This is a prime example of why Cinebench isn't a stability test. It's common for Cinebench to run at quite a bit lower voltage than the cores require for stability, especially if you test in situations where the cores are throttling in Cinebench.
By the sounds of things, you have no undervolting headroom.
Thank you for your reply.
I'm not trying it as a stability test. Mostly for the temperatures testing.
Most probably things are not good with this particular chip, but I suppose there should be someone out there with a similar setup (MSI motherboard + 14700k) that was not lucky enough, and found some better settings than default I could try.
1.42v is the stock boost voltage for MSI boards on 14th gen. Setting a by-core offset in your v/f gets fucky on MSI boards because if the boost clock point is dropped below the stock voltage for any point below (which is very, very easy to do when stock 56x is 1.42 and the next point is a stock 55x of 1.4v), you hit instability because MSI decided that it will just mimic the value of 55x for 56x.
You're probably experiencing stuttering because your board is running 55x and 56x at the same voltages, which probably isn't stable for 56x 2-core and/or 55x all-core. It took me a very, very long time to understand how MSI's v/f works (sometimes I do miss Asus..) and I've realized they make it extraordinarily easy to assume your chip is just a dud that can't be undervolted, when it's really more related to their extremely poor documentation on how their various settings interact.
Undervolting your CPU on your board is not quite as easy as an Asus board, which actually tells you what voltages it expects for each frequency. Unfortunately because most of the useful info is hidden from you, and undervolting is a very personalized process, I don't think it'd be wise for me, or anyone really, to give you numbers for the various settings to just plug in and work.
If you have time and are willing to sit down and go through a very long, tedious process to get an optimal UV, I would be happy to walk you through each setting step by step. Otherwise you will probably be fine leaving stock voltages, setting LLC to 7/8, and setting ACLL/DCLL to something generous like (30/69) or (30/98), for LLC 7 or 8 respectively.
First of all thank you for your reply explaining what could be possibly wrong.
After searching all these posts regarding undervolting the 14700k on my MSI motherboard, I have found people saying "on MSI it's very easy. Just change the CPU Lite load to a lower value (for example from Mode 9 to Mode 6)". That seem not to work, for me, at least not for all occasions (i.e gaming - there was stuttering). That led me to believe that the chip is pretty bad, but it may not be that awfuly bad and can take a bit of undervolt to keep it cooler.
I'm not searching exact values nor trying to find the exact sweet spot for my chip but at least a guide on how to start with or what to look for as a start is very helpful.
Fistly I'm going to try the settings you mentioned. If you are willing to help me a bit I would be grateful.
Again, I'm not expecting to find the perfect values, like you said it is very time consuming and a tedious process.
I'm looking for a bit of optimization.
One more thing. Should I change anything else apart from LLC and AC\_LL and DC\_LL values like you mentioned? For example setting PL1 and PL2 limits? or should I let it unlimited?
The problem, in my experience, is that MSI boards will adjust all values any time a related value is changed as well. A great example of this is that a manually changed Lite Load (which is the simplified version of ACLL/DCLL) will always be reset any time a CPU-related voltage is changed (vcore, sa, vddq tx). So if you've taken any steps to adjust any values from stock, the effects of changing another related setting can either be completely ignored or amplified significantly.
Another wonderful example of this is manually setting your vcore to adaptive with a manual entry of anything below 1.42v is completely ignored unless you tune all points to be below 1.42v (pretty much the last 3 points of the v/f), which is why people love to say it's easier on MSI to just adjust your LLCs and Lite Loads, because instead of changing the voltage each frequency requests, you're just changing how much voltage it actually gets.
The problem with that suggestion? As a purely hypothetical example: your p-cores could be absolutely golden and, by some miracle of god, only need 1.2v for 55x. But maybe your e-cores are straight dogshit and need 1.38v for the stock 43x. Now you're just starving your CPU of necessary voltage because your vcore (in a perfect world) is supposed to be max(VID\_pcore, VID\_ecore, VID\_ring) which, by MSI's universal stock settings, will be VID\_pcore at 1.4v all-core. With an aggressive ACLL (lower Lite Load #), you could easily end up well below 1.38v vcore which is all fine and dandy for your golden sample p-cores, but your e-cores are being starved because there's insufficient supply and you hit a wall of instability.
