Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What were your 2500K OCing results?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
January 17, 2012 3:04:37 AM

For those of you who have the 2500K and have overclocked it, here you can share your results.

State the following:

1) Your motherboard model
2) Your CPU cooler
3) How far you OCed without going over 1.48v.

More about : 2500k ocing results

January 17, 2012 3:30:39 AM

ASUS P8Z68-V Pro
CM Hyper 212+

-Leaving the core voltage set to auto (if that is what you mean by not changing the Vcore), I have had it running at 5.0GHz. I was getting temps around 80 running Prime95, so after a while I slowed it down a bit (I have it at 4.5 now, with a voltage offset). The core voltage (automatically regulated) hovered around 1.46-1.48v at that clock speed. I have been tempted to manually set the core voltage to 1.48 or 1.49 and see if 5.2GHz is attainable, have not tried it yet.

-Not sure what you mean by "without changing the Vcore". At least with my mobo, the default is for the core voltage to raise or lower automatically, per the whim of the motherboard/BIOS. Changing it means either setting it to a positive or negative offset, or manually inputting a value.
January 17, 2012 4:29:48 AM

OK, I'll change the question a bit.

Instead of "How far you OCed WITHOUT changing the Vcore" I'll make it "How far you OCed without going over 1.48v"

BTW is 1.48v safe if you plan on using the CPU for 5 years?
Related resources
a c 139 à CPUs
a c 106 V Motherboard
a b K Overclocking
January 17, 2012 5:19:06 AM

Well the safe vcore for longevity is debatable but most would say 1.4, tom's uses 1.35. But higher vcore will probably last 5+ years if the temps are safe. There are plenty of other threads to compare results. http://www.overclock.net/t/968053/official-the-sandy-st...
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 17, 2012 8:41:05 AM

I got the bad batch, but I still aint complaining. I have mine stable @ 1.35v 4.6Ghz which I am happy about, using offset.

As you can see in my sig, I hit the 5Ghz mark with 1.51v and got it stable with Prime for 8 Hours.

Anything under 1.45v is acceptable in my opinion, given the correct cooling - But I refuse to let mine go over the 1.35v mark, I like seeing my CPU @ 4.6Ghz running prime with cores @ 48C 52C 51C 47C respectivley after 4 hours.

@ 1.45v 4.9Ghz Mine peaks at 66C and at 1.51v 5Ghz it peaks at 74C. Amazing Air cooler dont you think?
a c 95 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
a c 224 K Overclocking
January 17, 2012 10:56:09 AM

pckitty4427 said:
BTW is 1.48v safe if you plan on using the CPU for 5 years?


5 years, no way 1.48v is safe! Absolutely Not!

Stay below 1.35v and then there is no guarantee you'll see any 5 years even at that.

Even Intel does not warrant the CPU past 3 years, because electrical pathways degrade over time, Intel is fully aware of that, overclocking equals more voltage, and more voltage equals more CPU electrical pathway degradation!

Everything eventually dies, even hardware!

Most overclockers accept the risks and dangers of overclocking hoping for longevity until their next upgrade, never even fully expecting 2 years, they take the risks to enjoy the increased performance gains, that they would have paid much more money to attain, without any overclocking.

If you are really hoping for a 5 year longevity, get out of the overclocking section as quick as you can! Ryan
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 17, 2012 11:39:16 AM

4Ryan6 said:
5 years, no way 1.48v is safe! Absolutely Not!

Stay below 1.35v and then there is no guarantee you'll see any 5 years even at that.

Even Intel does not warrant the CPU past 3 years, because electrical pathways degrade over time, Intel is fully aware of that, overclocking equals more voltage, and more voltage equals more CPU electrical pathway degradation!

Everything eventually dies, even hardware!

Most overclockers accept the risks and dangers of overclocking hoping for longevity until their next upgrade, never even fully expecting 2 years, they take the risks to enjoy the increased performance gains, that they would have paid much more money to attain, without any overclocking.

If you are really hoping for a 5 year longevity, get out of the overclocking section as quick as you can! Ryan


Bro, my 2500ks standard turbo Voltage was 1.35 out of the box. Your being WAY too cautious, 5 years @ 52C MAX temp for one core under worst case senario @ 1.35v is easily feasable. I would be extremely worried if my peice of Silicon was destined to be rendered useless after 5 years. I have an Athlon XP 2200+ at home still running nicely after 10.

I beleive the longevity of a peice of silicon is based on a formula using Time, Temperature, Voltage and Fabrication size.

It was projected that a Chip @ 75C 1.25v would go out around the same time as a Chip @ 50C 1.45v - or maybe not but you get my drift.

The lower the temp the higher the longevity but the higher the volts the lower the longevity, so a 1.5v i5 2500k running with a 480 rad and never going above 45C is going to be perfectly fine for 5 years. Same as a 1.25v 2500k with Stock cooler never going above 70C is going to be fine for 5 years.
1.25v and 45C is going to last forever, and 1.5v and 70C is probably going to die after 2 or 2.5 Years.
(These are all guesstimates but It gets the point accross right?)
a c 95 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
a c 224 K Overclocking
January 17, 2012 12:30:33 PM

deadjon said:
Bro, my 2500ks standard turbo Voltage was 1.35 out of the box. Your being WAY too cautious, 5 years @ 52C MAX temp for one core under worst case senario @ 1.35v is easily feasable. I would be extremely worried if my peice of Silicon was destined to be rendered useless after 5 years. I have an Athlon XP 2200+ at home still running nicely after 10.

