Solved

Max safe vcore for i7 2600k 4.6ghz

I tried overclocking my i7 2600k to 4.6ghz on a gigabyte z68xp-ud3 1.0 and found it to be only stable at 1.492vcore is it too high or am I missing something. I'm using a coolermaster hyper 212 evo.

I think my chip has one if its surface mounted resistor or capacitor chipped a little.
Reply to Dylan Young
8 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about max safe vcore 2600k 6ghz
  1. 1.492 Vcore is much too high for a Core i 2nd Generation 32 nanometer processor. Such a high overvoltage invites processor degradation known as "Electromigration". Also, at that Vcore during 100% workload, the CM Hyper 212 EVO is not capable of preventing Core temperatures from exceeding 80°C, even at normal or "Standard" ambient room temperature, which is 22°C or 72°F.

    Prime95 Version 26.6 Small FFT's is a steady 100% workload that provides steady Core temperatures which is perfectly suited for thermal testing.

    • Prime95 v26.6 - http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=15504

    Here's the recommended operating range for Core temperature:

    80°C Hot (100% Load)
    75°C Warm
    70°C Warm (Heavy Load)
    60°C Norm
    50°C Norm (Medium Load)
    40°C Norm
    30°C Cool (Idle)

    Here’s a list of maximum recommended Vcore settings:

    -> Core i

    7th Generation 14 nanometer ... 1.400 Vcore
    6th Generation 14 nanometer ... 1.400 Vcore
    5th Generation 14 nanometer ... 1.400 Vcore
    4th Generation 22 nanometer ... 1.300 Vcore
    3rd Generation 22 nanometer ... 1.300 Vcore
    2nd Generation 32 nanometer ... 1.350 Vcore <---
    Previous (1st) Generation 45 nanometer ... 1.400 Vcore

    -> Core 2

    Legacy 45 nanometer ... 1.400 Vcore
    Legacy 65 nanometer ... 1.500 Vcore

    When tweaking your processor near it's highest overclock, keep in mind that for an increase of 100 MHz, a corresponding increase of about 50 millivolts (0.050) is needed to maintain stability. If 75 to 100 millivolts or more is needed for the next stable 100 MHz increase, it means your processor is overclocked beyond it's capability.

    With high TDP air or liquid cooling you might reach the Vcore limit before 80°C. With low-end cooling you’ll reach 80°C before the Vcore limit. Regardless, whichever limit you reach first is where you should stop and declare victory.

    Remember to keep overclocking in perspective. For example, the difference between 4.5 GHz and 4.6 Ghz is less than 2.3%, which has no noticeable impact on overall system performance. It simply isn’t worth pushing your processor beyond recommended Core voltage and Core temperature limits just to squeeze out another 100 MHz.

    CT :sol:
    Reply to CompuTronix
  2. Mate just tried 4.4ghz 1.300 llc lvl6 but i couldn't get it lower. It crashed when i set it to 1.295 llc lvl6. Is it because of that chipped surface mounted component. But i havent tried 4.5ghz yet.
    Reply to Dylan Young
  3. I wouldn't believe blindly those "recommended vcore" and "recommended temps"

    One example is 7700k, the max recommended temp from intel is 100ºC, and that "chart" says that 80ºC is too hot for any CPU... While 2600k has a max temp is 72ºC, if you follow the max 80ºC, you will damage your CPU (it probably will turn itself off to prevent damage) Each CPU has their limits...

    I have a 2600k since 2011, used it @ 4ghz up to 2015, when I bought a raijintek themis evo...

    Since 2015 I'm using it @ 4.6ghz with 1.404v and it's working flawlessly

    I agree that 1.492v is too high, specially if you're trying just 4.6ghz

    In my opnion, anything below 1.45v is safe for 24/7, but remember also to check for your temps, if it's anything near 70ºC while stress testing I suggest lowering more your vcore (and probably your frequency also)
    Reply to Specht77
  4. Specht77 I'm running my i7 2600k at 4.4 with 1.300 with lvl6 llc. I also tried 1.295 with lvl6 llc but it would crash on desktop. Do you reckon the chipped off resistor at the bottom of the cpu is to blame?
    Reply to Dylan Young
  5. Dylan Young said:
    Specht77 I'm running my i7 2600k at 4.4 with 1.300 with lvl6 llc. I also tried 1.295 with lvl6 llc but it would crash on desktop. Do you reckon the chipped off resistor at the bottom of the cpu is to blame?


