Overclocking Question.

[Vmedvil]

I have often heard that your computer is only as fast as your slowest part what would I need to overclock this processor to, to balance this video card. It has a water-cooler 280mm water-cooler so I don't think temperature will be a issue, but I want them to balance. 

Processor

Video Card

Because currently I clock this processor to 4.0 ghz.

Current Processor

to balance. 

Current Video Card

Which I know is off by 1% , that is due to overheating above that with a standard fan cooler which sits at Min 44 C to  Max 87 C which is say below 100 C to 150 C where it melts but I always go below 99 C to be safe which I have been told be be OC'd to 5.0 Ghz with watercooling.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Vmedvil

[fiveworlds]

The first thing to check is whether your manufacturer supplied bios/uefi  actually supports overclocking.

[Vmedvil]

56 minutes ago, fiveworlds said:

The first thing to check is whether your manufacturer supplied bios/uefi  actually supports overclocking.

It does, the board that will be bought if this works is the one recommended by Intel for OC which supports  overclocks and the Turbo, which is the P67 for my current processor, where if it is OC'd to 4.0 GHz it actually runs up to Turbo 4.5 GHz or the Z270 for this one with Overvoltage protection and a safe slot, where this one if non- Overclocked to 4.2 GHz runs at Turbo 4.5 GHz, so with watercooling I think the thermal max is about 6.9 GHz or 7.2 GHz Turbo, but I just want it to sync with the card since that previous one is 3.3 GHz which can go to 5.0 GHz or 5.5 Ghz Turbo, which the highest I would this one to is 5.9 GHz with a 6.2 GHz Turbo, but whatever syncs with that card.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Vmedvil

[rangerx]

The problem with over-clocking is not always CPU temperature. Increased output can cause over-current in associated circuits on the main board not protected by a fan.

I've over-clocked a few times with success, but one time blew up a MSI motherboard then reused the processor on an ASUS board, which operated over-clocked just fine.

[Vmedvil]

40 minutes ago, rangerx said:

The problem with over-clocking is not always CPU temperature. Increased output can cause over-current in associated circuits on the main board not protected by a fan.

I've over-clocked a few times with success, but one time blew up a MSI motherboard then reused the processor on an ASUS board, which operated over-clocked just fine.

So does Hyperthreading effect overvoltage. I have never used a hyperthreaded processor, but I have taken this non hyperthreaded one up to screwed up levels for moments on the P67 of like 6.5 GHz with a turbo of 7.0 GHz, so if the Z270 is anything like the P67 it will handle it, but when it hit 99C+ I shut it down instantly, but yes those ASUS boards are solid, where I wouldn't ever keep it at that because you are just asking for trouble with a OC of 1.969 the standard is it unstable, Very! In any case, if you wanna cook a processor take a 3.3 GHz up to 6.5 GHz and keep it there.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Vmedvil

[rangerx]

I'm not certain, but I understand hyperthreading may cause  overclocked CPUs to become unstable. That's a problem with linear circuits. If you increase power at the source, the amplified parts of the circuit become supercharged unless you're able to attenuate voltage or current along the line. Many components have both upper and lower operating limits. Too high may cause the component to not boot up or crash due to internal protections. In which case won't work and you can revert to the original configuration. Lack of internal protection may cause failures. Again, it depends on who manufactured which parts.

All you can do is try.

Edited November 17, 2017 by rangerx

[Vmedvil]

5 minutes ago, rangerx said:

I'm not certain, but I understand hyperthreading may cause  overclocked CPUs to become unstable. That's a problem with linear circuits. If you increase power at the source, the amplified parts of the circuit become supercharged unless you're able to attenuate voltage or current along the line. Many components have both upper and lower operating limits. Too high may cause the component to not boot up due to internal protections. In which case won't work and you can revert to the original configuration. Lack of internal protection may cause failures. Again, it depends on who manufactured which parts.

All you can do is try.

Okay, what 8 Thread Ghz sync with that GTX 1080 Ti, I will put it there.

