Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD Motherboards › ROG Crosshair VI overclocking thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ROG Crosshair VI overclocking thread - Page 899

post #8981 of 17652
Hi. 2 questions. Think I'm a lucky one. I'm on 1002 bios, 3200 cl14 mem (bdies) and 1700@3900 cpu volt 1.38 socv 1.10. Runs perfect with Windows 10 creator update but I want MORE! I cant get stable at 4ghz. I'm using pstate clocking running nice and cool but debating 2 things....
Should I flash to 0081 and see if get the 5% increase or should I tinker with blk overclocking and try to get 4ghz and 3600 memory OR should I stick as I am and be greatful it works fine???
Thanks.
post #8982 of 17652
Quote:
Originally Posted by HellBoundgr View Post

I run CMD16GX4M4B3200C16-ROG. The "DRAM overclocking data collection" not have 4x4. I run them at 3200 with bclk 117. Is it samsung B IC on those?
Use this to find out: http://www.softnology.biz/files.html
System R
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD RYZEN 7 1700X ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G.SKILL TridentZ F4-3200C14D-16GTZ 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 960 Pro 512GB Samsung 850 Evo 250GB WD My Book (New) 4TB NZXT Kraken X62 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 1703 Samsung UN65JS9000F Logitech k830 Antec HCP-1200 
CaseAudio
Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX Galaxy Silver Onkyo TX-NR646 
  hide details  
Reply
System R
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD RYZEN 7 1700X ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G.SKILL TridentZ F4-3200C14D-16GTZ 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 960 Pro 512GB Samsung 850 Evo 250GB WD My Book (New) 4TB NZXT Kraken X62 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 1703 Samsung UN65JS9000F Logitech k830 Antec HCP-1200 
CaseAudio
Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX Galaxy Silver Onkyo TX-NR646 
  hide details  
Reply
post #8983 of 17652
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordzed83 View Post

Have You tried VDDP ?? It helped in my case where anothing else did. Im on 0.960 try that
what is vddp? and safe guideline is ?
post #8984 of 17652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benus74 View Post

@gupsterg you can find my CPU details below for your DB.


Ooh, 1710.

That's a new batch.
post #8985 of 17652
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpecChum View Post

Ooh, 1710.

That's a new batch.

Geez, now I'm even more thrilled applaud.gif
Ryzen ROG'ks
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD Ryzen 1700 Asus ROG Crosshair VI Hero AMD Vega MSI GeForce GTX 1060 GAMING X 6G 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
G.Skill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR samsung 960 PRO 1TB Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4 Ubuntu 17.04 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 LG 38UC99 WF Corsair K95 Platinium RGB Silver Switch EVGA T2 850W 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
ENTHOO EVOLV ATX GLASS (Galaxy Silver) Razer Mamba Razer Firefly 
  hide details  
Reply
Ryzen ROG'ks
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD Ryzen 1700 Asus ROG Crosshair VI Hero AMD Vega MSI GeForce GTX 1060 GAMING X 6G 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
G.Skill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR samsung 960 PRO 1TB Noctua NH-D15 SE-AM4 Ubuntu 17.04 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 LG 38UC99 WF Corsair K95 Platinium RGB Silver Switch EVGA T2 850W 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
ENTHOO EVOLV ATX GLASS (Galaxy Silver) Razer Mamba Razer Firefly 
  hide details  
Reply
post #8986 of 17652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benus74 View Post

Geez, now I'm even more thrilled applaud.gif

As far as I know you're the first on here with that batch, so please do report your findings.
post #8987 of 17652
Let's just hope the first batches weren't a fluke reaching 3.9ghz and they're now not aggressively binning them lol
post #8988 of 17652
betting he'll get 4.1ghz @ 1.45v !
post #8989 of 17652
@RS87

AFAIK no way within HWiNFO to save graphs, you will have do as f1ll highlighted in his post.

@finalheaven

Originally on 0902 / 1002 I had used SOC: 0.950V for lengthy back to back stability testing with 3.8GHz / 3200MHz C14 1T. I found at low loads / idle occasionally rig would just go code 8, upping to 0.962V solved issue. As posted before I believe this happened on low loads / idle as voltages may just be dipping lower compared with when rig loaded.

