• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

First time overclocking, not happy with results or temps(energmax t40 tb|2500k)

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

bubblerfett

New Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2014
[i5 2500k]
[haf 912]
[asrock z68 ex3]
[asus gtx 970]
[8gb g.skill ripjaw series]
[OCZ ModXStream Pro 600W]
[hitachi 500gb]
I installed an energmax t-40 tb and certainly did it wrong the first time as I was getting 77c at load, but reseated it and now reach 69c, I was expecting 60-65c but don't have enough thermal paste to retry. I am not happy with 69c because I am only at 4.3 ghz and reaching 1.32v(with auto voltage). I tried various manual offsets but kept getting bsod, and after ~20-30 tries I decided to try auto and havent crashed yet with prime95. @4.5 ghz I can't even boot up, and @4.4 I always crash within 10 minutes of prime95, I tried going - offset to +, but I eventually reached 1.4 ghz and still kept crashing, and at 4.4 I read 1.4 is not even necessary and considered too much.

I am wondering if I should just settle at keeping my voltage at auto and staying at 4.3ghz @ 69c load, is this satisfactory? personally I am not happy with it but am struggling to improve these results. I originally went out and bought the cooler because I heard how easy it was to oc to 4.5ghz, but now I am regretting it. I think I could have reached 4.3 without wasting 30 bucks on a cooler. I actually bought it because I just upgraded to a 970 and was worried about a bottleneck
 
No bottleneck there my friend. 4.3 is fine. I suggest you try manual voltage, not offset, and tweak some other things like load like calibration.
What are you stress testing with? What are you monitoring with?

More info? Screenies?
 
No bottleneck there my friend. 4.3 is fine. I suggest you try manual voltage, not offset, and tweak some other things like load like calibration.
What are you stress testing with? What are you monitoring with?

More info? Screenies?

Stress testing with prime95, when you say manual not offset, do you mean fixed?

I read some more and disabled turbo boost I think I already notice a difference..also I had cpu LLC on 4/5 but now I changed it to 3. I don't know exactly what made a difference but in terms of speed, I feel lightning fast now lol....I think maybe the llc made a difference...I use hw monitor and cpu z/core temp


BTW I actually bsod on auto so I am still tweaking... right now I am at .005 offset with lvl 3 cpu llc, and disabled turbo boost. Also disabled cpu 3/6/package. If I keep crashing I will get screens up but for now I am feeling confident that changing the LLC and disabling turbo boost made an impact
 
Set voltage to fixed, at let's say 1.3v for 4.4GHz.

LLC to 4: the vcore on load will stay the same as the one set in BIOS

Run P95 20 mins. It should be fine.

Then increase the multi by one, rince and repeat until you crash.

The give the vcore a couple of notch up and repeat...

Temps are safe up to the mi 90's with Sandy Bridge, so no worry until then.

Don't go over 1.4/1.45v vcore, even if temps are in line.
 
so I bsod and change to up 1 notch on the vcore, I will try doing fixed now. I also noticed temp rise 1c to 70c, will eventually buy a new thermal paste because that seems too high for my cooler, its compared to a hyper 212 which gets 60-65. I have ran prime95 at my current setting for aboiut 20 min no crash but it sounds like I should try fixed so I can reach 4.4 ghz

if I am at fixed do I enable cpu3/6/package?
 
Not while you test for stability.

Once your system is stable, you can re enable them.
 
so @ 4.4 I tried from 1.3 - 1.35 and kept crashing as soon as prime95 started, what could be the problem? For now I went back to manual @4.3
 
my settings are essentially what the guide lays out, I must have the worst i5 in history, I can barely get stable at 4.3. Im pretty much giving up at this point. 4.3 ghz @ 1.32 v and 70c load. The only thing I can think of is that this computer is 2 years old, and I have a sub par psu
 
Back