Model

Brand

EVGA

Model

11G-P4-6696-KR

Interface

Interface

PCI Express 3.0

Chipset

Chipset Manufacturer

NVIDIA

GPU Series

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 10 Series

GPU

GeForce GTX 1080 Ti

Core Clock

1569 MHz

Boost Clock

1683 MHz

CUDA Cores

3584

Memory

Effective Memory Clock

11016 MHz

Memory Size

11GB

Memory Interface

352-Bit

Memory Type

GDDR5X

Edited November 17, 2017 by Vmedvil

[tuco]

You are basically getting the top performance gfx and one of the best CPUs for o/c, and I wonder if there is anything to balance in such setup

While it's certainly correct that balancing CPU and gfx is essential for best results, I have never seen a formula to determine it. When I read about bottleneck (CPU or gfx) its either anecdotes or comparison of specifications which are not obviously comparable.

btw since you are upgrading from relatively old setup (I have similar), I assume you are not planning to upgrade again soon, have you considered chipset roadmap?

 

 

Edited November 17, 2017 by tuco

[Vmedvil]

12 minutes ago, tuco said:

You are basically getting the top performance gfx and one of the best CPUs for o/c, and I wonder if there is anything to balance in such setup

While it's certainly correct that balancing CPU and gfx is essential for best results, I have never seen a formula to determine it. When I read about bottleneck (CPU or gfx) its either anecdotes or comparison of specifications which are not obviously comparable.

btw since you are upgrading from relatively old setup (I have similar), I assume you are not planning to upgrade again soon, have you considered chipset roadmap?

 

 

Well, No I know that, that processor is not as powerful as that card but I dunno by how much, which is why it needs to be OC'd , I had originally thought about this i9 X but it seemed too expensive 5 grand for a computer that will be worth 1 grand in a year where I would need two of those 1080 ti's plus I didn't even know how to cool it.

 

Edited November 17, 2017 by Vmedvil

[tuco]

Right. Well, I cant answer your question as I do not know the answer. Was just trying to bring to attention, not sure how relevant it is to you, that Z370 is on the horizon.

As there is "Can I Run It?" site https://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri, there ought to be "Where Is My Bottleneck?" site  

[Vmedvil]

53 minutes ago, tuco said:

Right. Well, I cant answer your question as I do not know the answer. Was just trying to bring to attention, not sure how relevant it is to you, that Z370 is on the horizon.

As there is "Can I Run It?" site https://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri, there ought to be "Where Is My Bottleneck?" site  

Where I would have to use something like that in the board only supporting 8th gen.

53 minutes ago, tuco said:

Right. Well, I cant answer your question as I do not know the answer. Was just trying to bring to attention, not sure how relevant it is to you, that Z370 is on the horizon.

As there is "Can I Run It?" site https://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri, there ought to be "Where Is My Bottleneck?" site  

Ya, no what processor fits that board "Only 8th gen with a 1151" that X and XE are 2066 where  that 7700K is 7th gen, oh the coffee series 8th i7

Ya, I would consider if there were any left. Honestly, that looks unstable with a 1.0 Ghz Turbo or 1.4 Ghz Turbo

Ya, that looks like a experiment they were doing with turbo almost by they I mean "Intel", the question is would the turbo stay stable clocked at 6.9 GHz with a turbo of 7.9 GHz or even 5.9 GHz with a turbo of 6.9 GHz where it is a 6 core though with 12 threads, I dunno. Well, the .5 GHz turbo is stable way overclocked, but would the 1.0 GHz or 1.4 GHz turbo stay that way.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Vmedvil

[Vmedvil]

2 hours ago, tuco said:

Right. Well, I cant answer your question as I do not know the answer. Was just trying to bring to attention, not sure how relevant it is to you, that Z370 is on the horizon.

As there is "Can I Run It?" site https://www.systemrequirementslab.com/cyri, there ought to be "Where Is My Bottleneck?" site  

You know your right that Card is actually supposed to be paired with a 6 core processor as 6 * 64 = 384 bit where 4 * 64 = 256 bit, where that card's bit is 352 bit which is closer to 6 cores than 4, I know how to OC to sync it now, 1.375 a quad-core, so 5.775 GHz or lets just say 5.8 GHz, but that is the memory interface so it is something like that, which each core is clocked to 1.569 GHz and there are 3584 cores where 5623.296 GHz or 5.623296 THz is all of them. Well, I dunno at this point I get way different numbers but

(1.5)4.2 GHz HyperQuad = 1 HyperHex at 4.2 GHz

or

HyperHex at 4.2 GHz = 6.3 GHz HyperQuad.