When I went 0079 I found 0.950V did the same but quicker, 0.962V was perfect. As posted by me earlier my take on this is 0079 and newer have better RAM bench result in AIDA64. So I reckon this extra "efficiency" showed quicker 0.950V was too low compared with UEFI 0902 / 1002.

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)


I do believe my voltages are spot on for what I set rig up as, but will bare in mind that I may need a notch or 2 higher on potentially VCORE/SOC.

Since last night going to 0081 which basically is how 0079 was setup (ie I was using ProcODT as 53.3Ω), rig has been behaving smile.gif . I'm today only keeping to using my 3.8GHz 3200MHz C14 profile and not doing any changes like yesterday or unplugging power. So far this mornings testing of normal usage / rebooting / shutdown and up, all has been well smile.gif , keeping detailed log what occurs today.

@elmor

Thank you for viewing and commenting thumb.gif . As highlighted to finalheaven all is well today smile.gif . Not going to "tinker" today, just to see if it fall over in normal usage like the last occurrence posted on 0079. I will see if AMD CBS settings are reset upon "issue", if nothing happens today then tomorrow I will "tinker" to make rig fall over and get AMD CBS screenie.

@Tyrluk

Nice to read another CPU got you 3200MHz, shame not as good for OC, mine were very similar on that aspect so easy choice which to keep. Even X CPU does not guarantee better IMC from what I have read from shares by owners. I think I linked a post from XS forum before where Fugger who has used extreme cooling on CPU stated his X CPU did not do same RAM MHz as 1700.

Perhaps it's not IMC, as RAM speed affects "Data Fabric" clock perhaps it is something to do with that. Some CPU handle better others not. Again no idea just a thought bouncing in my head. Perhaps as FW improve it will get better or perhaps it won't. Only then we'll have better idea.

Thank you for sharing you tried another RAM kit. Like I posted before I don't think it's RAM / mobo, more like FW and/or CPU.

@Masterchief79

3.6GHz OC I didn't try. As basically when reading The Stilt's Anandtech thread he said this:-
Quote:
One of the major down sides of the "OC-Mode" is that upon activation both Turbo and XFR will be disabled as well. Basically, this means that unless you are able to reach at least the default MSCF / XFR frequency on all cores, then you will essentially be losing single threaded performance compared to stock configuration.

So I went for min 3.7GHz ACB as that was only 50MHz below XFR and 500MHz above stock ACB.

1st needed ~+50mV offset to reach 3.7GHz stable in 48 loops x264. HWiNFO showed MAX CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) ~1.244V, I may have a ProbeIt VCORE reading on my notepad. 3.8GHz was ~+137mV, this passed a lot of back to back testing of Y-Cruncher / x264 / f@h / RB. 3.9GHz was ~+181mV tested with LLC LVL3 at the time = ~1.465V on ProbeIt VCORE, passed 10 loops x264, due to VCORE requirement and gaining more knowledge from others I backed off from testing more or going higher. Just as added info, 3.9GHz +181mV LLC: [Auto] was ~1.405V on ProbeIt, which would fail x264 loop 2 or 3 with WHEA errors.

2nd I have not tested for 3.7GHz. 3.8GHz is +162mV, ~1.380V on ProbeIt VCORE, HWiNFO shows MAX CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) ~1.356V. 3.9GHz is +250mV, ~1.475V, tested only on x264 20 loops and then discarded profile as VCORE requirement too high for level of stability I want.

All results above are LLC: [Auto] except the one instance highlighted.

4.0GHz it will bench in CB with +250mV offset, LLC: [Auto]. I can not go any higher on clock with that offset for CB bench. Below are results with CB PB in UEFI enabled.

UEFI 0079 (ProcODT as 53.3, what is default in 0081) (Click to show)
UEFI 0081 (Click to show)
The 1786 result in below screenie is same setup but with CB PB in UEFI disabled.