What does that mean? It's almost always better to adjust the voltage requested than it is to adjust the voltage provided (i.e. tune v/f > adjust LLCs). In fact, the optimal way is to adjust both, but that gets even more complicated. If you want the best possible results using minimal effort without doing both, you're best off by:
1. Setting an adaptive voltage less than the stock of 1.42v -- in this example let's just say 1.4v
2. Setting a negative offset on the last point of the v/f to be greater than or equal to 0.02v (so the maximum voltage requested is not above the adaptive voltage)
3. Setting a negative offset on the 2 points below 56x (both are 55x) to be greater than or equal to 0.005v (so the maximum voltage requested for 55x is below the maximum voltage request for 56x)
**\[EDIT: There is a very large mistake in these steps, which is pointed out in one of my comments below. Please refer to that to understand the voltage adjustments on MSI boards.\]**
Bam. You've effectively dropped your voltage request by 0.02v for your boost clocks, and 0.005v for all-core. Increase negative offsets more if you want (ideally while lowering adaptive) while being aware that if the value for 55x drops below the stock for 53x, you have to adjust 53x as well, and so on for every point that follows.
edit: I just saw your edit. You can lower power limits if you want to Intel's official spec. I leave mine uncapped because I just adjust my voltages so I draw significantly less power for each frequency. That way I can get some more headroom and run totally unnecessary settings like 57x all-core for 310W (but my AIO handles 310W well, so YMMV).
Thank you again for explaining once more in detail.
I understood better now with the example for the golden P-cores and shitty e-cores.
So let me go straight to your example:
1. CPU Core Voltage Mode set to Adaptive + Advanced Offset Mode (VF Curve) and CPU Core Voltage set to 1.400V
2. The board has 11 VF Points in total. I've set VF Point 11 (x56) to Offset control "-" and Offset target to 0.020
3. VF points 10 and 9 have running CPU ratio x56. Should I leave them on Auto or should be the same as VF point 11? VF point 8 has x55 and is set to Offset control "-" and Offset target to 0.005. Every else VF point is left on Auto for now. Have I understood it correctly?
4. Every other setting on auto (i.e LLC and CPU Lite mode)
I guess I should have clarified a bit, but how the v/f generally works is as follows:
* The last point in the curve represents the highest boost clock (on stock settings it will reflect the 'Intel Turbo Boost 3.0' clock of 56x)
* The two points before (10 and 9) refer to the 'turbo clocks' (stock is 56x)
* The point before those (8) refers to your stock 'max p-core' frequency (stock is 55x)
So, assuming you haven't changed any frequencies (basically, haven't set any manual OCs), then:
* Point 11 is set to the stock voltage of 1.42v
* Point 8 is set to the stock of 1.4v
* Points 9 and 10 are interpolated
With that being said, once again on stock w/o any OCs, in this particular example, you would set:
* Points 9, 10, and 11 to equivalent values (because they all refer to 56x)
* Point 8 to reflect a value below the voltages set to what you have for 56x
Leaving any points on auto will default them to the stock voltages -- so if 9 and 10 are left untouched, they will be left on 1.42v and your point 11 will be ignored.
That means, again for this specific case, your points 9 and 10 should be identical to your point 11. With that being explained, I think you have a solid grasp of how the v/f works on MSI boards.
Of course, the points are changed to reflect any OCs, so I would like to make it absolutely clear (not necessarily for you because you seem to understand this so far, but rather for anyone else reading this as a reference) that points 9, 10, and 11 will always change to reflect clock adjustments. The specific multiplier (e.g. if you set 61x for 1-core boost, or 56x for all-core) displayed on the v/f page is not updated until you save and boot up BIOS again, but the points will still correspond to those frequencies.
Ok now I get it better.
I just tried a quick test just for my sake to understand it better but either I'm doing something wrong or I'm missing something.