 3.7 GHz HyperHex = 5.55 GHz HyperQuad.

So, somewhere between 5.6 GHz and 5.8 GHz which we will say 5.7 GHz will be perfect for that card around that, if it was meant to sync with a Hyperhex @ 3.7 GHz, let's assume that it sync with the processor at the same speed at its memory as a estimate, so 1.35 a Hyperquad of 4.2 GHz is around 352 bits within ±1.818% , correct me if you know a better way to do that.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Vmedvil

[Vmedvil]

On 11/16/2017 at 10:05 PM, Vmedvil said:

I have often heard that your computer is only as fast as your slowest part what would I need to overclock this processor to, to balance this video card. It has a water-cooler 280mm water-cooler so I don't think temperature will be a issue, but I want them to balance. 

Processor

Video Card

Because currently I clock this processor to 4.0 ghz.

Current Processor

to balance. 

Current Video Card

Which I know is off by 1% , that is due to overheating above that with a standard fan cooler which sits at Min 44 C to  Max 87 C which is say below 100 C to 150 C where it melts but I always go below 99 C to be safe which I have been told be be OC'd to 5.0 Ghz with watercooling.

So I just calculated this configuration to be equal to a Area 51 medium build. 

http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-desktop-computers/alienware-area-51-gaming-desktop/spd/alienware-area51-r4

If you want it build by dell and not yourself.

If you build it yourself do not forget Thermal Paste for the Precessor Artic silver thermal paste is probably best for connection between it and the watercooler mount like a normal processor.

https://www.ledsupply.com/accessories/arctic-silver-high-density-silver-thermal-compound?gclid=Cj0KCQiA0b_QBRCeARIsAFntQ9pc17QytZtPL0h3LqaKHesN8Mb5HhlSKgbMxCnuGKqoxNlUl75UnhEaAm4PEALw_wcB

Edited November 18, 2017 by Vmedvil

[tuco]

How about Delid?

Back in days I sanded down heatsink on coppermine CPU and this looks much safer  

[MigL]

The bottleneck for graphics/gaming is not the CPU, but the GPU.
As a matter of fact for single threaded applications, such as most games, your old overclocked i5 is probably comparable if you use the same video card on both the i5 and i7.
Intel hasn't had much competition for the past few years so they haven't increased core performance much;  they've been concentrating on decreasing power consumption and increased core counts to compete with ARM based processors.

We'll see what happens now that AMD has viable competition again.

[Sensei]

Quote

Overclocking Question

Why do you need overclocking at all?

Are you processing a lot of data?

What kind of data?

You can gain much more if you will rewrite code from scratch, using different language..

f.e. code is written in Java, rewrite it in .NET Framework C/C++,

if it's slow in .NET Framework, rewrite it in external C/C++ DLL, and call it from .NET app.

If it's not using multi-threading, try splitting task to multiple threads/cores..

If it's not using GPU, rewrite code using CUDA/OpenCL, at least the most time consuming tasks..

 

48 minutes ago, MigL said:

The bottleneck for graphics/gaming is not the CPU, but the GPU.

Certainly wrong (too large simplification). CPU is responsible for sending data to GFX card memory (3D objects and textures mostly). If it's not able to deliver data fast enough, GPU will have to wait for them..

In some games CPU is also responsible for collision detection, and vertex transformations of organic matter.

Not to mention about AI of bots..

 

Edited November 18, 2017 by Sensei

[tuco]

Overclocking for gaming, to get better value of purchase and just because its ..cool. Oh wait! Seeing the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, gaming in high resolution/detail is probably one the reasons.

The i5-2500K is just too old so its likely bottleneck for system with GeForce GTX 1080 Ti

 

 

Edited November 18, 2017 by tuco

[Carrock]

If the manufacturer got it right, overclocking is a sacrifice of reliability for speed.

Getting higher spec components that provide the required speed is sometimes more cost effective.

High reliability website hosts often underclock their processors and emphasize that in their advertising,

[MigL]

An i5 2500 will do approx. 3.75 GFLOPS per core at stock speeds, while an i7 7700 will do 5 GFLOPS per core at stock speeds.

A GTX 550 will do 7.2Gpxl, 29Gtxl and 69 GFLOPS, while a GTX 1080 will do 110 Gpxl, 277 Gtxl and 8800GFLOPS.

Do you see how the video card is an order of magnitude faster in filling, texturing and floating point ops, while the processor, even at stock speeds, is only an incremental increase in floating point ops ?

 They build supercomputers with graphics cards these days !

Edited November 18, 2017 by MigL

[tuco]

3 hours ago, Carrock said:

If the manufacturer got it right, overclocking is a sacrifice of reliability for speed.

Getting higher spec components that provide the required speed is sometimes more cost effective.

