Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

How much Voltage is considered 'safe' for i7-4790K?


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:05:24 AM

Posted 12 March 2018 - 06:44 PM

Topic is partially self-explanatory, after reading, one will see that while I can build a PC, even overclock one, don't know the first thing about these critical voltages. So here I am, and please, keep it simple, as I don't understand the first major technical thing inside of the UEFI when it comes to system tuning, other than how to increase the multiplier to bump the GHz levels upwards. While this CPU does have a Turbo Boost, may as well not be there, as I've been running at Turbo (4.4GHz constant) since CPU was new in 2015. 

 

My best PC, consisting of a ASUS Z97 PRO Gamer (the non-wireless variant), i7-4790K & 32GB of GSkill Trident X RAM (latter running overclocked XMP Mode #1), running decently, am soon going for a delid with liquid metal, which may mean a revisit to this Topic be later necessary. My long term goals are to run at somewhere in the neighborhood of 4.8 to 5.0GHz (running at 4.6GHz as of this post). 

 

What concerns me more than anything right now, isn't so much about the overclocking of the CPU. Which is easily done by adjustment of the multiplier. Stock is 40, was raised to 42, then a long time at 44, and this morning went to 45 & right after, 46, still running great, no BSOD (so far). Am a bit concerned about voltage, because to be honest, don't know what I'm doing. I never really looked to see what the stock voltages were, nor to see if any overclocking bumped this value up. From what I've read, it's best not to run a CPU at more than 1.3V, however, opened the Intel Extreme Tuning Utility to run a benchmark (note that I don't make adjustments with this, just bench & upload to HWBOT for submission. One thing I have noticed, is with higher frequencies, the more heat & why am going for a delid. In hopes of accomplishing two things, reducing temps & being able to clock my system like never before while running cooler at doing so. 

 

So first things first. Here's a pic that shows what I presume to be the current voltage fed to the CPU, which if I understand correct, is over 1.3V. 

 

DrjzzMA.png

 

Secondly, if it's overvolted, how do I reduce this while maintaining the CPU running at 4.6GHz? I'd assume this would make it run cooler within itself, although also gather this must be performed in very small increments, reboot, benchmark with whatever software I can (I don't do Prime95 because Ivy Bridge/Haswell owners are advised not to). One of my favorites to use are Bitsum ThreadRacer, being that I'm a big fan of their Process Lasso app & have a Lifetime Home key (unlimited PC's, as long as they're mine!). One can set ThreadRacer (in seconds) to run for as long as needed, example if a certain brand of thermal paste takes a couple of hours to break in for best results, then it runs for 7200 seconds. If using Arctic Silver 5 (rare anymore), I'd split that into a couple two hour sessions, followed by a couple of 4 hours, and keep increasing until the 200 hours are met, with a 15 minute cool down between runs, the final being a 24 hour run. From there, will let the thermal paste cure itself during normal usage. 

 

Yet today, am using more of Arctic MX-4 & Noctua NT-H1, so there's no need for a 200 hour break in, the first has an 8 year warranty, the second needs more frequent replacement. To be honest, none comes close to their lifetime max because I clean my computers often, it's not unusual for me to replace the thermal paste yearly on some machines, with a max of two years on any. 

 

My immediate concern is if my current voltage is 'too high' and if so, how do I go about lowering these? Please feel free to link instructions, as I don't know the meaning of all of the UEFI advanced controls, just know how to build a PC & OC the CPU & GPU of a system afterwards. For now voltages are new to me, yet to meet my long term goals, won't be able to dodge knowing how to set this for much longer. :)

 

Speccy specs are as follows:

 

http://speccy.piriform.com/results/lsswYfZt7IE5gf1XaixwgmL

 

HWMonitor Log also attached, please feel free to ask for any additional data. Should I have issues with understanding how to submit whatever's needed, will ask, there's no shame in doing so. Would rather swallow a bit of pride than cook a $335 CPU that's $200 more if purchased new today (if can be found & seller is honest). :)

 

Cat

Attached Files


Edited by cat1092, 12 March 2018 - 06:47 PM.

Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 The-Toolman

The-Toolman

  • Members
  • 1,418 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:04:24 AM

Posted 12 March 2018 - 07:07 PM

In my days of overclocking we only raised the processor voltage when we had stability issues from an overclock.

 

Bottom line I would stay with Default Voltages as a higher core voltage will certainly raise the processor temperature.

 

I would Leave Voltages at Default settings if you lack the knowledge of how to properly do an overclock safely.


Edited by The-Toolman, 12 March 2018 - 07:34 PM.

I'm grumpy because I can be not because I'm old.

 

The world is what you make of it, if it doesn't fit, you make alterations.

 

Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer.  (Mark Twain)


#3 Mason21

Mason21

  • Members
  • 352 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas
  • Local time:04:24 AM

Posted 12 March 2018 - 07:08 PM

Depending on what kind of cooling you are going to use makes a big difference in max temps. Above 1.3 volts is where you get into danger voltages on that processor. De-lidding it may improve your temperature threshold, but be careful.



#4 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:05:24 AM

Posted 12 March 2018 - 07:45 PM

In my days of overclocking we only raised the processor voltage when we had stability issues from an overclock.

 

Bottom line I would stay with Default Voltages as a higher core voltage will certainly raise the processor temperature.

 

I would Leave Voltages at Default settings if you lack the knowledge of how to properly do an overclock safely.

 

Actually I've not touched the voltages, because using the multiplier, am close to 70% (4691.1 GHz) towards my mission, having a i7-4790K running at 5.0GHz. :)

 

This is nearly 300 MHz above the Turbo Boost that provides the power to only a single core when needed, all of mine are synced to run together at the same speed. 

 

It does concern me that the higher induced voltages that I didn't adjust makes the CPU run warmer under load. I didn't adjust voltage, only the multiplier. 

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#5 The-Toolman

The-Toolman

  • Members
  • 1,418 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:04:24 AM

Posted 12 March 2018 - 08:02 PM

Are you doing an overclock using software through windows or are you doing an overclock through the bios.

 

I've only overclocked in bios as in my days of overclocking that was the only way to overclock so I'm not sure how overclocking through windows software works exactly and what it automatically changes as the multiplier is raised.

 

I would overclock through bios that way I would have full control over what gets changed as I just don't trust third party software to do an overclock inside of windows OS.

 

You have already mentioned about voltage settings changing that you didn't change. :scratchhead:

 

Call me paranoid but I want total control of any changes to be made on an overclock.


I'm grumpy because I can be not because I'm old.

 

The world is what you make of it, if it doesn't fit, you make alterations.

 

Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer.  (Mark Twain)


#6 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:05:24 AM

Posted 12 March 2018 - 08:04 PM

Depending on what kind of cooling you are going to use makes a big difference in max temps. Above 1.3 volts is where you get into danger voltages on that processor. De-lidding it may improve your temperature threshold, but be careful.

 

My cooling setup is a Noctua NH-D15 & I have zero intentions of installing a liquid cooler that 'may' develop leakage, and there goes my investment down the toilet. Under a worst case scenario, could also catch fire, causing property damage, bodily injury & possibly death. Even if a middle class unit (+/- $200), that's still only 10% of my investment, which took me years to save for & am gearing for the next, hopefully a few months after EOL of W7. :)

 

Yet am going AMD next round, as a consumer, I shouldn't have to delid & replace the lowest cost TIM for the closest replacement for solder in liquid metal, Intel has forced me into it. :(

 

Had they kept a good thing going, this CPU could do everything that the 2700K can & possibly more, many of us knows that model will take a 5.0GHz OC. Am almost there, just a tab over 300 MHz from where I want to be, and the results are in, most with Ivy Bridge or newer CPU's can easily make temps drop by 20C minimum, which is a lot, leaving more room for OC capability, the CPU has a 100C thermal cutoff. at 4.8Ghz is where I hit that limit. Therefore, if I can cool it a bit with some metal to metal contact, 5.0GHz is attainable. 