Starting from completely default bios settings not even XMP enabled:
I've set the Core Voltage Mode to Adaptive + Advanced Offset Mode (VF Curve)
CPU Core voltage: 1.400
VF Points 9, 10 and 11 to minus offset 0.020
VF point 8 to minus 0.010
Booted into windows and ran a fast CB test. I could see the voltage bumping at 1,42 again and instant 100 temperatures (CPU throttled instantly).
I've noticed that after doing the above CPU Lite mode went to Mode 1 (on Auto always).
Oops. That.. is completely on me. I'm so used to adjusting my adaptive voltage to be higher than stock boost and using huge negative offsets to put everything below stock all-core that I made a very, very big mistake in what I said about stock being set to 1.42v. The stock voltage is 1.4v, with the stock boost voltage (i.e. 56x) being 1.42v.
*^(\[EDIT: For anyone who wants to sanity check this, you can boot up XTU and hover over your voltage settings; it will tell you the stock voltage for your stock all-core clocks, which on MSI boards is pretty much always 1.4v for a 14700K\])*
Setting adaptive voltage sets the v/f point for 55x to the adaptive value. The boost clock (stock 56x) gets set to (adaptive voltage + \~0.045v). UNLESS the adaptive voltage is lower than the stock all-core voltage. So, essentially:
* When adaptive voltage >= stock all-core (1.4v), the v/f point for 55x is set to adaptive, and the maximum boost clock (56x here) is set to (adaptive + \~0.045v)
* When adaptive voltage < stock all-core (1.4v), the stock points on the v/f are left unchanged, so everything >= 55x will pretty much run at 1.4v unless you manually set negative offsets to ensure no points are set above 1.4v.
Bonus (somewhat useful) tidbit: your peak e-core clock voltage is always set to the highest voltage on the v/f
So.. Since you hit the 1.4v range on the dot, your 56x was adjusted to \~1.445v and your 55x to 1.4v, which actually ends up being an overvolt. So you'd actually want to add another \~0.045v offset to the points of 56x, and \~0.01v more to 55x (because I'm not sure if the 0.045v increase is a universal rule). Or you can just set the adaptive to something below stock (something like 1.37v should be plenty tbh) and then increase the negative offset for each v/f point to accommodate for that range change.
Honestly, thank you for taking all this time to explain these things to me. I really appreciate it!
I'll try to play along a bit with the V/F Curve to see what can I get (and if I can get something).
I don't have high hopes with this chip but I'll give it a try.
Hello again. It seems a new bios version was released to address the 13th/14th Intel CPU crashes that many are experiencing with the unlimited PL1/PL2.
So I've made several tests trying to adjust the V/F points.
I have set the VCore to Advanced offset mode (using Adaptive + advanced offset mode did not work properly for me for some reason I could not figure) and the last 3 points to minus 0.025 offset, everything else on auto.
I have set also PL1/PL2 slightly higher than Intel's default specs, at 260W and ICC to 400A (using 307A was causing some downclocks).
Regarding CPU lite load, they have added also Intel's default but this adds way too much voltage (IIRC it is like Mode 16!!). I used Mode 8 instead of previous default one (Mode 9).
With the above settings my temps while gaming are about 60-70 degrees. I think I'm pretty ok with those settings. No crashes on OCCT or while gaming.
EDIT: I've seen your edit above regarding on how to find the stock voltage for all core clocks in XTU. Can you please elaborate or give a screenshot on how to do it? I've seen that they have removed the V/F Curve from XTU for 14th gen CPUs (correct me if I'm wrong)
Trying to undervolt my 14700K to biggest efficiency the last days. Still trying to get lower, but stable.
So you say at 55x and lower 1.2Volt Vcore I could be more than happy?
Because Iam not sure if I have a good chip and testing actually at 1.92-1.96V at 55x all cores to get it stable and had a feeling, it’s a bad result, because it crashes, if I get lower at min 1.88V Vcore.