High reliability website hosts often underclock their processors and emphasize that in their advertising,

1

The way I understand it, basically the only concern when o/c, outside of adequate voltage for stability, is temperature. Temperature can be compensated for and o/c system can even run at lower temperatures than stock one. The question Sensei asked is deciding factor: What do you want your system to do? Run stable server or 60fps 4k video game or example. I'd be pretty surprised, which means little btw, that o/ced CPU running at a lower temperature is much less stable and has shorter longevity than CPU running stock speed with higher temperatures. There are no moving parts, so to say, after all.

Once I've heard that all CPUs with same architecture but running different speeds are made out of same pieces of silicon, just some can clock higher, lower respectively, at the same temperature than others. Never really investigated the notion though.

Edited November 18, 2017 by tuco

[Vmedvil]

8 hours ago, Sensei said:

Why do you need overclocking at all?

Are you processing a lot of data?

What kind of data?

You can gain much more if you will rewrite code from scratch, using different language..

f.e. code is written in Java, rewrite it in .NET Framework C/C++,

if it's slow in .NET Framework, rewrite it in external C/C++ DLL, and call it from .NET app.

If it's not using multi-threading, try splitting task to multiple threads/cores..

If it's not using GPU, rewrite code using CUDA/OpenCL, at least the most time consuming tasks..

 

Certainly wrong (too large simplification). CPU is responsible for sending data to GFX card memory (3D objects and textures mostly). If it's not able to deliver data fast enough, GPU will have to wait for them..

In some games CPU is also responsible for collision detection, and vertex transformations of organic matter.

Not to mention about AI of bots..

 

Yeah, I am going to be using mine for protein folding and Bitcoin mining strictly for the next couple of years.

Days to generate one block mining solo: 3082.99 Day(s) (can vary greatly depending on your luck)
Days to generate one BTC: 246.64 Day(s) (can vary greatly depending on the current exchange rates)
Days to break even: 68.71 Day(s) (can vary greatly depending on the current exchange rates)

Bitcoin Mining Profitability Calculator

Time Frame	BTC Coins	USD	Power Cost (in USD)	Pool Fees (in USD)	Profit (in USD)
Hourly	0.00016894	$1.33	$0.08	$0.00	$1.25
Daily	0.00405450	$31.82	$1.80	$0.00	$30.02
Weekly	0.02838153	$222.77	$12.60	$0.00	$210.17
Monthly	0.12163515	$954.71	$54.00	$0.00	$900.71
Annually	1.47989431	$11,615.68	$657.00	$0.00	$10,958.68

Edited November 19, 2017 by Vmedvil

[fiveworlds]

Quote

Yeah, I am going to be using mine for protein folding and Bitcoin mining strictly for the next couple of years.

It is just as profitable to watch the markets and sell when they are high. For instance bitcoin has gone from $3500 to $7800 in the past four months again. Buy cheap and sell high and you can make good profits.

[Vmedvil]

5 minutes ago, fiveworlds said:

It is just as profitable to watch the markets and sell when they are high. For instance bitcoin has gone from $3500 to $7800 in the past four months again. Buy cheap and sell high and you can make good profits.

Well, Someone has to work the backbones of bitcoin otherwise it would just error out and say "Unable to complete transaction"

Edited November 19, 2017 by Vmedvil

[Vmedvil]

6 hours ago, Vmedvil said:

Yeah, I am going to be using mine for protein folding and Bitcoin mining strictly for the next couple of years.

Days to generate one block mining solo: 3082.99 Day(s) (can vary greatly depending on your luck)
Days to generate one BTC: 246.64 Day(s) (can vary greatly depending on the current exchange rates)
Days to break even: 68.71 Day(s) (can vary greatly depending on the current exchange rates)

Bitcoin Mining Profitability Calculator

Time Frame	BTC Coins	USD	Power Cost (in USD)	Pool Fees (in USD)	Profit (in USD)
Hourly	0.00016894	$1.33	$0.08	$0.00	$1.25
Daily	0.00405450	$31.82	$1.80	$0.00	$30.02
Weekly	0.02838153	$222.77	$12.60	$0.00	$210.17
Monthly	0.12163515	$954.71	$54.00	$0.00	$900.71
Annually	1.47989431	$11,615.68	$657.00	$0.00	$10,958.68

Here is the build list that generates that good hunting happy black friday.

2017-2018 Newegg Area 51

[tuco]

Out of curiosity, why not use dedicated mining HW (ASIC) and why to balance CPU with GPU (I do not think it matter for mining)?