 

Whether or not it can be ran that way all the time is another issue, although has ran at or above 4.4GHz ever since new. May as well disable Turbo, those are now native speeds for the CPU. :thumbsup:

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#7 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:05:24 AM

Posted 12 March 2018 - 08:07 PM

Are you doing an overclock using software through windows or are you doing an overclock through the bios.

 

I've only overclocked in bios as in my days of overclocking that was the only way to overclock so I'm not sure how overclocking through windows software works exactly and what it automatically changes as the multiplier is raise

 

UEFI only, that snapshot taken was of me getting ready to perform a benchmark to upload to HWBOT. :)

 

I don't use Windows nor Linux based OC methods, have leaned long ago that neither are reliable in the long run. 

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#8 The-Toolman

The-Toolman

  • Members
  • 1,418 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:04:24 AM

Posted 12 March 2018 - 09:03 PM

Over clocking these days I'm sure is a lot different from my old days of over clocking on the fly method that was a lot of trial and error and than only as a last resort start cranking up core voltage little at a time to reach a stable overclock.

 

It might be a good idea to look at some of the overclocking forums and see what you can learn on how to do safe and successful overclocking.

 

Just keep in mind high temperatures are one thing but high temperatures from to high of voltage destroys processors and memory very quickly.

 

Overclocking without knowing what your doing is a risk and I speak from personal experience although for me was tuition for the price of an education I was willing to pay.


I'm grumpy because I can be not because I'm old.

 

The world is what you make of it, if it doesn't fit, you make alterations.

 

Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer.  (Mark Twain)


#9 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:05:24 AM

Posted 12 March 2018 - 10:35 PM

Over clocking these days I'm sure is a lot different from my old days of over clocking on the fly method that was a lot of trial and error and than only as a last resort start cranking up core voltage little at a time to reach a stable overclock.

 

It might be a good idea to look at some of the overclocking forums and see what you can learn on how to do safe and successful overclocking.

 

Just keep in mind high temperatures are one thing but high temperatures from to high of voltage destroys processors and memory very quickly.

 

Overclocking without knowing what your doing is a risk and I speak from personal experience although for me was tuition for the price of an education I was willing to pay.

 

You're likely correct on all four parts here: :)

 

1) That I've done, or wouldn't be sitting on a 4.6 GHz one right now (for over three years, 4.4 GHz).

 

2) True. I had considered just that, am a member of a dedicated overclocking forum, thought maybe more members had overcame their fears towards the art. After all, these are just components, not medical experiments, when folks are seeking assistance, most are willing to take the chance, if (s)he believes the one giving the advice knows what they're speaking of. It goes like this. The ones who has been the most successful in this World typically takes larger risks over those who follows the ranks. Had I created this Topic on that forum, would already be into the 3rd or 4th page, there's many who has successfully overclocked the i7-4790K, as well as it's little brother, the i5-4690K & many others along the way. I was hopeful that we'd broken that barrier by now & loaded with successful overclockers. While things may change course, there's been a lot of caution & little aggression showed so far. Will give a day or two & make the call as needed. So far, no one has even stated why the voltage increases with that of the multiplier, even though I never laid hands on those settings. 

 

3) True again, that's what all experienced overclockers says & why I've created the Topic. While I can get somewhere with the multiplier, comes at the expense of heat & extra voltage. On the other hand, if one has a stable overclock, voltage can be backed off......a little at a time, benched & if successful, a little more until a BSOD happens. We've gotten close to establishment of the safe voltage for the desired frequency. I know this, what I don't know is how muck to back off of the control. Maybe other things needs to be done. I'm a willing learner. Are we still stuck in 2008, rather than 2018? \

 

4) True yet again. although I didn't know what I was doing (well with CPU's anyway), GPU overclocking is child's play, CPU OC'ing isn't. While I've taken a gamble that's so far, paid off, am afraid if I keep pushing it, will be out of luck. And yes, I was willing to pay the price, otherwise would had sat on the candy tail performance of a 4.0GHz CPU with a single core 4.4GHz Turbo Boost. Funny, have been running all cores on Turbo for years. 

