Broadwell-E Overclocking resultsPost Date: 2016-07-07 |
Post Reply
|
Author | |
Xenecus
Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2016 Online Status: Offline Posts: 97 |
Quote Reply
Topic: Broadwell-E Overclocking results Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 7:35am |
I've been sucking up a ton of info on the web, seems these new Broadwell-E processors are terrible overclokers, especially the 6950x... I'm actually about to swap my order from the 6950x to the 6850k which not only saves me a boat load of $$$ but I would actually gain performance in games more than I would lose in my rendering solutions, at the end of the day, I will be gaming 60-70% in this rig....
I've seen the 6950x fail miserably past 4.2Ghz, the power it draws is insane probably due to the number of cores.... seems the 6850K is actually the best OC in this new family of Broadwell-E. Any of you guys actually have experience with any of these new CPU's? Can you share some of your OC results? Edit: Wanted to post this on the Hardware discussion, my apologies. Edited by Xenecus - 07 Jul 2016 at 7:54am |
|
Velox | i7 6850x @ 4.5Ghz | Asus Rampage V E.10 | Titan X (Pascal) SLI | 32GB DDR4 | Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB | 2x Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Raid 0 | 1200W AX1200i| H20: HydroLux PRO | Win 10 |
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 9:17am |
All cpus are not the same and don't worry about what others are doing.
EXtreme chips are known for running hotter plus more cores means less oc speed. which is ok depending. Now having said that, the base clock for 6850 is 3.6GHz where 6950x is 3.0GHz, but both have 4.0GHz turbo which means that the 6950x is ocing more then 6850. for gaming at 4.0 -4.4GHz is a good spot to be for gaming. So think long and hard about it, but if you feel like you still want to switch go ahead. |
|
Xenecus
Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2016 Online Status: Offline Posts: 97 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 9:44am |
Exactly, both will OC at minimun the same, with the 6850 having a bit more overhead and *NOT* the other way around... It's been already tested 4.5Ghz is the max that anyone has been able to OC a 6950 with the sweetspot for stability being 4.3-4.4, where as the 6850 can hit 4.6-4.8 looks like.... The bottom line is, that the 6950x "can" make sense if I was charging for my projects as it's really a professional grade chip... the best gaming cpu seems to still be the 6700 or 6800 with the 6850 giving me 40 lanes, that's about it.... I really only lose 4 cores with going with the 6850 but gain significant higher clocks (at stock and possibly OC as well).... those 4 cores are not really being utilized at all by Adobe suit... in fact after 4 cores the utilization of the rest of the cores is negligible at best.... I actually think the best bang for the buck is the 6800k on these Broadwell-E CPU's unless you're going 3 or 4 way SLI then the 6850 is a must. Not sure there's anything else i'm losing by not going with the 6950x, since Turbo Boost 3.0 is a feature in all these new CPU's Edited by Xenecus - 07 Jul 2016 at 9:45am |
|
Velox | i7 6850x @ 4.5Ghz | Asus Rampage V E.10 | Titan X (Pascal) SLI | 32GB DDR4 | Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB | 2x Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Raid 0 | 1200W AX1200i| H20: HydroLux PRO | Win 10 |
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 9:50am |
Well listen 3.0GHz to 3.6GHz is a long way, the 6850 has a lot of headroom over 6950.
