm sure the happy customers far far outweigh the customers with issues.
the majority of issues are covered in the announcements in the customer support forums if you would care to look.
you purchased a cpu that is capable of running at those speeds.
it may be that your other hardware is stopping it from running at higher speeds. my p67 ud4 capped out at 4.9ghz but my z68ud5 will hit 5.2ghz with ease. it could very well be the board as the testing is carried out on the asus equivalent board
we test under air cooling for 12 hours+ using prime 95 on the hardware stated in the item description.
Associate
If you want to see a godlike Cpu check this guys low volter ~ post #1466
Best one I've seen so far.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...00K-2600K-batch-number-and-o-c-results/page59
Best one I've seen so far.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...00K-2600K-batch-number-and-o-c-results/page59
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 5,712
Not really, as 2500K is different voltages chip than the 2600K. Many 2500K will see less vcore voltage and many 2600K will see more vcore voltages (because of Hyper-Threading 8 threads)
I would like to see this screen shot of that vcore! Very very rare to see 2500K to get 4.8GHz for 1.325v !
Mine get 4.8GHz for 1.42vcore at the bios (but in windows the vcore drop to 1.35v)
Last edited:
no. they are both based on the same process and overclock identically.
Soldato
I would like to see this screen shot of that vcore! Very very rare to see 2500K to get 4.8GHz for 1.325v !
QUOTE]
Cant get screeny now as sold my rig. Heres the build log: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18261700&highlight=project+blueberry
I sold the rig OCed @ 4.4GHz @ just below stock volts.
Rather, you got one of the top 0.1% of chips in the world.
It was a very good chip, it would do 4.4GHz @ just below stock voltage. Only problem was seemed like 4.9Ghz was the limit regardless of volts, maybe the chip or my Mobo. I think you sent me a message on the bay regarding volts and i told you then it wasnt much but couldnt rememeber off the top of my head.
Soldato
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 5,712
Yeah, cos he had a lucky cherry chip batch ! My cpu chip is rubbish batch need 1.42v for 4.8GHz and that's far too much voltage! (But under load in windows the vcore drop to 1.356v) but who care ! I am happy with 4.8GHz anyway.
Soldato
I'm not saying that all of your OC/ed bundles are bad mate, I'm just pointing out that several people have complained about the old 920/UD5 oc'ed bundles you used to sell in the store, I remember a load of people complaining that their system wasn't Prime stable, and were getting constant issues with their rigs.
Also, my Dad actually bought the UD5/920 D0 bundle himself, and when he setup his rig he too faced a lot of issues with random BSOD's and failing prime within a few minutes, when he got me to have a look at the BIOS settings everything was left on auto apart from the vCore which was set to 1.300v, this IMO is a pretty poor attempt to get a stable O/C.
I understand that you don't have the time that the people who overclock themselves do due to the demand for bundles, and having to deal with other stuff at work, but you surely see where I'm coming from?
Changing the vCore to 1.3v and leaving everything else on auto is far from an "Expert O/C", and I personally don't believe my dads bundle was thoroughly tested with these basic settings neither, otherwise it would have cripled over with you guys as well.
It was the bundle that you guys used to have on offer with 6GB of XMS3 Corsair RAM (1600MHz), the 920 D0, x58 UD5 and the Corsair H50 cooler, and it was all fitted into a 800D.
I ended up spending the weekend at his fine tuning it, and the chip he received required 1.325v on both vCore and Vtt, all RAM timings needed to be manually set, and I had to use 191MHz Bclk with Turbo mode enabled before I could get it 8 hours prime stable and managing 20 passes of LinX using all available RAM.
Also, the chip absolutely refused to run with Bclk of 200, I even took vCore and Vtt right up to 1.4v, and played around with ICH, IOH and PLL voltages as well to try and get 200x20 but the chip wasn't capable of running stable with any of the settings I used.
