Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Kaby Lake Overclocking Guide [With Statistics]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Kaby Lake Overclocking Guide [With Statistics] - Page 211

post #2101 of 2783
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyd9 View Post

And comparing an overclocked processor to a stock processor isn't?

The ROG test had the lower VID for you, correct? Here's ROG "Stress" test set at the default 4GB running for a few minutes. I changed the graphing to show Core0 clock, Core0 VID and the CPU Package power.

The significant point here is that while ROG Stress was running, the package power never went over 61 watts, and.... wait for it... the VID was constant at 1.170 (+/- 0.001) the entire time that the cores were at 4400. (I stopped the test before taking the screen snippet. ROG stress makes user interface interactions jumpy for me.)



Here's a few minutes of linpack. Cores at 4400, VID constant at 1.17 (+/- 0.001), and package power going between around 41W and ~95W depending on what linpack is doing. (This is setting linpack to use 16GB of memory for a problem size of 46290.)




Does that satisfy you that I'm not clueless? Being that I performed the test you asked for (as close as I'm able to with what I have installed), how about you do the same for me? Load up intel stock defaults for your processor, run any stress test (ROG bench, prime95, whatever) and see what happens with VID while the cores are all at 4400. (If they aren't at 4400, you aren't stock.)
I don't know how you are doing the voltage capture however you are not doing something correctly.

loaded stock optimized defaults. Prime95 maximum VID 1.193v RealBench maximum VID 1.124v.


post #2102 of 2783
Quote:
Originally Posted by wingman99 View Post

I don't know how you are doing the voltage capture however you are not doing something correctly.
Well, that IS confusing. I'm using HWInfo to capture the VID. Are you using ROG benchmark or ROG stress? I am kind of annoyed that you assume an unexplained difference between your testing and mine must mean that I'm the one doing something wrong. I admit that its possible, but how many ways can a person get HWInfo or HWMonitor to read a VID differently?

I just loaded up HWMonitor (from CPUID.) It's version 1.30.0 and it ALSO reports my VID as 1.170:

    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7-7700K Asus ROG Maximus IX Hero Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1070 G1 Gaming 4x 8GB Vengeance LPX Series 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingOS
1TB Samsung EVO 960 NVME M.2 EK Supremacy EVO EK SE 360 Radiator Windows 10 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Asus PB328Q 32" WQHD Asus 25" 16:10 (forgot the model number) Ducky Shine 5 EVGA SuperNOVA 650 G2 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair Crystal Series 460X RGB Logitech G900 Corsair MM300 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7-7700K Asus ROG Maximus IX Hero Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1070 G1 Gaming 4x 8GB Vengeance LPX Series 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingOS
1TB Samsung EVO 960 NVME M.2 EK Supremacy EVO EK SE 360 Radiator Windows 10 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Asus PB328Q 32" WQHD Asus 25" 16:10 (forgot the model number) Ducky Shine 5 EVGA SuperNOVA 650 G2 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair Crystal Series 460X RGB Logitech G900 Corsair MM300 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2103 of 2783
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyd9 View Post

Well, that IS confusing. I'm using HWInfo to capture the VID. Are you using ROG benchmark or ROG stress? I am kind of annoyed that you assume an unexplained difference between your testing and mine must mean that I'm the one doing something wrong. I admit that its possible, but how many ways can a person get HWInfo or HWMonitor to read a VID differently?

I just loaded up HWMonitor (from CPUID.) It's version 1.30.0 and it ALSO reports my VID as 1.170:

I'm using RealBench stress test. I don't know what is going on with your rig. VID has adjusted for load since 2011 with sandy bridge.

Serial Voltage Identification "SVID": A few generations back, Intel introduced serial voltage identification (SVID) which is a protocol the CPU uses to communicate with the voltage regulator. The power control unit inside the CPU uses SVID to communicate with the PWM controller that controls the voltage regulator. This allows the CPU to pick its optimum voltage depending on current conditions (temperature, frequency, load, etc.). You can actually use a combination of SVID and LLC to get an optimal VCore instead of manually setting it. If you start your system without making any changes, your VID (which some refer to as the stock voltage) might be 1.25v, but if you lower your CPU multiplier and restart, you will find your VID has dropped automatically. The reverse happens if you increase your clock and do not set any VCore. Intel's latest CPUs are able to pick their own voltage, and this comes into play if you want to utilize "offset" / "adaptive" voltage. The good news is that if you come from Haswell, you should look forward to a CPU that has the same or better durability.

