Despite the value, the number is a negative offset. I have the same type of board. So "2" is actually "-2".
From your motherboard's manual, page 44:Just got around to overclocking my 8700k on a Gigabyte's Z370 Aorus Gaming motherboard, and I have a question. The AVX setting on the board are in positive numbers, and yet several of you are using negative figures.
What's the story? I have my chip at 4.9 now, but would like to hit the mystical 5.0 if I can.
AVX Offset
AVX offset is the negative offset of AVX ratio.
They are pretty much silent and very cool temps. I'm sure you get great temps with the stock fans too. I had an H60 in my Sandy Bridge system and the stock fans were very loud. I replaced them and didn't consider using the stock fans this time. I never ran the stock so I can't really say for sure how much qieter the Vardars are but I'm really happy with them.What improvement did you get from replacing the fans on the h115i? I have one too, and the stock fans work well.
AVX is rarely used for most people, and modern BIOSes allow for the AVX offset, so why not take advantage of the feature? AVX workloads are power hungry for Intel and AMD CPUs, and tend to cause temps to rise dramatically.Why is setting an AVX offset and calling a 5.2Ghz stable when it's not really stable when you turn off the offset? I see siliconlottery advertising this on their CPUs setting the AVX offset to -2 and putting over 1.4vcore on their Coffeelake CPUs and charging a lot for the 5.2Ghz chips.
Why is setting an AVX offset and calling a 5.2Ghz stable when it's not really stable when you turn off the offset? I see siliconlottery advertising this on their CPUs setting the AVX offset to -2 and putting over 1.4vcore on their Coffeelake CPUs and charging a lot for the 5.2Ghz chips.
No! Giving the user the power to control how their cpu executes an extremely power hungry, albeit rarely used code, is not only smart but convenient to the enthusiasts who buy K chips to wring every performance they can get from these chips. It's great to see overclocking is still very much alive and intel doing their bit to support it. There's no shame in overclocking. I'm actually surprised I should even be saying this.Because they are appealing to l33t g4m3rz who want bragging rights on having the highest gaming FPS never mind that they are getting 300+ FPS already at their "competitive" (read: lowest quality settings) graphics settings.
OCCT uses AVX, are you using the AVX offset?Long story short, I was never planning to get a 8700K, as my 6700K @ 4.7GHz was more than enough for my gaming needs. However, I came across a very good deal to get a used 8700K + Asus Z370-P motherboard for basically the same price as a new 8700K, so in a sense I got the motherboard for 'free'. I'm planning to sell the 6700K / Z170 motherboard and will probably only end up $100 out of pocket for the upgrade - not bad for a 50% core increase, even though frankly I can't tell the difference at all for my gaming, but what the heck, I'm sure it will be more future proof than the 6700K as games scale with more cores so I think thats $100 well spent.
Anyway, I've been playing around with overclocking today and to be honest, I wasn't expecting much, as the motherboard is entry level and I only have a Coolermaster Hyper 212 HSF on hand to cool the CPU.
Since the 8700K launched I've read about how you would ideally need a good overclocking motherboard with decent VRMs and an AIO cooler to hit 5GHz stable - well from my experience I have to say thats not absolutely necessary. The Z370-P is a no frills budget Z370 board with average VRMs, and combined with the Hyper 212 I'm able to hit 5GHz stable, with 1.42V under load. Yes, temps are high, peaking at 90C in fact when under stress testing with OCCT, but it is still stable, and under less intense loads like Cinebench temps only reach into the 70s - not bad for a cheap air cooler.
I could probably hit 5.1 or even 5.2GHz with a delid, better motherboard, AIO etc, but I don't think I will bother. In fact, I'll probably run it daily at 4.8GHz or 4.9GHz with lower voltages, but it was good to see that a budget Z370 motherboard and cheap air cooler was able to keep a 8700K stable at 5GHz.
OCCT uses AVX, are you using the AVX offset?
Right, use the offset and keep those temps safer during AVX loads.Nope, no AVX offset, stays at 5GHz throughout.
Right, use the offset and keep those temps safer during AVX loads.
Great steal, buddy! This should tide you over for a while. You're very brave running AVX under those conditions, to be frank. But these chips are designed to take abuse. 4.8GHz sounds great to me. Enjoy!Long story short, I was never planning to get a 8700K, as my 6700K @ 4.7GHz was more than enough for my gaming needs. However, I came across a very good deal to get a used 8700K + Asus Z370-P motherboard for basically the same price as a new 8700K, so in a sense I got the motherboard for 'free'. I'm planning to sell the 6700K / Z170 motherboard and will probably only end up $100 out of pocket for the upgrade - not bad for a 50% core increase, even though frankly I can't tell the difference at all for my gaming, but what the heck, I'm sure it will be more future proof than the 6700K as games scale with more cores so I think thats $100 well spent.
Anyway, I've been playing around with overclocking today and to be honest, I wasn't expecting much, as the motherboard is entry level and I only have a Coolermaster Hyper 212 HSF on hand to cool the CPU.
Since the 8700K launched I've read about how you would ideally need a good overclocking motherboard with decent VRMs and an AIO cooler to hit 5GHz stable - well from my experience I have to say thats not absolutely necessary. The Z370-P is a no frills budget Z370 board with average VRMs, and combined with the Hyper 212 I'm able to hit 5GHz stable, with 1.42V under load. Yes, temps are high, peaking at 90C in fact when under stress testing with OCCT, but it is still stable*, and under less intense loads like Cinebench temps only reach into the 70s - not bad for a cheap air cooler.
I could probably hit 5.1 or even 5.2GHz with a delid, better motherboard, AIO etc, but I don't think I will bother. In fact, I'll probably run it daily at 4.8GHz or 4.9GHz with lower voltages, but it was good to see that a budget Z370 motherboard and cheap air cooler was able to keep a 8700K stable at 5GHz.
edit - *actually crashed about an hour in, will have to consider using an AVX offset I guess, since I don't want to raise the vcore any more, temps are high enough as it is.
The problem is that OCCT uses Linpack with AVX, and runs cooler than LinX 0.6.5, which runs Linpack with AVX2. I did a comparison lately. I found that using LinX 0.6.5 with an OC to 5.0 and a Vcore set at 1.37 static (not adaptive) the 140mm six-heatpipe heatsinks from Prolimatech (Megahalems and Gensis) and Noctua (NH-D14, NH-D15, NH-U14S) were barely able to keep the CPU from throttling.
Backing off to an OC of 4.9GHz can allow you to bring down your Vcore. I don't think a 120mm four-heatpipe heatsink like the Hyper 212 can keep an 8700k from overheating running LiX0.6.5 at 5 GHz. I think 4.8 is far more reasonable day to day.
Yes my 8700k is stable at 1.28 at 4.8
4.8 for 8700Ks at low volts is easy.
5.0 is a whole different thing..