those max oc you are talking about have a high temp most likely and are not for constant use rather benchmarking. in gaming 4.4GHz and 4.6GHz won't differ much at all. you are making a huger mistake thinking what your oc is going to be. with DS stage 1 you are gonna be at 4.4GHz anyway. If you know how to oc yourself very well that is a different story, otherwise count on both cpu being at 4.2GHz to 4.4GHz. Significant higher oc has to be .6GHZ to .8GHz higher which I don't see you with that difference. Again if its for gaming no need for the cores and the X chip. Look at how at 3.0GHz 6950 keeps up with the 6850 at 3.6GHz on productivityon most stuff and that is with significant less clock speed .6GHz. Edited by DST4ME - 07 Jul 2016 at 9:55am |
|
Xenecus
Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2016 Online Status: Offline Posts: 97 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 10:07am |
That is the bottom line... the point being in reverse, look at how the 6850K keeps up with the 6950x at $1100 cheaper... Makes sense? And I completely agree about the OC... I like to OC as higher as I can go fro bragging rights and just that, I will probably keep my OC @ 4.4Ghz Max. |
|
Velox | i7 6850x @ 4.5Ghz | Asus Rampage V E.10 | Titan X (Pascal) SLI | 32GB DDR4 | Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB | 2x Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Raid 0 | 1200W AX1200i| H20: HydroLux PRO | Win 10 |
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 10:14am |
You missed the point, the x chips are for enthusiast or powerusers, if with .6GHz its almost keeping up, then both at 4.0GHz the 6950 kicks 6850's butt in productivity, and yes there is a price you pay for that, whether the price is worth it or not is dependent on how important the work one is trying to do is, aka is doing this work faster worth the extra $1100 to me?
If the answer is yes then one goes with 6950 is the answer is no then 6850. Again please stop thinking you know your oc from DS, you are going to be disappointed, stage 1 os is upto 4.4GHz they don't promise nothing, depending on your chip you may not even get that far no matter which you pic. Plus there is other factors, I rather keep a oc of 4.0 with vcore below 1.4 then I would an oc of 4.4 with a vcore of 1.48. DS does not pay too much attention to vcore. Edited by DST4ME - 07 Jul 2016 at 10:14am |
|
Xenecus
Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2016 Online Status: Offline Posts: 97 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 10:36am |
I'm not counting on DS OC to it's full potential... I never seen a boutique master the art of OC, I know what they do is just stage settings from the BIOS for the most part... i totally get it. I'm going by enthusiast that know their OC and that actually tested these chips, that's all. I respect your opinion, make no mistake, but the X or the K mean very little aside for just that... at the end of the day they are both unlocked chips, right? Also keep in mind in the real world when running at all cores the 6950x WILL NOT run past 3.5Ghz in turbo mode that alone 4Ghhz it will ONLY reach 4Ghz in single thread... in multithread test it rarely goes over stock speed...so lets get that out of the way. Edited by Xenecus - 07 Jul 2016 at 10:41am |
|
Velox | i7 6850x @ 4.5Ghz | Asus Rampage V E.10 | Titan X (Pascal) SLI | 32GB DDR4 | Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB | 2x Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Raid 0 | 1200W AX1200i| H20: HydroLux PRO | Win 10 |
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 10:52am |
I'm a bit confused, what are we discussing here? if we are discussing performance then its simple both at 4.0GHz where 6950x wins.
If we are discussing how high one can oc, then that discussion can't be had, cause different chips oc differently, however its a known fact that more cores = less oc ability. If we are discussing price, then yes the 6950x is very expensive but it does offer extra power on productivity, and whether its worth the price or not is dependent on each situation. For gaming this cpu does not offer much over the 6850k. Extreme chips are binned / little different then K chips btw. Nothing that really matters tho. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I can get a lot more power/use out of the 6950 then the 6850. But that is for productivity, not gaming. Edited by DST4ME - 07 Jul 2016 at 10:57am |
|
Xenecus
Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2016 Online Status: Offline Posts: 97 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 11:00am |
Well I'm discussing the best overall CPU.... and I'm finding it hard to see how the 6950x is better than 6850k... Besides the obvious reasons of the 4 more cores, then again is 4 more cores worth 1100... that's where I say no....
Having said that, why would the 6950X @ 4.0 have better performance that the 6850X @ 4.0 generally speaking? (real world not synthetics) |
|
Velox | i7 6850x @ 4.5Ghz | Asus Rampage V E.10 | Titan X (Pascal) SLI | 32GB DDR4 | Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB | 2x Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Raid 0 | 1200W AX1200i| H20: HydroLux PRO | Win 10 |
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 11:09am |
More cores = more performance where its used and that is in real life, because more cores = more multi tasking. In real world use you could be doing many stuff and if you are doing things that are heavy and some that are light then more cores will handle that better. Not saying for regular use 10 core is needed/better then 8 cores or 6 cores.
