I have an I5 2500k. I played with the "Intel Extreme Tuning utility" today with mixed results. It goes through its process of changing and restarting, and at one point, I couldn't even get the bios to load -- I had to use the back2bios button and reset the defaults for the performance settings to boot. Not that happy with that tool, although I'm sure you guys don't use things like that anyway.
Back to the point -- the utility got me to 106W on "turbo boost power" and slightly higher multipliers for 1, 2, 3, and 4 active cores, 44x for each of those, and was at 4.1GHz. However, on stress testing the processor temps got to 90C which triggered a popup warning. I checked this forum and saw numbers in the 70 range, and stopped the test right away. then i reverted the multipliers to defaults (37, 36, 35, 34x), and checked again.
Idle temp is 43C or so, and a 5 min stress test puts it at 85 or so now.
The motherboard is an Intel DZ68BC.
Are you using the stock cpu cooler? If so, idle around 40C and stress at 85C is not unusual. Intel will tell you those temps are "within spec", and quite frankly 85C probably won't damage anything -- but it is getting close to the danger zone.
If you have a third-party cooler, I would check the installation and thermal paste. If you are using the stock cooler, I would recommend buying a third-party cooler. I am using a Zalman 9900max on my DZ68BC+2600k, and with moderate overclocking I see about 29C idle and 60C under stress (with room temp at 21C).
Thanks. You're right. I decided to pull the stock intel fan and saw that it was built with way too much paste. I removed all the paste, applied some arctic silver 5 in a thin layer, and then installed a Zalman cooler, and now it's running at 40 or so, and even overclocked and stress tested, it's staying at 70C or so.
Glad you got the temp down -- 70C leaves plenty of "breathing room".
As for my 60's, I may be overclocking less than you are... I only have the multipliers at 39/40/41/42, and have left all voltages at defaults (core voltage 1.0v, core current limit 97.0A, turbo boost max 95w, turbo boost short power max 118w, additional turbo voltage 0mV). I also have a pretty big case with lots of ventilation, and am not using the onboard graphics.
Whatever you do, don't load BIOS 0035! You've probably seen the other threads here about that, but just in case you haven't -- it breaks the overclocking ability completely.
I'm still trying to learn what I should be doing. I did read about the bios update, and don't plan to install it.
If you don't mind, perhaps I can pose a few more questions...you sound pretty knowledgeable!
I started off using the Intel Extreme Tuning Utility, as I mentioned. It kept making adjustments, then restarting. Each time, I needed to log in with my password (which I later read that I may not need to do), and then authorize the application to run as admin, so I doubt it would've automatically restarted and run as the instructions claim it should do.
In any case, after the third restart, it hung on startup. The only way I could get it to start was to go into the bios and reset the performance page to defaults. I don't know which setting caused it to hang, but I had noticed the 44/44/44/44 on a prior test, and it seemed to work. So, I ended up with the settings I mention above.
Later, I tried another setting, and the pc wouldn't even go into bios. I got a non-flashing white cursor on an otherwise all black screen. That was a big challenge to rectify -- I had to use the Back2Bios button on the back of the computer and then reset the performance page to defaults again before I could proceed at all.
I know that's a lot of words, but I suppose what I'm really trying to find out is how to actually overclock properly, so I am able to find the sweet spot or even get somewhere near it, using that utility? Or is that tool kind of a joke?
Thanks a lot
If you check the release notes of BIOS 0035 you will see that Intel fixed a couple of defects in support for the Extreme Tuning Utility (XTU):
BIOS 0028 can not always recover if XTU has overclocked your system too high, for example.
That was my primary reason to upgrade to 0035. However 0035 has a serious defect that breaks overclocking or can make your system non-bootable or even unstable: advice DONT INSTALL 0035!
If you want automatic overclocking you need to wait to the next DZ68BC BIOS release. In the meantime, the automatic overclocking option in the BIOS 0028 (up to 4.5 Ghz) worked fine for me (in version 0028) and XTU can be used to manually overclock.
Agree with vbaderks' comments above... Will add that I didn't find XTU very helpful when I tried it; no idea if 0035 actually improved XTU functionality since 0035 is a non-starter with the problems it has.
Something I especially disliked about XTU is that it needlessly changes some "auto" settings in BIOS to "static" settings. For example, I had memory set for XMP so the board would automatically get the memory timings from the dimms. After applying only cpu multiplier changes with XTU, I found that XTU had also changed from XMP to static values for memory clock and timings.
I like XTU for monitoring and easily seeing all the settings at once, and the stress tests are good too. But I prefer to make any changes directly in the BIOS rather than through XTU.
I have a i7 2600K in my DZ68BC.
Which settings do want? I have reset all settings to bios-default to get BIOS #35 stable on my board.
P.S. the readme of #35 gives an overview of the fixes (including the XTU support fixes). Reading this readme the other way around: these issues are present in #28 and earlier revisions.
By the way there are 2 branches of XTU: the 2.1 branch and the 3.x branch. The 3.x version seems to be under active development but cannot automatically overclock yet (the readme states that this will be address in the next revision). The 2.1 branch can, but is not developed anymore...