Edited by gupsterg - 4/13/17 at 4:58am
XPS - R7 1700
(14 items)
 
XPS - i5 4690K
(12 items)
 
XPS - Q6600
(8 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 7 1700 Asus Crosshair VI Hero Sapphire Fury X@1145/545 G.Skill Trident Z 2x 8GB 3200MHz C14 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung Evo 840 ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2 + 2x TY143 ThermalRight TY-143 2x front case intake Arctic Cooling F12 + 2x F9 as rear case exhaust 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 7 Pro x64 / Win 10 Pro x64 Asus MG279Q Cherry MX-Board 3.0 Cooler Master V850 
CaseMouse
SilverStone TJ06 Logitech G700S 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4690K@4.9GHz 1.255V Asus Maximus VII Ranger Sapphire Fury X@1145/545 HyperX Savage 2x8GB 2400MHz C11 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung Evo 840 TR Archon SB-E X2 Win 7 Pro x64 / Win 10 x64 Asus MG279Q 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Cherry MX-Board 3.0 Cooler Master V850 SilverStone TJ06 Logitech G700S 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Q6600 G0 Asus P5K Premium Black Pearl Sapphire Toxic HD5850 Corsair Dominator 4GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Crucial MX 100 256GB TR TRUE Rev.A Win 7 Pro x64 Cooler Master V650 
  hide details  
Reply
XPS - R7 1700
(14 items)
 
XPS - i5 4690K
(12 items)
 
XPS - Q6600
(8 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 7 1700 Asus Crosshair VI Hero Sapphire Fury X@1145/545 G.Skill Trident Z 2x 8GB 3200MHz C14 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung Evo 840 ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2 + 2x TY143 ThermalRight TY-143 2x front case intake Arctic Cooling F12 + 2x F9 as rear case exhaust 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 7 Pro x64 / Win 10 Pro x64 Asus MG279Q Cherry MX-Board 3.0 Cooler Master V850 
CaseMouse
SilverStone TJ06 Logitech G700S 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4690K@4.9GHz 1.255V Asus Maximus VII Ranger Sapphire Fury X@1145/545 HyperX Savage 2x8GB 2400MHz C11 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung Evo 840 TR Archon SB-E X2 Win 7 Pro x64 / Win 10 x64 Asus MG279Q 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Cherry MX-Board 3.0 Cooler Master V850 SilverStone TJ06 Logitech G700S 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Q6600 G0 Asus P5K Premium Black Pearl Sapphire Toxic HD5850 Corsair Dominator 4GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
Crucial MX 100 256GB TR TRUE Rev.A Win 7 Pro x64 Cooler Master V650 
  hide details  
Reply
post #8990 of 17652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reikoji View Post

betting he'll get 4.1ghz @ 1.45v !

Yea i def wouldn't hold your breath haha. I think AMD has pretty much maxed out their CPU limitations, think about it.

They already have boost clocks and xfr clocks (it being on one core should say something especially with the voltage being applied lol), i think they are pretty close to maxed out to begin with. It was the same for HBM and Fury just did not give up the ghost. We may see more OCing in ryzen 3 and 5 but i wouldn't hold my breath either, its a brand new architecture.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1700X asus crosshair 6 Sapphire R9 390 Nitro CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Kingston HyperX 3K Seagate ST2000DM006 EKWB Supremacy Evo EK-XRES 100 Revo D5 - Acetal 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Alphacool GPX r9 390 m01 alphacool xt45 240 Alphacool xt45 360 Alphacool D5 PWM 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 LG 29UM68 Corsair Strafe Corsair RM1000 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Thermaltake X5 Corsair M65 Pro RGB Razer Goliathus Speed 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1700X asus crosshair 6 Sapphire R9 390 Nitro CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Kingston HyperX 3K Seagate ST2000DM006 EKWB Supremacy Evo EK-XRES 100 Revo D5 - Acetal 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Alphacool GPX r9 390 m01 alphacool xt45 240 Alphacool xt45 360 Alphacool D5 PWM 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 LG 29UM68 Corsair Strafe Corsair RM1000 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Thermaltake X5 Corsair M65 Pro RGB Razer Goliathus Speed 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD Motherboards
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD Motherboards › ROG Crosshair VI overclocking thread