The cpu is the most powerful cpu IMHO, one that kicks ass in both gaming and productivity. The price is a different story, I don't think anybody will disagree that the 6950x cost is way too high, cut cost does not have anything to do with how powerful a cpu is. At the end of the day the most powerful cpu is the 6950x however its one's use that decides which cpu you go with. Now more cores = more power can go the other way if the other processor has 2 less cores lets say but the cpu speed is way higher like say 10 cores at 4.0GHz vs 8 cores at 5.0GHz. It is very likely that the 5.0GHz will beat the 10 cores butt up and down the street. (assuming architecture is the same). Whether me and you think the price of 6950x is ridiculous is one thing, which is more powerful is another. Edited by DST4ME - 07 Jul 2016 at 12:02pm |
|
Xenecus
Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2016 Online Status: Offline Posts: 97 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 11:21am |
Can't argue with your logic :)
|
|
Velox | i7 6850x @ 4.5Ghz | Asus Rampage V E.10 | Titan X (Pascal) SLI | 32GB DDR4 | Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB | 2x Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Raid 0 | 1200W AX1200i| H20: HydroLux PRO | Win 10 |
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 11:24am |
I'm just a messenger to be honest, I just report what I see.
But ya the price of the 6950x is a joke, and very few people will use it or actually have use for it other than myself. I thought my 980x was expensive at the time ($1200) if I remember correctly. Brodwell is an old architecture now so it really does not matter, the true most powerful cpu is gonna be the skylake 10 X that is do out Q2 of 2017. So really which is more powerful between 6950 and 6850 is a moot point. skylake has a far superior technology in cores then brodwell. Edited by DST4ME - 07 Jul 2016 at 12:01pm |
|
Xenecus
Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2016 Online Status: Offline Posts: 97 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 1:08pm |
I much prefer Broadwell-E though, Turbo Boost 3.0 and 40 PCI-E Lanes are the features I was after (Assuming at some point I will try 3 way-sli)
|
|
Velox | i7 6850x @ 4.5Ghz | Asus Rampage V E.10 | Titan X (Pascal) SLI | 32GB DDR4 | Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB | 2x Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Raid 0 | 1200W AX1200i| H20: HydroLux PRO | Win 10 |
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 4:25pm |
Just keep in mind starting with 1xxx line only dual sli is supported so you can't tri sli 3 x 1080 for example.
TB3.0 is cool but your mobo must support it properly. I always prefer new architecture. |
|
DS Veteran Joined: 28 Oct 2014 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1674 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 5:54pm |
Don't buy into Turbo Boost 3.0. And like DST4ME pointed out, tri-SLI configurations are no longer supported (except for select benchmarking apps, with no real world application), so 40 PCI-e lanes really aren't needed.
http://semiaccurate.com/2016/06/13/intels-broadwell-e-not-released/
Edited by - 07 Jul 2016 at 5:56pm |
|
Xenecus
Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2016 Online Status: Offline Posts: 97 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 7:04pm |
3 SLI is supported...I already have a support code from NVidia, it's just on demand now that's all.
|
|
Velox | i7 6850x @ 4.5Ghz | Asus Rampage V E.10 | Titan X (Pascal) SLI | 32GB DDR4 | Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB | 2x Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Raid 0 | 1200W AX1200i| H20: HydroLux PRO | Win 10 |
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 07 Jul 2016 at 7:57pm |
Correction:
1. nvidia does not officially support tri sli so that is a problem, you can get the "enthusiast code" but that supposedly will just unlock the tri sli ability, it does not mean the same thing as nvidia supporting tri sli. 2. there is no hb bridge made for tri sli as of right now, you can go ahead adn use the old one but they are not hb. If HB is not needed then why would nvidia say it is for dual sli. 3. lets say regualr sli bridge didn't make much of a difference and one did get the "enthusiast code" from nvidia, do we have a code that tells the game to use tri sli? Don't bank on things you see and read on the net so fast. Lets see if nvidia does in fact provide a code that works as it is supposedly suppose to, and everyone can use this code, and then lets see what happens with the bridges and if those 2 workout lets see what happens to the games themselves not to mention dx12 and ms. At the end of the day, if nvidia is not supporting it, it means that game devs will not waste their time on it either. Edited by DST4ME - 07 Jul 2016 at 7:59pm |
|
db188
DS Veteran Joined: 29 Jul 2014 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2115 |
Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jul 2016 at 3:10am |
i thought Nvidia backtracked on that code thing?
