New Rig: Intel i5-2500k

[sygnus21]

They obviously just need to let us exchange them until we are happy with one

That would be perfect for all us overclockers. Hey um the chip you sold me doesn't have low enough volts, or overclock as high, I need to swap it for a better one

Yeah, we can only dream

 

[Lordbob75]

They obviously just need to let us exchange them until we are happy with one

That would be perfect for all us overclockers. Hey um the chip you sold me doesn't have low enough volts, or overclock as high, I need to swap it for a better one

Yeah, we can only dream

Hahaha, we can only imagine.

~Lordbob

 

[Lordbob75]

I just hit 5Ghz!



Unfortunately, the Temps are a little high for my tastes, so it will be backed down, but I am pleased that I managed to hit 5Ghz at all.


edit: Max temps have hit 83C on Core 2, not sure how high is too high...

~Lordbob

 

[Wishmaster]

That might be OK, under Prime or LinPack.
Since in real world you may only be in the mid 60s max, something like that.



But I agree, and would be a bit uncomfortable too.
I know with my Q9650, my Prime loads OCd, I wanted to be aprrox 70C.

Even though technically a bit higher was considered safe under Prime, that was my personal safe point.



Maybe a bit better cooling solution would help you out.

Either way, impressive OC, even if you do not decide to keep it. Good to know what its capable of.

 

[society misfit]

That’s awesome. Did you try the settings I recommended?

 

[sygnus21]

Just noticed the GPU temps loaded in Real Temp. That's obviously the GPU part of the i5? I have the same version of Real Temp as you but don't have the GPU readings.

 

[Lordbob75]

That might be OK, under Prime or LinPack.
Since in real world you may only be in the mid 60s max, something like that.



But I agree, and would be a bit uncomfortable too.
I know with my Q9650, my Prime loads OCd, I wanted to be aprrox 70C.

Even though technically a bit higher was considered safe under Prime, that was my personal safe point.



Maybe a bit better cooling solution would help you out.

Either way, impressive OC, even if you do not decide to keep it. Good to know what its capable of.

I am already water cooling the CPU, and pumping 1.55 volts through that thing to achieve that scares me. I have already bumped it back down to what I considered stable (and safe).

That’s awesome. Did you try the settings I recommended?

I played around with them, but they didn't seem to do much.
Newegg's video on OCing the i7-2600k was actually a really great guide that helped me push it up.

Just noticed the GPU temps loaded in Real Temp. That's obviously the GPU part of the i5? I have the same version of Real Temp as you but don't have the GPU readings.

Nope, that has always been my actual GPU's temperature.
(I am not sure though)

~Lordbob

 

[sygnus21]

Just noticed the GPU temps loaded in Real Temp. That's obviously the GPU part of the i5? I have the same version of Real Temp as you but don't have the GPU readings.

Nope, that has always been my actual GPU's temperature.
(I am not sure though)

~Lordbob

I don't think so. Here's mine.....



Note no GPU readings. Remember your processor has the built in GPU.

 

[Lordbob75]

Just noticed the GPU temps loaded in Real Temp. That's obviously the GPU part of the i5? I have the same version of Real Temp as you but don't have the GPU readings.

Nope, that has always been my actual GPU's temperature.
(I am not sure though)

~Lordbob

I don't think so. Here's mine.....

View attachment 137500

Note no GPU readings. Remember your processor has the built in GPU.

Yes, but mine used to give GPU readings with my Q8200 as well.

~Lordbob

 

[Everlong]

Just noticed the GPU temps loaded in Real Temp. That's obviously the GPU part of the i5? I have the same version of Real Temp as you but don't have the GPU readings.

Nope, that has always been my actual GPU's temperature.
(I am not sure though)

~Lordbob

I don't think so. Here's mine.....

View attachment 137500

Note no GPU readings. Remember your processor has the built in GPU.

Mine displays GPU on the version of RealTemp I have too with my 9550.

 

[Lordbob75]

Nope, that has always been my actual GPU's temperature.
(I am not sure though)

~Lordbob

I don't think so. Here's mine.....

View attachment 137500

Note no GPU readings. Remember your processor has the built in GPU.

Mine displays GPU on the version of RealTemp I have too with my 9550.

Confirming that it is indeed my 260GTX. If you click on the button it tells you.

I have also played with my 4.5Ghz OC, and have it stable at 1.35V, which is MUCH better than 1.4V.

~Lordbob

 

[profdlp]

You know, I hate to be a stinker, but...

4999.9 is close... :devil:

(I am kidding, of course.)

 

[sygnus21]

I don't think so. Here's mine.....

View attachment 137500

Note no GPU readings. Remember your processor has the built in GPU.

Mine displays GPU on the version of RealTemp I have too with my 9550.

Confirming that it is indeed my 260GTX. If you click on the button it tells you.

Hmmm.... I've never seen mine displayed that way on any version of Real Temp

I have also played with my 4.5Ghz OC, and have it stable at 1.35V, which is MUCH better than 1.4V.

Yeah, and probably better on the temps as well

 

[sygnus21]

Hmmm.... I've never seen mine displayed that way on any version of Real Temp

Well mystery solved!

Silly me! As long as I've been using Real Temp I never ever really looked at the options available! Finally did that and checked the "ATI" box and what do you know.....



Duh

 

[Everlong]

Hmmm.... I've never seen mine displayed that way on any version of Real Temp

Well mystery solved!

Silly me! As long as I've been using Real Temp I never ever really looked at the options available! Finally did that and checked the "ATI" box and what do you know.....

View attachment 137526

Duh

It's an alright feature to have, but for GPU temp reading I just open GPU-Z and have it run alongside RealTemp when I'm testing temps.

 

[sygnus21]

Agreed. My point is I never even knew that option existed in Real Temp. But yeah you're right, GPU-Z is much better.

 

[Wishmaster]

You may even be able to get those voltages a tad lower.


Still,with lower voltages, and should be much lower temps, I think its worth the trade off of the slightly higher clocks.

Probably not that much of a performance increase in the grand scheme of things anyway.


Look forward to building one of the SandyBridge setups

 

[sygnus21]

Still,with lower voltages, and should be much lower temps, I think its worth the trade off of the slightly higher clocks.

I have to totally agree with you here. Yeah it's nice to go higher but at what cost?

 

[Lordbob75]

You know, I hate to be a stinker, but...

4999.9 is close... :devil:

(I am kidding, of course.)

While my snip timing appears to be rather poor, it was indeed stable at 5Ghz (check the CPUz validation).

And yes, in the long term, I will take 4.5Ghz at 1.35V (what I am now) over 5Ghz at 1.55V. Especially considering anything over 1.4V is not recommended and 1.5 and over is considered too high.

~Lordbob

 

[Wishmaster]

Exactly.
I too love playing around and finding the Max everything will do, but in the end a good trade off or "Sweet Spot" as refer to it is the best option IMO.