Post Your Overclock!

GeneO said:

I guess my quibble was with the use of the words "safe".

I think you'll find my use of the words "safe" and "max safe" are always within quotation marks.

The connotation of words between quotation marks " " should be a clear implication that there is a difference from categorically stating with 100% impunity that it is safe vs the general consensus of "considered safe", derived from thousands of others trials and errors with varying results.

GeneO said:

I very much doubt an Intel person ever stated that, I am sure through all the multitude of reading you have done you misremember. Even if they thought it they would not state it publicly in writing.

I don't recall saying it was an official statement. Off the record comments are never repeated are they

And to be quite honest, I have better things to do than go re-trawling through forums/threads/posts just to back up a debate.

I think the audience here is a little different than core overclockers.

Of that I am fully aware.

Hence you'll find I don't give out blanket 'crank it till it carks it' advice. What I do to my processor isn't a rally for all to try.

I certainly don't recall forcing anyone to do anything they are uncomfortable with.

And unless my memory is really that bad, I've already mentioned that the majority of users in this sections are using 1.5V kits rendering this drawn out debate moot.

There are only a handful of us using 1.65V kits and I've found that out of all them, none of them are lacking in intellect themselves and well aware of the inherent risks that Overclocking entails.


People are more than welcome to trawl through posts to find the info they need. And if they don't want my help, they are free not to take it. If they do, I'm happy to help.

Basically, it's that simple.

It is too bad Intel and the memory makers won't get together ion the memory voltages.

I'd agree with you on that since it's true, but it seems to be of little point.

You seem keen to disagree with anything I have to say. If that's the stance you wish to take, then so be it. It's a pity though, as I've respected your input previously.

GeneO said:

smarteyeball said:

I don't recall saying it was an official statement. Off the record comments are never repeated are they

Well I hate to be disagreeable, sand I don;t mean this as a personal attack, but then your statement about Intel stating these are safe maximum voltages isn't worth a grain of salt.

That's fair enough mate.

Whew! Ok now go have some ice creme kids.

GeneO said:

Getting back on topic (sorry I am such a PITA). Does anybody know of any adverse affects of setting the VRM Phase control to extreme (all phases full on) vs standard (Intel) on the Asus Z68 or P67 boards? I seem to get a more stable overclock with lower core temperatures. but I wonder about the passively cooled, unmonitored?, VRM temps under these conditions. Don't want to cut of the nose to spite the face (age the motherboard faster so that the CPU can live longer - they cost about the same ). I am at a good fairly cool low voltage stable 4.4GHz with the phase control on extreme at the phase frequency manually set to 350 MHz.

This might be a good read:

[H]ard|Forum - View Single Post - Official ASUS P8P67 Series Overclocking Guide and Information

In the interest of disclosure, I've had a couple of beers and believe I would do you and others a disservice by going for a in depth explanation.

But if you have adequate airflow (keeping the VRM's cool) then it shouldn't be that much of an issue re longevity. Obviously though, less constant supplied voltage whilst maintaining other lower voltage settings and stability would increase a components life span.

Simply put, it wouldn't be a quick board killer.

I've just been letting my MOBO handle the VRM setting on its own. Haven't messed much with it, but Ive yet too see mine over 40C.
Typically 35-38C is where it runs, and its a passive design.
Im assuming thats pretty good.
The way mine is designed, and the CPU HS, it seem to exhaust air over the VRM area, effectively cooling it somewhat.


But Ive always thought those settings,or the extreme setting, had the most benefit for extreme Overclocking. I could be mistaken though.

This is why we want to have the latest BIOS, to choose UEFI2...without the spooky face.