How?

 

Nice..

 

I will upload a detailed guide tommorow.

 

So much for a guide 'tomorrow'...

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jedi Mind Trick

So much for a guide 'tomorrow'...

I didn't had the time and now am at work so propably in about 3-4 hour's i will upload the guide.

 

Looking forward to checking out the guide as well.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by IntelFreakI5U

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jedi Mind Trick

So much for a guide 'tomorrow'...

I didn't had the time and now am at work so propably in about 3-4 hour's i will upload the guide.

Awesome! Really interested in this guide.

 

*Updated*

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by IntelFreakI5U

*Updated*

+rep

Nice guide, and benchmarks/does it feel any faster. I will try this over the weekend (not that I have the same laptop as you, so it might not work for me).

 

well, did you add some voltage ? how much ? plus I don't think the chip is able to take 3.9 GHz, same for the PSU.

 

With 3.9 GHz i got +1000plus points at Geekbench, BUT i don't recommend to overclock so high and play game's.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by sasuke256

well, did you add some voltage ? how much ? plus I don't think the chip is able to take 3.9 GHz, same for the PSU.

Well, at the photo's i hit 4.1 GHz. Voltage is as you can see at the photo 1200 and the chipset can hold it as we can see, but no for too long!

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by IntelFreakI5U

With 3.9 GHz i got +1000plus points at Geekbench, BUT i don't recommend to overclock so high and play game's.

Thanks!

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by IntelFreakI5U

With 3.9 GHz i got +1000plus points at Geekbench, BUT i don't recommend to overclock so high and play game's.

Do you know if this could be replicated for an HP ENVY 17t?

 

Actually the truth behind this is that the whole Clover overclocking thing doesn't really work. One can set virtually any value for the bus speed, which doesn't set it for the hardware but makes the system think it's running faster.
https://imgur.com/JaQDSgj
For example you can get it to 400mhz as you can see on the screenshot but in reality it's still running on 100mhz, but the system will be running terribly slow with the 400mhz bus clock.
So basically this doesn't yield any real-life improvements, just makes cheating in benchmarks possible.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ultrax55

Actually the truth behind this is that the whole Clover overclocking thing doesn't really work. One can set virtually any value for the bus speed, which doesn't set it for the hardware but makes the system think it's running faster.
https://imgur.com/JaQDSgj
For example you can get it to 400mhz as you can see on the screenshot but in reality it's still running on 100mhz, but the system will be running terribly slow with the 400mhz bus clock.
So basically this doesn't yield any real-life improvements, just makes cheating in benchmarks possible.

First thing, it's from your CPU. For example, if you have Intel Core i7 XXXXQM you can overclock it without clover, just with XTU.
Second with clover i can set whether my CPU can double first P state (which is worth it for perfomance).
Third, yes with high cpu bus it goe's laggy!

So, "fake" bus or not Benchmark's say's the true my friend.

All best IFI5

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by IntelFreakI5U

First thing, it's from your CPU. For example, if you have Intel Core i7 XXXXQM you can overclock it without clover, just with XTU.
Second with clover i can set whether my CPU can double first P state (which is worth it for perfomance).
Third, yes with high cpu bus it goe's laggy!

So, "fake" bus or not Benchmark's say's the true my friend.

All best IFI5

Sorry to say, but it doesn't really work that way. I have an i7 4720HQ CPU which doesn't allow me to overclock it past Intel's +2 turbo bins limit, and it should be quite similar to your CPU.

Let me explain it - basically you are slowing down time on the laptop when you set the bus to higher values than nominal. So, the laptop thinks the time goes slower, so when it does its calculations at the same speed as always, it appears to be way faster. The reality is kinda different - the real performance is still the same - it only hinders UX because everything is proportionally slower to the percent "OC" applied to the bus.
So benchmarks definitely say it's faster, but I have a simple task for you - measure seconds in benchmark runs in Geekbench and Cinebench with an external stopwatch(don't use software on the laptop itself). You will see that there's no difference between the runs, so no real increases in performance.
Or just set the bus to say 500 mhz and check the benchamrk scores and CPU clocks - I reached 11 Ghz with my i7 and 400 mhz, but what's the point of this if the system is running 4x slower and only benchmarks show an artificial increase of 400%. 2400 fake points in Cinebench is a better result than the 6 core desktop CPU's achieve, but what's the point of this if it's fake?

The real BCLK OC would only give you 3 to 5 percent increase, but it requires a certain chipset and requires modding of the ME region to even allow it, so the amount of work to get it done is improportional to the gains. It's definitely not as easy as writing a random number in Clover options