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/guides/7481/tweaktowns-ultimate-intel-skylake-overclocking-guide/index5.html
post #2104 of 2783
i made the delid http://imgur.com/a/SXPVE

temps at 4.9 ghz (4.7 avx) has improved by 19!

I put CLU on the die and mx4 between ihs and my cobber waterblock smile.gif

http://imgur.com/a/K90Cv

More OC inc smile.gif
post #2105 of 2783
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyd9 View Post

Not always unless I'm doing a long running test. For the screen shots I provided earlier in the thread, I just eyeballed the "current" column. It doesn't invalidate that the VID is going to 1.17 no matter what load is on the processor iff all 4 cores are running at 4400. Once the cores slow down, the VID drops.
Are you saying that moving a 'Chrome' browser window around the desktop on an otherwise idle machine uses the same load as running 8 threads of linpack? They both showed the same VID of 1.17...

Perhaps defining "load" might be a good idea. My definition for the purpose of this discussion is "how hard the processor is having to work at a given frequency." I usually guess the difference of two loads by comparing the "CPU Package Power" parameter in HWInfo (assuming both tests cause all cores to use a 44x multiplier.)

So, using linpack as an example again, on my processor, when linpack is loading up memory, 4 cores are at 4400, VCore is at 1.12, VID is at 1.17, and CPU power is at only 40 to 42 watts. When linpack is done loading up memory and actually starts chewing data with AVX instructions, the core speeds, vcore, and VID are still the same, but the CPU's package power fluctuates between 91 and 95 watts.

Obviously, there's a massively different load on the processor between the two.

(Oh, and when the machine is idle, moving the chrome browser window around causes the power to jump to 21W, with 4x cores at 4400, VID at 1.17, and VCore at...1.12)
I don't doubt that you are seeing something different than I am. smile.gif The massive difference is that I'm running everything with stock intel settings (and even disabling the Asus crap that throws extra voltage at the CPU.) Perhaps if you were to record/save your current BIOS settings, reset them to defaults, turn off anything on your board that auto-OC's or tries to be "helpful" with voltages, and try again you might see results similar to mine with the VID staying the same when the cores are all at max (4400.)

I'm NOT saying that you're wrong and I'm right. However, I'm trying to demonstrate with the least common denominator of stock intel settings, while your contrasting that with overclocked settings. We might as well be speaking different languages..

It'd be considerably easier for you to match my current settings (which are just stock defaults for intel) than for me to try and match your settings (which would likely be impossible as we don't even have the same motherboard.)

Otherwise, you and I comparing things doesn't make much sense.

Remember, please, that my original suggestion was to publish VID's for loaded cores with STOCK INTEL settings.

But what exactly are you trying to achieve or prove, by running at 4400mhz per core and focusing so much on what the VID is at stock level, to the point where it looks like you are obsessing over a VID of 1.12 to 1.17?

At those voltages and frequencies, it is not even worth worrying about anything whatsoever.
WetBench
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6700K Asrock Z170M OC Formula 980ti SLI Trident Z - 3600mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB Custom Water Loop Windows 10 Corsair 1200i 
Case
Praxis Wetbench 
  hide details  
Reply
WetBench
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6700K Asrock Z170M OC Formula 980ti SLI Trident Z - 3600mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB Custom Water Loop Windows 10 Corsair 1200i 
Case
Praxis Wetbench 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2106 of 2783
Quote:
Originally Posted by tknight View Post

But what exactly are you trying to achieve or prove, by running at 4400mhz per core and focusing so much on what the VID is at stock level, to the point where it looks like you are obsessing over a VID of 1.12 to 1.17?

At those voltages and frequencies, it is not even worth worrying about anything whatsoever.

I think the point is to see if there a correlation between the VID range set at the Intel fab for a Kaby Lake sample versus what the overclock performance is. I think its an interesting question. One might predict that a sample with a lower factory set VID range would be a better overclocker, but we won't know until we see the data.
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
7700K Delid @5.1GHz @1.4V Asus Z270F Strix Asus RX480 Strix @ 1400MHz Corsair Vengance PC3200 2x8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Sandisk Ultra II 960GB 2 x Intel 530 SSD 2 x 3TB HDD LG BD-R 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Noctua NH-D15 Windows 10 Home Dell 27" 1080p Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium 
CaseMouse
Fractal Define R5 Razer DeathAdder 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600K @4.6GHz @1.4V Gigabyte GA-Z68-D3H-B3 AMD RX480 4x4GB GSkill RipjawsX 1600 CL8 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2 X Intel 530 240GB + 4TB HDD LG BD-RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell 27" 1080p Microsoft Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium Fractal Define R5 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
7700K Delid @5.1GHz @1.4V Asus Z270F Strix Asus RX480 Strix @ 1400MHz Corsair Vengance PC3200 2x8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Sandisk Ultra II 960GB 2 x Intel 530 SSD 2 x 3TB HDD LG BD-R 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Noctua NH-D15 Windows 10 Home Dell 27" 1080p Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium 
CaseMouse
Fractal Define R5 Razer DeathAdder 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600K @4.6GHz @1.4V Gigabyte GA-Z68-D3H-B3 AMD RX480 4x4GB GSkill RipjawsX 1600 CL8 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2 X Intel 530 240GB + 4TB HDD LG BD-RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell 27" 1080p Microsoft Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium Fractal Define R5 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2107 of 2783
Quote:
Originally Posted by briank View Post

