First OC, does this look right?

Windows is just sensing the processor model not the speed.

You could probably back down on the voltage a bit. It's not too high as is but the 2500K can usually do ~4.5Ghz at 1.3v. Try backing down a bit and rerunning Prime 95.

Alright, I will try lower vcore some. Btw I turned off all those power saving modes cause ppl say they make OC unstable. However, its always nice to save some money, any idea how much difference it is having it clock lower at times vs running perma 4.4 ghz?

I leave the power saving on unless it interferes with the overclock. Mine are all still enabled on my 2600K. All in all it saves a tiny amount of electricity. More of course if you leave your computer on 24/7.

Are you using offset mode? Or fixed voltage mode? You should use offset mode, it takes a little longer to get used to, because you don't know the exact voltage in the bios, but it will extend the life of the chip and save you money.

I changed to offset -0.015V

My vcore is now at 1.335 idle and goes up to 1.357 under prime 95 peaking at 61 degrees at 4.4 GHZ

Does that look fine?

I think I got a better one now, I changed LLC to lvl 3. And offset to -0.040V

Now I get 1.330Vcore (idle 1.290) under prime 95 and 59-60 degrees at 4.4 GHZ, think ill go with this if u guys think it looks good

That looks fine. I imagine you might be able to drop it a bit more if you tried and still be stable if you wanted to. Voltage is well within safe limits and temps are great so it's up to you.

ok, btw what about core current limit? i see alot of ppl say set to 300 , mine is at 150, what exactly does it do`?

It's related to CPU voltage but I am really not sure how. It's an ASRock specific setting. If it boots and is stable in Prime 95 then leave it alone is the best advice I can give since I have never used an ASRock board.

Ok, i switched to intel burn in test, cause i heard it stresses more, set it to maximum, gonna let it run awhile and see, so far so good after 3 runs.

This is with vcore at 1.315 and c1 enabled, so idle is like 1.1 This is at 4.5 GHZ

btw how is 1.315 at 4.5GHZ? good,bad, average? id like to know  

About average I would guess. My 2600K is at 4.5Ghz and 1.32v. The 2600 usually needs a bit more voltage because of Hyperthreading. You are well within the safe range though. I would run Prime 95 small FFT test for 6 to 8 hours. If it passes with no errors you pretty much have a solid stable system.

Alright thanks for your help. Ill run prime tonight when I go to bed. I could try lowering voltage abit, but I feel 1.315 is pretty low/fine for 4.5GHZ.

Esp since I also get 1.050-1.1 idle which is nice.

Yep it should be fine.

Oh one more question, well so I can the intel burn test and max vcore went up to was 1.315 same in prime ran it abit.

But now I just started a game SWTOR- and vcore goes up to 1.360 how is that?

Ah I think I know why  


I haven't bought a dedicated graphic card yet, waiting for 7950. So I'm using the chips integrated graphics, that's probably why.

What program are you using to monitor voltage? Burn test and Prime 95 stress the CPU way more than any game ever will. That seems odd.

Do you have your RAM set to 1.5v manually?

You are probably right. 1.36 is still safe although going over that can start degrading your chip. 1.36 is about as high as the testers at Tom's Hardware have found you can go with no risk of electromigration. Even then it does not get bad until you get close to 1.4v.

You were probably writing your reply at same time as I was. Dont you think it's cause I'm using integrated graphics atm?

Stupid forum lag