Personally I don't think it's worth paying the extra money on these pre-overclocked bundles/and chips that are guaranteed to run at a specific speed, I'd much rather buy the components and do all the work myself, but at the same time I understand that there is loads of people who don't have the time or are too lazy to learn how to O/C themselves and would much rather just buy something that's guaranteed to work with the settings you provide them with your bundles, but I've never understood how any shop can sell chips that are guaranteed to run at 4.8GHz when no two systems are identical, you guys probably do get these chips running at said speeds with your mobo/ram combinations, but putting the same chip into another mobo using different RAM won't always give the person the same clock speeds that was attained by you guys in your workplace.
Just my two cents.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 5,712
Mine was the same when I brought UD5 i7 920 d0 OC bundle from OCUK. They put 1.30v on the vcore and left the rest on Auto and I got BSD when playing Microsoft Flight Simulator X and I found out that I need to adjusted the 3200 instead of 4000 (on Auto) with the memory of 1600MHz at 16x and it pretty bad that OCUK put a profile on my bios with everything on AUTO except the vcore. The OCUK bundle should be adjusted manual on all setting (not on Auto)
I have to agree with DavyBoys. That's why I brought 1155 motherboard and i7 2600K myself and do the overclocked manual myself (no more ocuk bundles) because of past experience. No offence to you ocuk.
I put my own manual setting on my i7 920 191x21 work best way rather than 200x20 as the vcore is lots better at 1.2875v instead of 1.3000v. I never believed in any oc bundles as I know many of them isn't worked well out of the box. That not just ocuk, but other companies too.
I have to agree with DavyBoys. That's why I brought 1155 motherboard and i7 2600K myself and do the overclocked manual myself (no more ocuk bundles) because of past experience. No offence to you ocuk.
I put my own manual setting on my i7 920 191x21 work best way rather than 200x20 as the vcore is lots better at 1.2875v instead of 1.3000v. I never believed in any oc bundles as I know many of them isn't worked well out of the box. That not just ocuk, but other companies too.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 5,712
Nor me too! I don't believe in 4.8GHz is fully stable guaranteed with oc bundles from many shops. The best stable, best safer vcore is anything between stock speed up to 4.4GHz is more guaranteed to be honest on all the i7 2600K & i5 2500K chips.
I just happy left my i7 920 d0 at 4.0GHz 191 x 21 @ 1.2875vcore and under 65C temp. And also happy with my i7 2600K at 4.0GHz 100 x 40 @ 1.2900vcore and under 60C temp. I just be happy with 4GHz, why more ?
Last edited:
Well OCUK very kindly gave me an RMA so I'm going to return this one and get a retail chip instead.
I think my components are all high quality (see OP) - otherwise, a definition of 'high quality' might help inform a buying decision. Or recommended boards, and ones to avoid too
.
That was you selling that rig?!!! If you'd told me you could get 4.8 with 1.325 I'd have been on it like a dog in heat!!
I think my components are all high quality (see OP) - otherwise, a definition of 'high quality' might help inform a buying decision. Or recommended boards, and ones to avoid too
.Craterloads said:
That was you selling that rig?!!! If you'd told me you could get 4.8 with 1.325 I'd have been on it like a dog in heat
!!
Last edited:
Soldato
Thats a very valid point. Time is something you need to get an overclock done right. When i do a rig, whether its for me or a custom build for a client i take a week usually making sure everything is as perfect as can be. Battery of tests, prime, IBT, 3dmark etc. i try to get the place as hot as possible to get worst case temps etc.. Seems to me that assembly line overclocking is not a generally good idea..
I know some setups and chips are 99.9% drop in and clock to a certain level and you could be confident it'd pass everything but even those can sometimes be problematic as components can vary. For example i remember i think it was an overclockers worker saying all 920s can do 4Ghz on air, i've seen the odd few that can't, at least not at any reasonable vcore that any air cooler would handle well.
I've dealt with 2 overclockers bundles and one full overclocked PC with issues.. and they all were due to poorly setup BIOS parameters leading to unstable operation, one wouldn't even pass 2 mins of prime and would reset within seconds on IBT, coolers were fine and temps were good, tweaking the voltages and timings etc got them stable.. but thats not what i'd want if i bought a pre overclocked rig.