I think the point is to see if there a correlation between the VID range set at the Intel fab for a Kaby Lake sample versus what the overclock performance is. I think its an interesting question. One might predict that a sample with a lower factory set VID range would be a better overclocker, but we won't know until we see the data.

I don't think VID has any bearing on overclocking whatsoever, because the VID range of my 7700K at stock clocks, with all cores running at 4500mhz and cpu cache at 4200mhz is 1.19-1.23 volts, depending on load.

Yet I run my 7700K at the above stock clocks, with a manual voltage of 1.10 volts for 24/7 use. And when overclocking above 4.5ghz, to 5ghz for example, then it actually runs at a manual voltage of 1.21 volts.

So trying to determine how your cpu will overclock, based on VID is not accurate at all.
WetBench
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6700K Asrock Z170M OC Formula 980ti SLI Trident Z - 3600mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB Custom Water Loop Windows 10 Corsair 1200i 
Case
Praxis Wetbench 
  hide details  
Reply
WetBench
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6700K Asrock Z170M OC Formula 980ti SLI Trident Z - 3600mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB Custom Water Loop Windows 10 Corsair 1200i 
Case
Praxis Wetbench 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2108 of 2783
This isn't about what Vcore your part will actually run at, this is about what Intel sets for a VID range vs the final overclocking result (Max stable frequency, Vcore & temps). Also you should never draw a conclusion from one sample.

I don't see why you are so against people suggesting or trying to collect this data. If people want to spend their time to collect data and compare notes to see if there is a correlation, let them. You haven't proven there isn't a correlation so the question still is open. I'd suggest that a separate thread be started called "Stock VID range versus overclock" for those that want to be part of the experiment.
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
7700K Delid @5.1GHz @1.4V Asus Z270F Strix Asus RX480 Strix @ 1400MHz Corsair Vengance PC3200 2x8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Sandisk Ultra II 960GB 2 x Intel 530 SSD 2 x 3TB HDD LG BD-R 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Noctua NH-D15 Windows 10 Home Dell 27" 1080p Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium 
CaseMouse
Fractal Define R5 Razer DeathAdder 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600K @4.6GHz @1.4V Gigabyte GA-Z68-D3H-B3 AMD RX480 4x4GB GSkill RipjawsX 1600 CL8 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2 X Intel 530 240GB + 4TB HDD LG BD-RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell 27" 1080p Microsoft Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium Fractal Define R5 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
7700K Delid @5.1GHz @1.4V Asus Z270F Strix Asus RX480 Strix @ 1400MHz Corsair Vengance PC3200 2x8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Sandisk Ultra II 960GB 2 x Intel 530 SSD 2 x 3TB HDD LG BD-R 
CoolingOSMonitorPower
Noctua NH-D15 Windows 10 Home Dell 27" 1080p Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium 
CaseMouse
Fractal Define R5 Razer DeathAdder 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600K @4.6GHz @1.4V Gigabyte GA-Z68-D3H-B3 AMD RX480 4x4GB GSkill RipjawsX 1600 CL8 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2 X Intel 530 240GB + 4TB HDD LG BD-RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell 27" 1080p Microsoft Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium Fractal Define R5 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2109 of 2783
Quote:
Originally Posted by briank View Post

This isn't about what Vcore your part will actually run at, this is about what Intel sets for a VID range vs the final overclocking result (Max stable frequency, Vcore & temps). Also you should never draw a conclusion from one sample.

I don't see why you are so against people suggesting or trying to collect this data. If people want to spend their time to collect data and compare notes to see if there is a correlation, let them. You haven't proven there isn't a correlation so the question still is open. I'd suggest that a separate thread be started called "Stock VID range versus overclock" for those that want to be part of the experiment.