|
|
Aventum 3
I7-6700K Gigabyte G1 Z170X Gaming GT 16GB Corsair Dominator 3000MHz Corsair Hx1000i 1000W Samsung M.2 980 Pro 2TB;Samsung 850 EVO 1TB MSI RTX 3080 Ventus OC 10G LHR Gigabyte M28U 4K |
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jul 2016 at 6:30am |
Honestly I didn't keep up with it as it didn't make much sense to begin with.
|
|
Xenecus
Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2016 Online Status: Offline Posts: 97 |
Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jul 2016 at 8:34am |
True Enthusiast push the limits regardless of official support or not.... Nvidia doesn't want to deal with some of the negative of 3 or 4 way SLI, in all honestly it's a total waste of money for actual games.... It's all about Benchmarks, regardless many are already doing 3-4-way-SLI with 1080's
The HBLink is more of a marketing play, it has no real benefits over using two legacy bridges. |
|
Velox | i7 6850x @ 4.5Ghz | Asus Rampage V E.10 | Titan X (Pascal) SLI | 32GB DDR4 | Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB | 2x Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Raid 0 | 1200W AX1200i| H20: HydroLux PRO | Win 10 |
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jul 2016 at 8:42am |
Can you show me a tri sli with regular bridge vs hb bridge benchmark? both in 3d and actual game.
I don't know one informed poweruser/gamer that cares about what a Synthetic benchmark is on a part, everyone I know cares about real world performance. How many times have you seen us mention benchmark numbers when we recommend parts? Zero and there is a reason for that. Application benchmarks are what counts. IMHO with all due respect for an average/ordinary owner user, Synthetic benchmarks are worthless. Only people in the industry that have something to gain from breaking benchmarks or having high benchmarks, no informed person is gonna recommend gpus based on 3dmark bench score for example. I'm not saying there is something wrong with benching your system, but to spend $500+ on things that have no real world use just to get a higher bench score is not gonna grab anybody's attention or respect. I guess what my long rant up there is trying to say is this: If its about benchmarks for somebody, then that is great and fine, but as long as that person understands that its about benchmarks for that person and a small group of people, not the rest of us. So to each his own. Edited by DST4ME - 08 Jul 2016 at 9:11am |
|
DS Veteran Joined: 28 Oct 2014 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1674 |
Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jul 2016 at 9:24am |
In order to be competitive in benchmarks, you need to be doing extreme cooling. Liquid nitrogen is the preferred method, and you need the appropriate boiling pots on an open rig to work it and continually add more N2, defrost, disassemble it, etc. You will also need to do some extreme power mods to the hardware to enable it to suck down a lot of power, when you have the voltage cranked really high with sub-zero temps keeping it in check. Insulating various components against frost and water damage is necessary as well.
Obviously this is most definitely not suitable for everyday use. I'm not sure I see the point to benchmarking a water cooled system for the sake of getting a high as it won't be competitive. Especially now that tri-SLI is niche to benchmarking, that will make the percentage of systems skewed significantly toward dedicated sub-zero benchmark set-ups. |
|
DS Veteran Joined: 28 Oct 2014 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1674 |
Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jul 2016 at 9:54am |
http://www.pcgamer.com/the-broadwell-e-review/
Jarred is a former Anandtech writer and one of the most knowledgeable with processors. He makes a lot of points and it his conclusion, it's the same as what we've been recommending on this forum: pure gaming you go with an i7-6700K or i5-6600K; pure video editing or other professional multi-threaded application you go with a Xeon workstation; and a mix of gaming and professional multi-threaded application you go with the HEDT processor. Gaming performance is pretty much a wash, as far as Intel processors are concerned, and multi-threaded applications get cleaned up by the processors with more cores. Edited by - 08 Jul 2016 at 9:54am |
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jul 2016 at 9:58am |
Why are we still talking about brodwell? lol it the old architecture.