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#10 jonuk76

jonuk76

  • Members
  • 2,180 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wales, UK
  • Local time:10:24 AM

Posted 12 March 2018 - 10:48 PM

Just increasing the multiplier will increase the voltage I believe, under stock (Auto) settings on these CPU's.  The voltage is altered dynamically based on the CPU speed.  Looks like you have a 0.025v Vcore Offset set as well which basically adds 0.025v to whatever the Auto setting is at a particular speed.  You could take that voltage offset out and see if it's still stable.

 

I'm definitely no expert though, on that generation my overclocking has pretty much been limited to "leave it all at auto and increase the turbo speed until the temps got too hot".  I was stability testing it under Prime95 small FFT's though and my 4670K with air cooler was getting a bit hot for my liking at just 4.2 Ghz all core under that test.  Some boards have an AVX Offset setting, which allows you to essentially back off the overclock under those sort of loads.


7sbvuf-6.png


#11 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:05:24 AM

Posted 13 March 2018 - 12:58 PM

jonuk76, what you're speaking of below, is this solely by increasing the multiplier? 

 

 

 

on that generation my overclocking has pretty much been limited to "leave it all at auto and increase the turbo speed until the temps got too hot". 

 

My system is set at auto, I presume the ASUS UEFI makes adjustments as needed. Haven't messed with the Turbo speeds, for now, doesn't exist, because am over the 4.4GHz that Turbo will run. As I understand this, only one core will be increased, maybe others will be as more demand is placed on system. :)

 

For now, am going to back the CPU down to where it was (4.4GHz) & see if the voltage lowers. 

 

Maybe I should go ahead & delid the CPU and reinstall before further proceeding? The needed tool & materials are already here, other than I need to run to a dollar store & grab a bottle of clear nail polish. This will give the PCB a protective layer, don't want the metal to short anything. While some uses tape with success, are more experienced than myself, wouldn't want that liquid to seep onto the PCB after assembly. Kind of a fine line between too little & too much, the one who advised me to get the particular brand of metal told me that being careful, I could do a minimum of a dozen CPU's with the amount in the syringe. All is in the below pic. Have some RTV sealant that's not shown, am not going to use Krazy Glue, could damage the PCB. 

 

nGczGrV.jpg

 

My initial plan was to practice this on one of the former $69 unlocked Pentium Anniversary Edition (Haswell) CPU's, however there's few available, am not going to pay the price of a mid range i3 for it today.

 

Actually, have three Haswells that am going to delid for better cooling, one is locked (i7-4770), therefore the main benefit will be to stop the temps from creeping upwards. The other two are the 4790K & 4690K, the first of which this Topic is over. It would seem that if I can gain better cooling, and learn the art of overclocking enough to meet my needs, this could at least offset any performance loss when Spectre/Meltdown patches ships. Plus I want to get the most out of both Devil's Canyon CPU's, this one first. 

 

It would seem that if those who clings dearly to their i7-2700K CPU's running at 5.0GHz, can get close with the later 4790K. These are supposed to be 'better' Haswell models than the rest (excluding Haswell-E, which are soldered). :)

 

Going back to when I made the decision to purchase the 4790K & Z97 platform over the 5820K & X99 while both CPU & MB combined were just $100 more at that time, taking the advice of a trusted friend (& confirmed by someone here who I'll not name), believe he was grossly misinformed. Had I known of the thermal differences & advantage of the extra PCIe lanes, would had spent that extra cash w/out a second thought. Now am stuck with what I have, trying to make the best out of a poor purchase decision & that doesn't count the speed differences of the GPU & M.2 NVMe SSD in the 2nd PCIe 3.0 slot. :(

 

If I could gain more CPU performance safely via overclocking & bring down temps at the same time, would be a happy medium. :)

 

My issue is that other than adjusting the multiplier or using the onboard UEFI option for improving performance (other adjustments are automatically made), don't know what else to do. There are many opinions as to what needs to be enabled/disabled & other settings needed to manually make the best decisions, why I chose the auto option. That's not going to net me much further, if I bump to x47 & bench, the system will BSOD & revert to defaults & why maybe a delid will help. When the BSOD's took place, I could see the CPU temps going to just over 95C. Therefore, I presumed thermals triggered these, to save the CPU & possibly the MB. 

