Official Seven Forums Overclock Leader boards

[paulpicks21]

Had to update to validate till I almost asphyxiate !

View attachment 282418

You got there in the end Alan I have just altered the leaderboards as your validated speed was a tiny bit faster and we always go by the validated score.

 

[paulpicks21]

I am just in the process of adding Voltages to the Leaderboards.

This make take a while but it will be interesting.

 

[paulpicks21]

Ok that's all updated.

It's worth noting there are a couple of 'Suspect' Voltages where I think although CPUz has validated the voltage has not been read correctly.
Especially so on Wrends, his was 1.064V which for 4.9GHz on a Sandy-E CPU or any other CPU for that matter is just not possible so I have had to put N/A for that one for now.
On smarteyballs he was having issues with CPUz and it has not even given a voltage.

Paul.

 

[kbrady1979]

I hate to do this to you Paul because you just got everything updated..........but I managed this today:

 

[paulpicks21]

I hate to do this to you Paul because you just got everything updated..........but I managed this today:

View attachment 282436

Don't worry Kelly, if anything it's interesting as I can see you just got a faster speed with less voltage. Nice one!

I will update in a min.

 

[kbrady1979]

I used an offset and that wasn't it's max voltage.....it was somewhere around 1.524.

 

[paulpicks21]

I used an offset and that wasn't it's max voltage.....it was somewhere around 1.524.

Arh, Ok, I can see that the offset mode could cause some issues with correct voltage readings in CPUz now. I didn't really expect anyone to be running massive OC's using offset mode lol.

Your new speed has also bumped you up the leaderboard 1 spot.

Edit: Picture added, I see a dilemma , All I can think of is for people to post what voltage it was running for the OC if they are using Offset.

 

[essenbe]

Paul, I read On OCN that CPUz will validate some, but they have a way to tell it was not correct and will, and sometimes do, come back and invalidate it.

 

[paulpicks21]

Paul, I read On OCN that CPUz will validate some, but they have a way to tell it was not correct and will, and sometimes do, come back and invalidate it.

It's pretty annoying Steve, it's a shame they can't build something into CPUz that stress's the CPU for a few seconds before/while validating to show the proper voltage.

 

[kbrady1979]

Paul, my voltage was 1.524 @ that overclock

Edit: I see you already got it handled.....thanks buddy

 

[paulpicks21]

Paul, my voltage was 1.524 @ that overclock

Edit: I see you already got it handled.....thanks buddy

Yeah, no messin around here mate! Lol.

 

[paulpicks21]

This thread has been more popular than I thought it would be,

Some statistics - Nearly 500 Replies and 6000 Views since it started 7 Weeks ago

 

[kbrady1979]

It's a good thread Paul......keeps us all in one place. Easier to keep track of us like that lol!

 

[Solarstarshines]

It's also a great opportunity to show people how it's done

The lot of us here are Guru's pretty much and that is pretty awesome

People will always look here first to see how effective one can overclock brand of CPU Genius my boy Genius @Paul

 

[essenbe]

It's a good thread Paul......keeps us all in one place. Easier to keep track of us like that lol!

I have anti tracking on my browser, so there Paul.

 

[Wrend]

Hi, Paul.

Yeah, my voltage and clock rate are both dynamic based on CPU load, so in a sense, the voltage that is validated is likely the correct measured voltage at the time, though it isn't as high as it would be under load.

The base Vcore I set the voltage to to get it to 4.9GHz was 1.445, but under load it will up it higher still, if it needs to. So basically, I don't have a set maximum nor minimum voltage to achieve the OC, and it is always in somewhat of a state of fluctuation based on what it needs for stability vs. power saving and heat reduction.

So that being said, "N/A" is probably fitting enough for my OC voltage level... LOL

For those of us using dynamic offsets and whatnot, perhaps you could just list the base voltage with an asterisk afterwards and have a note on the bottom (or similar) explaining that they're dynamic voltages and that the listed voltage is just the base Vcore setting (mine being 1.445)? Just a thought. Only problem being that they aren't "validated" voltage levels, and you'll have to rely on us to submit them.

Sorry if I'm complicating things for you.

 

[Britton30]

Are you guys using manual CPU voltage with no offset?

I discovered something to day you may already know. In CPUz if you click the Intel logo a IE page opens with the OC records for the CPU you have. as recorded by them.

 

[Dude]

Are you guys using manual CPU voltage with no offset?

I discovered something to day you may already know. In CPUz if you click the Intel logo a IE page opens with the OC records for the CPU you have. as recorded by them.

Nice find Gary, I never clicked it.

 

[Wrend]

Wow, don't think I'll be making it on that list any time soon for my i7-3930K...

Top score listed there for it is 5950.7 MHz.

Liquid nitrogen cooling?

 

[kbrady1979]

Well, after much tinkering the past few weeks, I've finally hit 5GHz. I used an Offset voltage of +.430 and even ran AIDA64 to see my maximum voltage. I tried it several times and got a voltage of 1.656 but the validation frequency was 4999.8 MHz, and I wasn't havin' that, so I ran it again. Surprisingly, I can hit 5GHz with a multiplier of 49+BCLK OC or straight 50 multiplier. It feels like there is a little more in the tank, but I'm done with it. I hit my goal and that's where I'm stopping.