ASRock releases BCLK OC BIOSes for non K CPUs |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
DooRules
Newbie Joined: 05 Nov 2015 Location: Newfoundland Status: Offline Points: 122 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 16 Dec 2015 at 3:35am |
Sure did not take them long to put these out, good show Asrock...
http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/asrock_releases_bclk_oc_bioses_for_non_k_cpus.html
|
|
wardog
Moderator Group Joined: 15 Jul 2015 Status: Offline Points: 6447 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
And all I've looked for so far can at this time of writing can be found in your motherboards BETA Download sections.
Happy hunting ! < id="kpm_plugin" ="application/x-KPMPlugin">
< id="kpm_plugin" ="application/x-KPMPlugin"> Edited by wardog - 16 Dec 2015 at 3:56am |
|
Xaltar
Moderator Group Joined: 16 May 2015 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 25043 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I was reading about this the other day, it's good news for a lot of more budget minded people as it applies to even the pentium and i3 parts and likely the celeron line once it is released. I would like to see BCLK options added to non-Z chipset boards too as it isn't really abusing intel's rules regarding overclocking given it does nothing to allow for higher multipliers. It may still upset intel though. We have already seen on more than one occasion they really don't like features being added that were not meant to be.
|
|
wardog
Moderator Group Joined: 15 Jul 2015 Status: Offline Points: 6447 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Oh give 'em time and they'll figure a way to snip or code this ability out of existence < id="kpm_plugin" ="application/x-KPMPlugin">
|
|
wardog
Moderator Group Joined: 15 Jul 2015 Status: Offline Points: 6447 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Go Intel and Microsoft !
< id="kpm_plugin" ="application/x-KPMPlugin">
|
|
ASRock Expert
Newbie Joined: 04 Oct 2015 Location: Croatia Status: Offline Points: 220 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I hope ASRock will bring this to Non-Z boards.
The H110M-ITX/D3 and the B150M-ITX/D3 are the two desired boards for my next ITX build (NES project). |
|
990FX Extreme 9 MOD P1.70
AMD FX 8120 4GHz 1.25V Thermalright HR-02 Patriot Viper 2x4GB 2133MHz Samsung 850 EVO 250GB MSI R7970 TFIII 3GB CORSAIR VX550W LanCool K62 Dragonlord ASUS Xonar D2X |
|
Xaltar
Moderator Group Joined: 16 May 2015 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 25043 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I would love to see it materialize for all 100 series boards, sadly I doubt it will happen with reports already coming in of i3s hitting close to 4ghz. Intel will not like the idea of prospective i5 buyers opting for an i3 in an H110 board because it can overclock to near i5 performance for a fraction of the cost. They will want us to fork out for a Z170 based motherboard so we can achieve these overclocks. Regardless of whether it comes to non-Z boards it is still great news for a lot of people that would otherwise have paid more for the K branded i5/i7.
|
|
h170_performance
Newbie Joined: 12 Dec 2015 Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I will try this with my Z170M-pro4s and locked i5-6600. I'd be happy with 4.2Ghz oc but you actually can't read cpu temp when using the Sky OC. 4.2 is modest, but I want to be sure that my chip won't run hot with a 212 Evo cooler. Is this a good and safe speed?
I saw the i5-6400 clocked at 4.7Ghz, which is ridiculous. A 6400 clocked at 4.7 has functionally the same performance as a 6600 with the same clock, correct?
|
|
Claf1109
Newbie Joined: 14 Dec 2015 Location: Belgium Status: Offline Points: 19 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You really should be fine with 4.2 Ghz. I also have a Z170M Pro4S, with a I5-6600K. My CPU cooler is an Enermax Liqmax II 120 and i can manage up to 4.7 Ghz without temperature problems. At 4.2, i never exceed 50-55°C. The tricky thing is to manage the LLC and the offset to get the voltage as low as you can. Mine is perfectly stable with a 36mv Offset and LLC Level 1 It's also worth noting that you might need to up the current limits for you CPU.
|
|
h170_performance
Newbie Joined: 12 Dec 2015 Status: Offline Points: 7 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I was going to start at 1.35v bios vcore without LLC and read the load vcore. Then set bios vcore to the previous load vcore and low level LLC. Next, increase LLC level until I get bios and load vcores close, while giving the bios a little more voltage if vdroop brings load vcore below what is the minimum (the load vcore I got in step 1 without LLC). Is this correct?
Edited by h170_performance - 19 Dec 2015 at 3:50pm |
|
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |