Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

2500k 4.5ghz safe overclock?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
December 26, 2011 5:42:43 PM

I just finished putting together my new system and so far am very happy with its performance. I overclocked the CPU to 4.5ghz and would like to know if what I have done is safe. I passed 10 runs of intel burn test on maximum with max temps 57/64/66/63 with the CPU voltage set to 1.24 in BIOS. Are these temps normal for this overclock with a Noctua NH-D14 cooler and ambient temps at 20c? One thing I have noticed is that in CPU-Z the core voltage says 1.224-1.232 while Core Temp is reading 1.3711-1.407v at 100% load. It's making me nervous because I don't know which is correct and if it's going to damage my CPU. If someone could please give me some advice I would really appreciate it. Thanks!

Specs:
CPU- Intel core i5 2500k
mobo- asus p8z68-v pro
psu- cooler master silent pro m 850w
gpu- radeon hd 6950 2gb
RAM- G. Skill ripjaws x 8gb 1600
SSD- Crucial m4 128gb
HDD- WD Caviar black 1tb
Cooler - Noctua NH-D14
Case- NZXT Phantom

idle temps (max): 30/34/35/31
load temps (max): 57/64/66/63
a c 111 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
December 26, 2011 6:01:04 PM

Your temps are fine, I do not see you needing 1.3711-.140 for your speeds.

Get a second opinion from hwmon. I am willing to bet you are at 1.224-1.232 as the other voltages would surely give you hotter temperatures.

http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/hwmonitor.html

EDIT, just opened CoreTemp and got a reading of 1.3711(I am only @ 4.4) with Prime95, so i am willing to bet it is wrong. I had heard of a dynamic VID feature, so maybe that is what the cpu would use if you had the voltage with auto. I know at auto my voltages got too high.
December 26, 2011 6:14:33 PM

nukemaster said:
Your temps are fine, I do not see you needing 1.3711-.140 for your speeds.

Get a second opinion from hwmon. I am willing to bet you are at 1.224-1.232 as the other voltages would surely give you hotter temperatures.

http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/hwmonitor.html

EDIT, just opened CoreTemp and got a reading of 1.3711(I am only @ 4.4) with Prime95, so i am willing to bet it is wrong. I had heard of a dynamic VID feature, so maybe that is what the cpu would use if you had the voltage with auto. I know at auto my voltages got too high.


CoreTemp is what's throwing me off and making me nervous. Hardware Monitor and CPUZ report 1.24 under load and 1.23 idle. CoreTemp says 1.406 load and 1.367 idle.
Related resources
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
December 26, 2011 6:16:43 PM

your temps are absolutely right! Although if your temps are 70 or even 80's they also fine so yes, temps are normal and fine no need to be worry. Mine are same to you i overclock it to 4.6ghz with 212 evo they are fine.
December 26, 2011 6:24:05 PM

Coretemp does not have a version out to my knowledge that is accurate on voltage readings for sandy bridge based processors. Cpu-z is the best tool to use at the moment.

On a side note, I highly doubt your chip is volting that high though if by some chance it is there is no need to worry. It is non hyperthreaded and I myself have been running an i7 sandy with an over volt load line calibration a bit above 1.4v now for nearly a year with zero degradation.

Your temperatures are very reasonable and I'll bet your grazing low 1.3v at best with the quad thread. Well in the green zone.

link to cpu-z: http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html
a c 111 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
December 26, 2011 6:31:04 PM

anherox said:
CoreTemp is what's throwing me off and making me nervous. Hardware Monitor and CPUZ report 1.24 under load and 1.23 idle. CoreTemp says 1.406 load and 1.367 idle.

Ignore Core Temp's voltage, it is clearly wrong, shows far to high for my system as well(2600k). I think it is the overclock messing with it. There is nothing to worry about and with your temperatures, i would doubt you are pushing that kind of voltage.
December 26, 2011 6:39:49 PM

so my temps are good with the nh-d14 cooler? or should they be lower. i notice that core 0 is sometimes 5-10c cooler than the other cores.
December 28, 2011 5:28:50 PM

core difference is typical as it is impossible to have the thermal compound 100% evenly laid out.

Side note: I am jealous you are stable with a vcore < 1.26. Same setup for the most part, I start failing prime95 tests if vcore drops to or below 1.26. None the less, my temps are nearly the same as yours at 4.5 ghz, I am running a 212+ though.
December 30, 2011 2:54:08 AM

chapstic said:
core difference is typical as it is impossible to have the thermal compound 100% evenly laid out.

Side note: I am jealous you are stable with a vcore < 1.26. Same setup for the most part, I start failing prime95 tests if vcore drops to or below 1.26. None the less, my temps are nearly the same as yours at 4.5 ghz, I am running a 212+ though.


what's your vcore? I'm wondering if i didn't apply enough thermal paste or mount my cooler right since the noctua should perform better than the 212+
a c 111 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
December 30, 2011 3:04:16 AM

The Noctua will perform better, but it takes extreme amounts of heat to start to show its lead over just about every thing else(i mean this in a good way, that thing will take LOTS of heat and still be quiet.).

We are at a point where the cpu's just are not running hot enough(dissipating enough heat.).

With thermal paste, its too thick that is bad. While you can be too this, thick is generally worse.
December 30, 2011 3:23:53 AM

CoreTemp shows VID, which is not the same as Vcore. I think VID is the voltage that the CPU needs from the motherboard to make a certain clock speed, or something. I agree with Chapstic, the lowest voltage I was able to run my 2500K at 4.5GHz at was 1.265, but then it locked up after more than 1 hour on Prime95, so only partially stable. At the moment, I run it at 4.5 with a voltage offset of .040 (+), which results in peak voltages of 1.304-1.312v. I might fine-tune it a little more, as my max temp is 66deg C, and I would like it a tad cooler.
!