I beleive the longevity of a peice of silicon is based on a formula using Time, Temperature, Voltage and Fabrication size.

It was projected that a Chip @ 75C 1.25v would go out around the same time as a Chip @ 50C 1.45v - or maybe not but you get my drift.

The lower the temp the higher the longevity but the higher the volts the lower the longevity, so a 1.5v i5 2500k running with a 480 rad and never going above 45C is going to be perfectly fine for 5 years. Same as a 1.25v 2500k with Stock cooler never going above 70C is going to be fine for 5 years.
1.25v and 45C is going to last forever, and 1.5v and 70C is probably going to die after 2 or 2.5 Years.
(These are all guesstimates but It gets the point accross right?)


Projections and reality are two completely different things when you're referencing a smaller fabrication size that has no comparison simply because no 2500K, has lasted 5 years because it has only been on the market just over a year.

Quote:
The lower the temp the higher the longevity but the higher the volts the lower the longevity, so a 1.5v i5 2500k running with a 480 rad and never going above 45C is going to be perfectly fine for 5 years. Same as a 1.25v 2500k with Stock cooler never going above 70C is going to be fine for 5 years.


The cpu would have to be actually tested for 5 years for that statement to be true, even Intel does not have solid 5 year projections.

Quote:
I have an Athlon XP 2200+ at home still running nicely after 10.


That CPU was released June, 10th 2002 for the Thoroughbred, September 2003 for the Thorton release, either way, you haven't been running either for 10 years yet, and that's totally irrelevant anyway.

It's always best to err on the side of caution when advising someone of what they can expect regarding longevity for a cpu that's been on the market just over a year.
January 17, 2012 2:48:20 PM

deadjon said:
I got the bad batch, but I still aint complaining. I have mine stable @ 1.35v 4.6Ghz which I am happy about, using offset.

As you can see in my sig, I hit the 5Ghz mark with 1.51v and got it stable with Prime for 8 Hours.

Anything under 1.45v is acceptable in my opinion, given the correct cooling - But I refuse to let mine go over the 1.35v mark, I like seeing my CPU @ 4.6Ghz running prime with cores @ 48C 52C 51C 47C respectivley after 4 hours.

@ 1.45v 4.9Ghz Mine peaks at 66C and at 1.51v 5Ghz it peaks at 74C. Amazing Air cooler dont you think?



That is a good cooler, haven't heard of that make before. Did you leave the core voltage on automatic to achieve your 5.0 @1.51v? I wonder if you had manually input something a smidgen lower, like 1.48v, if it would have been stable for 8 hours....or only 15 minutes, like mine. :lol:  I only tested for stability for a short time period at that clock speed; I figured I wouldn't actually try to run my processor at that speed constantly. Like you, I have settled on using the voltage offset method to get 4.5GHz for everyday use. With the offset, the peak voltage varies slightly, never going above 1.312v, with an offset of (+).035v. I prefer the offset, because the core voltage comes back down to around 1.00v, when the CPU is at idle clock speeds.
January 17, 2012 3:01:51 PM

pckitty4427 said:
OK, I'll change the question a bit.

Instead of "How far you OCed WITHOUT changing the Vcore" I'll make it "How far you OCed without going over 1.48v"

BTW is 1.48v safe if you plan on using the CPU for 5 years?


Well, okay then, my chip made it to 5.0 on max 1.48v, which was being modulated automatically on that run. I might attempt the same clock speed, but manually set the voltage to 1.48 or something slightly lower, to see if it runs. As far as being "safe", I know that opinions run the gamut, but I would say that running the chip with constant core voltage of around 1.48 would most likely incur long-term damage, shortening the potential life of the processor, but this depends upon the temps also. If you had some ridiculous cooling that allowed for max 45deg C temps at that voltage, then, I don't believe anybody can speculate how that balances out the potential damage of running at that voltage.

This is all kind of moot for daily use, as I haven't heard of anyone running their proc at those clock speeds and voltages, with 100% core utilization, 24/7 (outside of temporary stress testing), although I'm sure some crazy fool probably does. That is why I like the voltage offset method, the processor clock and the core voltage is low when idling, and only hits the ceiling you set for it sporadically, hence, max temps rarely get close to what you observe under stress testing such as Prime95.
February 12, 2012 9:03:42 PM

Back on thread

Ive runned mine around the 5.1-ish ghz mark while using the Asus P8Z68-V LE overclocking program and setting it to maximum overclocking (it overclock it by a few hundred mhz everytime and test for stability.

But i now run it a 4.3ghz with a Vcore of 1.320V.

And I'm using the CM 212Evo cooler with a second fan on it, running smoothly at 26C
!