The fact that my overclocking voltage is below my stock VID volts, at the same or higher frequencies than stock clocks, proves there is no correlation between VID and overclocking.
WetBench
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6700K Asrock Z170M OC Formula 980ti SLI Trident Z - 3600mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB Custom Water Loop Windows 10 Corsair 1200i 
Case
Praxis Wetbench 
  hide details  
Reply
WetBench
(9 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 6700K Asrock Z170M OC Formula 980ti SLI Trident Z - 3600mhz 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB Custom Water Loop Windows 10 Corsair 1200i 
Case
Praxis Wetbench 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2110 of 2783
Quote:
Originally Posted by tknight View Post

But what exactly are you trying to achieve or prove, by running at 4400mhz per core and focusing so much on what the VID is at stock level,...
Quote:
Originally Posted by briank View Post

I think the point is to see if there a correlation between the VID range set at the Intel fab for a Kaby Lake sample versus what the overclock performance is.
Yes. This. It would be reasonable to guess (without seeing any data) that if a chip is able to function with less voltage at Intel's max all core frequency, that it might also be a "better chip." However, without any supporting data, it's only a guess. This could be useful for some, as they'd be able to stick a new processor in a machine and instantly read the VID at stock settings. From there, they MIGHT be able to make reasonable assumptions about the level of overclocking that the particular chip might reach.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tknight View Post

I don't think VID has any bearing on overclocking whatsoever, because the VID range of my 7700K at stock clocks, with all cores running at 4500mhz and cpu cache at 4200mhz is 1.19-1.23 volts, depending on load.
If your running all cores at 4500, you aren't running at stock clocks. Intel i7-7700k turbo maxes at 4400 for 4 cores. What is being brought up in the discussion, however, is the possibility that VID at 4400x4 isn't constant per chip. This is different from what I'm seeing on my own platform, which is.. confusing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tknight View Post

So trying to determine how your cpu will overclock, based on VID is not accurate at all.
Consider that Intel programs a chip specific VID table into each processor based on some internal testing. Assume two processors with identical clock speeds and load; if "Processor A" has a VID of 1.16 and "Processor B" has a VID of 1.25, then Intel determined that Processor A needs less voltage to perform stability for that speed/load. That, in turn, suggests that Processor A _might_ require less voltage at overclocked frequencies as well. (The whole point of charting the data would be to determine if this is actually the case, and then to potential use the data to predict better overclocking processors.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tknight View Post

The fact that my overclocking voltage is below my stock VID volts, at the same or higher frequencies than stock clocks, proves there is no correlation between VID and overclocking.
No, that proves nothing of the sort. It only reflect that Intel sets the VID conservatively with allowances for vdroop, low performing voltage regulation, etc. Your statement is similar to me saying that if I let my Asus motherboard o/c my chip for me, it sets voltage to 1.4 with a 48 multiplier, and therefore my chip must require 1.4v for 4.8GHz. Asus didn't check MY chip, and their built in profiles assume processors in the lower 25 percentile.

Please pardon me while I delve into a bit of sarcasm...

I'm getting the very strong impression that folks in this thread don't actually want to collect data to determine if VID at stock can have any correlation to overclocking ability. Instead of looking at it and saying "it might or might not, but it doesn't hurt to look to try and determine if it does", most people are rejecting it out of hand and even attacking it. So far, no one has made a reasonable argument as to why there'd be harm in collecting the data.

Hey, that's fine. I was under the (seemingly false) impression that the chart (and therefore this thread) was about trying to collect information about overclocking and not a contest. It seemed to me that the VID at a known state would be a better indicator of overclockability than.. a batch code.

Take care
Gary
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7-7700K Asus ROG Maximus IX Hero Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1070 G1 Gaming 4x 8GB Vengeance LPX Series 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingOS
1TB Samsung EVO 960 NVME M.2 EK Supremacy EVO EK SE 360 Radiator Windows 10 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Asus PB328Q 32" WQHD Asus 25" 16:10 (forgot the model number) Ducky Shine 5 EVGA SuperNOVA 650 G2 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair Crystal Series 460X RGB Logitech G900 Corsair MM300 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7-7700K Asus ROG Maximus IX Hero Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1070 G1 Gaming 4x 8GB Vengeance LPX Series 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingOS
1TB Samsung EVO 960 NVME M.2 EK Supremacy EVO EK SE 360 Radiator Windows 10 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Asus PB328Q 32" WQHD Asus 25" 16:10 (forgot the model number) Ducky Shine 5 EVGA SuperNOVA 650 G2 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair Crystal Series 460X RGB Logitech G900 Corsair MM300 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Kaby Lake Overclocking Guide [With Statistics]