    Dylan,

    There's no short "yes" or "no" answer to your question.

    Without knowing precisely which component has been damaged or "chipped off", and without consulting a schematic diagram to determine how that missing component would affect specific circuits in a processor with 1.16 billion transistors, I couldn't speculate. However, integrated circuits are often designed with redundancies and can still sometimes function correctly with an open or missing component. Regardless, since your 2600K is still working, it's lower than average overclocking ability may or may not be related to a missing component.

    Keep in mind that no two processors are identical; each processor is unique in voltage tolerance, thermal behavior and overclocking potential, which is often referred to as the "silicon lottery" or luck of the draw. It's possible that your particular CPU is simply in the lower percentile of 2600K samples, which is unfortunate for you. Some people get the good ones, and some people get the not-so-good ones.

    As a former 2700K owner, and builder of several overclocked Core i7 and i5 Second Generation Sandy Bridge rigs, the average overclock is about 4.6 GHz. My particular CPU sample required 1.335 Vcore to reach a stable 4.7 GHz overclock at 77°C with a large single tower air cooler. That's just one example; not bad, but only the upper 2% of 2700K's / 2600K's could reach 5.0 GHz at about 1.375 Vcore.

    Also, the difference between 1.295 and 1.300 Vcore (5 millivolts or 0.005 volts) typically isn't enough to significantly affect stability. In my previous post I mentioned that when tweaking your processor near it's highest overclock, keep in mind that for an increase of 100 MHz, a corresponding increase of about 50 millivolts (0.050 volts) is needed to maintain stability. If 75 to 100 millivolts or more is needed for the next stable 100 MHz increase, it means your processor is overclocked beyond it's capability. I suggest that you use Vcore increments larger than 0.005, such as 0.025 to more quickly find initial stability at a given clock speed. You can then fine tune Vcore using 10 millivolt (0.010) increments.

    Anonymous said:
    I wouldn't believe blindly those "recommended vcore" and "recommended temps"

    One example is 7700k, the max recommended temp from intel is 100ºC, and that "chart" says that 80ºC is too hot for any CPU... While 2600k has a max temp is 72ºC, if you follow the max 80ºC, you will damage your CPU (it probably will turn itself off to prevent damage) Each CPU has their limits...

    I have a 2600k since 2011, used it @ 4ghz up to 2015, when I bought a raijintek themis evo...

    Since 2015 I'm using it @ 4.6ghz with 1.404v and it's working flawlessly

    I agree that 1.492v is too high, specially if you're trying just 4.6ghz

    In my opnion, anything below 1.45v is safe for 24/7, but remember also to check for your temps, if it's anything near 70ºC while stress testing I suggest lowering more your vcore (and probably your frequency also)


    Specht77,

    On behalf of Tom's Moderator Team, welcome aboard!

    At the top of all our Forums are "Stickies", which are informative Threads that are permanently "Stuck" in place so they're always available as reference material for everyone's benefit. Near the top of the CPU's Forum you'll see this Sticky: Intel Temperature Guide - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1800828/intel-temperature-guide.html

    I suggest that you give it a read ... because respectfully, like most users, you are misinformed concerning Intel's Thermal Specifications, which are very confusing at best, so don't feel singled out. Here's why:

    Tcase Specifications are factory only measurements on the surface of the Integrated Heat Spreader, so Tcase is not Core temperature, which is about 5°C higher on CPU's with a soldered Integrated Heat Spreader. Tcase values are also calculated based on stock cooler TDP and processor TDP. Cooler models with different TDP values are packaged with different TDP processors. Several Generations of Quad Core CPU's at 77, 84, 88 and 95 Watts were packaged with a universal 95 Watt cooler. 6th and 7th Generation i5 and i7 "K" processors are 91 Watts, but the cooler is 130 Watts and is sold separately: Intel’s Skylake Cooler - http://vr-zone.com/articles/this-is-what-intels-first-cpu-cooler-for-skylake-looks-like/97189.html

    Compared below are three Intel processor / cooler combinations with respect to TDP and Tcase Specifications:

    Example 1: i7 2700K 95 Watts TDP / Cooler 95 Watts TDP / Difference 0 Watts / Tcase 72°C.
    Example 2: i7 3770K 77 Watts TDP / Cooler 95 Watts TDP / Difference 18 Watts / Tcase 67°C.
    Example 3: i7 6700K 91 Watts TDP / Cooler 130 Watts TDP / Difference 39 Watts / Tcase 64°C.

    The higher the cooler TDP is from the processor TDP, the lower the Tcase Specification, just as when the stock cooler is replaced with a higher TDP aftermarket cooler, Core temperatures are lower. Tcase is based on different combinations of stock coolers and CPU's, which is why Specifications vary. The examples above suggest the 6700K is less thermally capable than the 2700K, which is misleading, because the 6700K has a higher Throttle temperature (2700K 98°C, 6700K 100°C).

    As you're aware, Intel changed the Thermal Specification for 7th Generation Desktop processors from Tcase to Tjunction (Tj Max), which standardizes Desktop and Mobile (laptop) Specifications. Intel's long overdue change signifies that Tj Max has always been the limiting Thermal Specification; not Tcase. Also, Intel still provides the Tcase Thermal Specification for the 7700K in their Datasheets, and the 6700K and 7700K both have exactly the same Tcase and Tj Max values.

    Although Intel's Tcase Thermal Specification for the 2700K / 2600K is 72°C, Intel's Tj Max Specification is 98°C, so once again, Tj Max is the limiting Thermal Specification; not Tcase. Consequently, operating the 2600K at Core temperatures of 80°C is not exceedingly hot.

    Tj Max Specifications vary from 80°C to 105°C. Some processors Throttle at 80°C, while others become unstable over 80°C. Core i 6th and 7th Generation CPU's have Configurable TDP (cTDP) and Scenario Design Power (SDP) which can trigger Throttling as low as 80°C. Although most processors Throttle at 100°C (212°F), it’s not advisable to push your CPU to the thermal limit, just as you wouldn't operate a vehicle with the temperature gauge pegged in the red “hot” zone.

    If your hottest Core is within a few degrees of Throttle temperature, your CPU is already too hot. The consensus among highly experienced and well informed system builders and overclockers, is that cooler is better for ultimate stability, performance and longevity. As such, all agree it's wise to observe a reasonable thermal limit below Tj Max. So regardless of your rig's environmental conditions, system configuration, workloads or any other variables, sustained Core temperatures above 80°C aren't recommended.

    Concerning Vcore; as a rule, CPU's become more susceptible to Electromigration with each Die-shrink. The exception is Intel's 14 nanometer Microarchitecture, where advances in FinFET technology have improved voltage tolerance. I realize that some users may consider the Vcore table I posted to be a bit on the conservative side for certain variants. However, since most folks work hard for the money to buy CPU's, (not all of which are created equal), out of respect for their labors, and as a Moderator and author, I can not in good conscience responsibly suggest that it's OK to run their processors at higher than recommended Vcore settings. I'm sure you can appreciate this position.

    CT :sol:
    Reply to CompuTronix
  6. Thanks for your reply. Would you like me to send you a photo of the cpu? BTW would my chip running at 4.4ghz bottleneck a r9 fury.
    Reply to Dylan Young
  7. Best answer
    Dylan,

    Thanks, but photos wouldn't be helpful in this instance.

    Although Intel provides signal descriptions in the Datasheets for their Land Grid Array (LGA) connections, I am not aware of any non-proprietary schematics for the Surface Mounted Devices (SMD's) on the processor's substrate. Further, even if the missing component was identified and a replacement sourced and obtained, without a proper micro-miniature workstation, it's not feasible to solder a missing component by conventional means without damaging the surrounding components.

    Concerning a 2600K overclocked at 4.4 GHz bottlenecking an R9 Fury, although most games are more heavily GPU intensive, a few CPU intensive titles might be slightly affected. However, keep in mind that your 2600K with all Cores at 4.4 GHz is still a strong performer, which would be on par with a 4770K with all Cores overclocked at 4.0 GHz. Also, the difference between 4.4 and 4.6 GHz is only 4.5%, which is enough to be measureable in benchmarks, but would have no noticeable impact on overall system performance.

    CT :sol:
    Reply to CompuTronix
  8. Just cleaned the crap out of the cpu socket (do know why it was that dirty) it has helped the cpu achieve 1.280 with a llc level 6 ( 1.350 max vcore @ 4.4ghz). Who knew you had to clean the cpu socket lol.
    Reply to Dylan Young
Ask a new question Answer

Read More

Overclocking Cooler Master Intel i7 Intel PC gaming CPUs Gigabyte Motherboards