 

Cat


Edited by cat1092, 13 March 2018 - 12:59 PM.

Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#12 jonuk76

jonuk76

  • Members
  • 2,180 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wales, UK
  • Local time:10:24 AM

Posted 14 March 2018 - 08:50 PM

jonuk76, what you're speaking of below, is this solely by increasing the multiplier? 

 

on that generation my overclocking has pretty much been limited to "leave it all at auto and increase the turbo speed until the temps got too hot". 

My system is set at auto, I presume the ASUS UEFI makes adjustments as needed. Haven't messed with the Turbo speeds, for now, doesn't exist, because am over the 4.4GHz that Turbo will run. As I understand this, only one core will be increased, maybe others will be as more demand is placed on system. :)

 

For now, am going to back the CPU down to where it was (4.4GHz) & see if the voltage lowers.

 

Cat, yes all I did with my Haswell CPU was manipulate the multiplier, but rather than set a fixed multiplier of 42 (or whatever) I did it by setting the 4 core turbo speed to 42.  The Gigabyte BIOS I used on that system allows you to set the turbo multiplier to whatever (probably 99x if you wanted, not that it would run of course).  This meant that while I was browsing, using MS Office or other light tasks the clock speed would be much lower, along with power use and temperature, because it would only go to the "turbo" speed when needed.

 

I think basically there are 3 voltage modes for processor core voltage - manual, Auto (dynamic) and offset. Manual - it runs the voltage you set in BIOS all the time.  Auto - voltage is based on the processor VID  which varies based on the clock speed.  Can go very low on low load, power saving modes (well under 1v at 800 mhz for example).  Offset - modifies the "Auto" value by a set figure throughout the range, so if at a given speed the VID is 1.225v and your offset is +0.025v it will up the target voltage to 1.25v. 

 

I did also experiment with Vcore Offsets, I think I left a very small one (like 0.01v) in most of the time.  I did occassionally have stability issues on that machine, but not at high load.  It would safely pass hours of testing on Prime 95, Intel Stability Test, etc.  but at times would randomly blue screen while doing more or less nothing.  Go figure...


Edited by hamluis, 15 March 2018 - 08:12 AM.

7sbvuf-6.png


#13 Mason21

Mason21

  • Members
  • 352 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas
  • Local time:04:24 AM

Posted 16 March 2018 - 02:58 AM

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-3091175/max-voltage-cpu.html



#14 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat

  • Topic Starter

  • BC Advisor
  • 7,018 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:05:24 AM

Posted 16 March 2018 - 04:31 AM

 

Looks like this was more for an AMD FX-series rather than i7-4790K, which on a decent MB, can take a bit more voltage. :)

 

For now, have dropped the multiplier to x42 (all cores), running just under 1.2V if I read the report correctly, may move back to x44 & check voltages.

 

Spoiler

 

Next time I purchase a MB/CPU combo, will go with my gut feeling over asking the advice of friends who knows less than myself. The X99 OC potential is a lot higher over the Z97, while the i7-4790K was the 'cream of the crop' Haswell quad core CPU, shot myself in the foot by listening to those who stated I 'needed' onboard graphics. For what? That's what discrete GPU's are for, and had two at the time, although not the installed one yet.

 

Will proceed with the delid when I can devote the energy & time, then see what can be done. Maybe 4.6GHz will be a good target, being that when I created the Topic, was where the CPU was running fine, although voltages a bit high, and inch forward from there. :)

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users