Soldato
I'd raise the bar and say about 4.5Ghz is more or less a solid bet.. have only done 9 2500k rigs but have done about 24 2600k and 4.5Ghz -4.6Ghz is easily done and all have done this with the worst chip (a 2600k) needing 1.385v for 4.5Ghz and the best (nother 2600k) needing 1.33v for 4.8Ghz and 1.39v for 5Ghz (wish i kept it, but didn't have any spare.. darn + i sold it at STOCK speed
).
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 5,712
That's true it easy to get 4.5GHz-4.6GHz but think about the vcore could be too high at 1.38V at the bios where OCUK told us all not to over 1.35V. I got mine 4.6GHz as it only stable at 1.38V at the bios but under loads in windows were 1.35V but it make me think twices, why 1.38V in the bios ? That's far too much. I had try from 1.31V to 1.35V at the bios but it will not stable my 4.6GHz at all, so, my chip is rubbish one as it pure greedy chip that want more vcore! So I had try Level 4, 5, 6 and 7 on the LLC and put 1.31 to 1.37v at the bios and got BSD after 2 hours prime blend. So, I leave 1.38V at level 5 LLC at the bios and got stable after 12 hours blend test, but it only do 1.356-1.380 at windows under load. So, I thought once again, 4.4GHz is the better safer vcore only need 1.33V at the bios. 4.5GHz need 1.37V and 4.6GHz need 1.38V as it was massive big jump in vcore meaning my chip isn't cherry one or could be my board is rubbish one! If I ask OCUK to borrow Asus P8P67 PRO Intel P67 board and test my i7 2600K and if it does stable at 4.6GHz with 1.32V at the bios, then I know it the board limit of what I got, if it doesn't and still the same at 1.38V then it will be my chip then.
I can see quite alots of i7 2600K batch L0 with the first two letters on it is far the best chip. My chip isn't L0 the first two letters of the batch number which it probably the reason my chip need more vcore ! So, I just leave my 4.0GHz at 1.29V as the best safer way and I think between 4.0GHz and 4.80GHz is no difference in performance! Only the benchmark does!
1.380V at the bios for 4.60GHz under loads is down to 1.356V and on idle it went up to 1.404V as I don't know why it creeping up to 1.404V as the bios set at 1.380V as it shouldn't go over it. Maybe poor LLC level 5. If I push it down to LLC Level 4 it will end up BSD straight away even with the same vcore setting. Rather daft! I cannot do 4.80GHz because I had to set a crazy 1.42V at the bios! A big jump from 1.38V (4.6) to 1.42V (4.8) really crazy of my chip need biggest increasing vcore as a madness.
Perhap rjk will explain to me why is this ?
Here is screenshot with still under blend test for 4 and half an hour as you can see it 1.356v under load but you can see 1.404V is the max vcore for idle even thought I set 1.38V at the bios below:
I can see quite alots of i7 2600K batch L0 with the first two letters on it is far the best chip. My chip isn't L0 the first two letters of the batch number which it probably the reason my chip need more vcore ! So, I just leave my 4.0GHz at 1.29V as the best safer way and I think between 4.0GHz and 4.80GHz is no difference in performance! Only the benchmark does!
1.380V at the bios for 4.60GHz under loads is down to 1.356V and on idle it went up to 1.404V as I don't know why it creeping up to 1.404V as the bios set at 1.380V as it shouldn't go over it. Maybe poor LLC level 5. If I push it down to LLC Level 4 it will end up BSD straight away even with the same vcore setting. Rather daft! I cannot do 4.80GHz because I had to set a crazy 1.42V at the bios! A big jump from 1.38V (4.6) to 1.42V (4.8) really crazy of my chip need biggest increasing vcore as a madness.
Perhap rjk will explain to me why is this ?
Here is screenshot with still under blend test for 4 and half an hour as you can see it 1.356v under load but you can see 1.404V is the max vcore for idle even thought I set 1.38V at the bios below:
Last edited: