Overclocking Performance
BIOS Frequency & Voltage Settings
| Header Cell - Column 0 | ASRock X99 OC Formula/3.1 | Fatal1ty X99 Professional/3.1 |
|---|---|---|
| BIOS | P1.20 (06/01/2015) | P1.20 (06/01/2015) |
| Base Clock | 96-300 MHz (0.1 MHz) | 96-300 MHz (0.1 MHz) |
| CPU Multiplier | 12x-120x (1x) | 12x-120x (1x) |
| DRAM Data Rates | 800-3200 (200/266.6 MHz) | 800-3200 (200/266.6 MHz) |
| CPU Vcore | 0.80-2.00V (1 mV) | 0.80-2.00V (1 mV) |
| VCCIN | 1.20-2.30V (10 mV) | 1.20-2.30V (10 mV) |
| PCH Voltage | 1.00-1.50V (25 mV) | 1.00-1.50V (25 mV) |
| DRAM Voltage | 1.00-1.80V (10 mV) | 1.00-1.80V (10 mV) |
| CAS Latency | 4-31 Cycles | 4-31 Cycles |
| tRCD | 5-31 Cycles | 5-31 Cycles |
| tRP | 5-31 Cycles | 5-31 Cycles |
| tRAS | 10-63 Cycles | 10-63 Cycles |
The X99 OC Formula/3.1 reached the ordinary 4.40 GHz achievable by this CPU sample at 1.28V, but the Fatal1ty X99 Professional/3.1 came up a little short of that mark. Both produced extra-high DRAM clocks, both use the same PCB, and both have the same power circuitry, so it does look like there’s a little luck involved in picking a motherboard. The Rampage V Extreme/U3.1 proved its worth as a memory overclocking rig, while the 4.40 GHz that affects both it and the OC Formula 3.1 appears to be a new, reduced ceiling for our aging CPU.
We began checking bandwidth at unqualified memory data rates when we found a board that performed worse as it was overclocked. Fortunately, that’s not the case with the X99 OC Formula/3.1 or Fatal1ty X99 Professional/3.1. The top boards in this regard (Asus and MSI) were barely faster.