right now its all about the 6700/6600 k amd slylake x 10, the rest is old news. |
|
Xenecus
Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2016 Online Status: Offline Posts: 97 |
Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jul 2016 at 2:25pm |
The CPU RND has slowed down a ton in the past 3-4 years compared to GPU.... There used to be a staggering delta in a 3 year timeframe just a few years back, seems we have hit a wall in speed/cores, I'm guessing that consumers mark the trend and four cores seems to be where software companies seem to focus on.
I agree having 3-4 way SLI is a complete waste however there are a ton of folks out there that have these expensive hobbies of ranking their benchmarks... who am I to judge? :) Just as there are people that would buy a 6950X (hell I almost did, they I realized that for what I use a 6850 or even a 6800 would be just as good if not better due to the higher base clock. i agree, to each its own, its a free world :) |
|
Velox | i7 6850x @ 4.5Ghz | Asus Rampage V E.10 | Titan X (Pascal) SLI | 32GB DDR4 | Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB | 2x Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Raid 0 | 1200W AX1200i| H20: HydroLux PRO | Win 10 |
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jul 2016 at 2:43pm |
I would be a buyer and user of 6950x if this was last year but with the skylake x 10 coming out next year and it being the new architecture and brodwell being the old one, right now if you asked me what I would do, I would tell I'm waiting till Q2 of 2017 for the x 10.
People can put 4 x 1080 in their system, but I think you would have a hard time finding somebody here that would think that was a smart idea. To me that is equivalent to me trying to brag to a 4k gamer about my skylake x 10. I would look like a fool. Edited by DST4ME - 08 Jul 2016 at 2:45pm |
|
Xenecus
Newbie Joined: 22 Jun 2016 Online Status: Offline Posts: 97 |
Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jul 2016 at 3:20pm |
It's not about bragging.... i don't think any of those guys care about gaming they do it because they can for one and they like benchmarking... I mean you would buy a 1700 dollar processor which makes very little sense to almost anyone, but you are entitled to do so if you can.... having a 3 way SLI is just as unnecessary as having a 6950x... that's all am saying.... That's just what I think, not saying it's what you should think.
Some people buy a Ferrari to go from point A to point B, some are happy with a Civic ;) At the end of the day you and I both bought a DS system, I have a long list of people that tell me again and again how they can do it for $$$ less... Hell I can build the system I bought for a lot less, but to me it's worth it for my reasons... Edited by Xenecus - 08 Jul 2016 at 3:22pm |
|
Velox | i7 6850x @ 4.5Ghz | Asus Rampage V E.10 | Titan X (Pascal) SLI | 32GB DDR4 | Samsung 950 Pro 512 GB | 2x Samsung 850 EVO 1 TB Raid 0 | 1200W AX1200i| H20: HydroLux PRO | Win 10 |
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jul 2016 at 3:37pm |
CPU benchmark is a bit difference as it has to do with ocing the cpu, the cooler used on cpu and etc.
To be clear, its not about a Ferrari vs a keya, its a Ferrari vs a Ferrari, but how much did you pay for yours or who got a better deal for the same performance? remember if my cpu scores higher for a temporary bench, it does not mean I can beat you in gaming. if we both do the same in gaming and etc, but I can oc higher then you for a short time for benching, then we are both Ferrari. I just spend a little more on mine to gain a little temporary performance, and not real world use perfomrance. Edited by DST4ME - 08 Jul 2016 at 3:42pm |
|
Post Reply |
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 can vote in polls in this forum |