Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Does the bios and windows recognize the new OC speed?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
June 25, 2012 3:30:57 PM

I have a question about the bios and windows recognizing the OC cpu speed. I notice when I OC my AMD 8150/ASUS Sabertooth 990FX during the boot up I see my OC speed and when I get into window my gadgets along with windows recognizes my new OC speed. But when I OC my 3770K/ASUS Sabertooth Z77 during the boot it still flashes my stock speed, windows don’t recognizes my OC speed and only one of my gadgets sees the new OC speed. Then I load up CPU-Z and it does see the OC speed. So the question is when I go into my bios and set the turbo core to 41 to get a speed of 4.1ghz that isn't a true OC? I always thought that the bios flash during boot and windows itself sees the new OC speed? Unless I'm not really OC by changing the turbo core speed.
June 25, 2012 3:59:32 PM

It is using turbo to OC. My 2500k chip listed as 3.3ghz turbo 3.8 ghz is set to 4.5ghz. It is always listed at 3.3ghz. Stress the CPU and it will shoot up to 4.1 using Prime or something like Diablo III. Did you run your stability tests?
m
0
l
June 25, 2012 4:11:50 PM

DarkOutlaw said:
It is using turbo to OC. My 2500k chip listed as 3.3ghz turbo 3.8 ghz is set to 4.5ghz. It is always listed at 3.3ghz. Stress the CPU and it will shoot up to 4.1 using Prime or something like Diablo III. Did you run your stability tests?


Yeah when I stress the CPU the speed jumps up to 4.1ghz and its 100% stable but I guess I'm just use to seeing the OC speed in the boot sequence and in window. So if I disable speed step will that force the cpu to run at 4.1ghz fulltime OC?
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 185 à CPUs
a c 150 K Overclocking
June 25, 2012 4:13:36 PM

There's no point of a full time OC, it's just a waste of power when you are doing light things such as surfing the internet.
m
0
l
June 25, 2012 4:45:23 PM

Ok now I'm begining to understand why I dont see the OC speed in the boot and in windows is because by adjusting the core boost up it allows the turbo to be higher than 3.8 which is stock under load. So why do I see some people messig with the temps if all your doing is going to allow the CPU to OC itself when it needs to. Why not let the CPU/MOBO say how much voltage it needs at those times?
m
0
l

Best solution

a b à CPUs
a c 100 K Overclocking
June 25, 2012 5:05:45 PM

Because it isn't dynamic. The voltages are set by a VID, meaning it's drawing the numbers from a table (think Excell spreadsheet). They are not properly prepared for overclocks. On top of that, different chips OC differently, so basically a good chip might be able to OC by 1ghz on stock voltage, a bad chip might not.

As for temps, they don't really limit the chip until you hit 100C and it goes into safety mode. They do talk about Turbo boost as though it is built in for thermal headroom, but I've never seen or heard of a CPU not hitting it's binned turbo due to heat.

So basically, you are taking the CPU outside of specs, so you can't expect the specs programmed for it to work properly anymore.

It's like if you were to turbo charge a normal car. It might get a little more power but it'll run like *** until you tune it.
Share
June 25, 2012 5:48:13 PM

And to add to wolfram23 we have seen the auto shoot 1.5v+ into the CPU, which is something like a suicide bomber only without virgins. Anything with 'Auto' in it sucks the moment you change any setting. You will have some room still. My 2500k is set to vcore 1.34 and my LLC is set to 2 so my chip gets between 1.31-1.34 so far. I have not seen it spike past this range.
m
0
l
June 25, 2012 6:27:54 PM

Ok I understand now. Wow that’s a crazy amount of volts to get thrown at your cpu on auto. I'm just going to leave the turbo core set to 41 and call it a day. I do notice when I set it to 46 my temps in prime get up to 75C which isn't ultra hot but still hot compared to 64C when set 41. At a certain point you have to ask yourself how far you are willing to push it and does it make a big difference.
m
0
l
June 25, 2012 6:29:12 PM

Best answer selected by nupe123.
m
0
l
June 25, 2012 7:14:41 PM

Right, also I just realized your clocking an i7. i7 get hotter and such rather than the i5. 4.1 is pretty good (I believe) unless you go with water cooling. That is why I went with the i5 instead of the i7. I could be wrong but I think they hyper threading is the cause of this.
m
0
l
!