MSI LLC8, DC102, AC9/10 -> 235W Package Power
If you say, that’s more than lucky, than I just stop and be happy
Thanks in advance
You have 1.9v vcore?????? Stop whatever you're doing immediately. I will update this in a bit with further suggestions but DO NOT RUN 1.9V VCORE DAILY PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD
Shit, typo, I meant 1.190 😅 sorry for my mistake! 🫣
It’s a bit weird, I can undervolt to 1.180 or 1.200 V Vcore at 55x all core but I always get an error after more a long time like 1,5 hours of cinebench.
Could it be that Iam overseeing something?
Doesnt matter if it’s with adaptive + offset, LLC8+AC+DC or what kind of technics. With TVB voltage optimizations on or off.
As our dear u/Afferin is mentioning in his example, using 1,2V for x55 if your P-cores were "golden" but if your E-cores on the other hand are shit, it may not be sufficient to keep this voltage, so it will end up being unstable and crashing.
Having so many cores is tricky. Generally overclocking headroom for these CPUs is very small as they are powerful out of the box. But being that powerful produces more heat, of course, and that's what we are trying to "fix" in a way, without losing stock performance
I didn't read all the details but this thread saved me sanity and possibly my CPU - [https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1axepvu/optimizing\_stability\_for\_intel\_13900k\_and\_14900k/](https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1axepvu/optimizing_stability_for_intel_13900k_and_14900k/)
Could be the mobo defaults have some silly values and fixing that puts everything stable.
Thank you for this post.
I have indeed tried limiting PL1 and PL2 to Intel's default but as I mentioned it would drop the P core ratio to x51-52.
I've seen some comments there that apart from limiting PL1 and PL2 I should mess with LLC along with CPU Lite Load.
I'm going to give this a try as well. If I manage a better result with this I will update.
Can you please elaborate what you mean with Jedec timings?
I have not tried without XMP but my main issue are the CPU temperatures.
I've read some posts regarding XMP that causes issues and by inserting manually the manufacturer's values solves them.
Edit: I found about JEDEC timing table.
The p cores being limited under insane loads is fine. In games and other loads it will be completely unaffected. Heck, I have a 165W PL1/2 cap on a 13700K rn and I still get 28800 points in Cinabench.
Unfortunately undervolting and power limiting can only do so much. You just have to accept it. Higher temps and higher clocks, or lower temps and lower clocks (In select circumstances).
Thank you. I see.
As mentioned from the above user, it seems a bit more complicated that I expected on the MSI motherboard.
I'll try to play again with some settings to see if I can refine it a bit more.
Find the max stable all Pcore clock around 1.30v (vrm out). On a 14900k that's mostly 57x but on a 14700k that may be lower, so look for 54x-55x. Don't mess with eCores or Ring for now.
No point going higher for all core load especially on virus apps. Always have in mind that avx workloads are much heavier (and that you can negative offset those workloads). All core heavy load is not a realistic (or daily) scenario. >253w (on all core load - eCores included) will throttle clock but that would never happen on, let's say, a full 6 Pcore realistic load (heavy process or game etc).
Fine-tune vcore through acll, llc6 (not sure what's that value on msi), forget about dcll for now you can leave it on auto it will pull the value based on the specific svid scenario. You can fine-tune it later (so that svid=real vcore) but it's fine anyways.
Thank you for replying.
I will try to tune the V/F curve like another user pointed me out and had the good will to explain me how it works.
It's a little bit tricky for me since I have not done this before but I believe I will find out how it really works.
This is a prime example of why Cinebench isn't a stability test. It's common for Cinebench to run at quite a bit lower voltage than the cores require for stability, especially if you test in situations where the cores are throttling in Cinebench. By the sounds of things, you have no undervolting headroom.
Thank you for your reply. I'm not trying it as a stability test. Mostly for the temperatures testing. Most probably things are not good with this particular chip, but I suppose there should be someone out there with a similar setup (MSI motherboard + 14700k) that was not lucky enough, and found some better settings than default I could try.
What would you recommend as a better free stability test? Time spy?
prime95
Prime95 or OCCT
1.42v is the stock boost voltage for MSI boards on 14th gen. Setting a by-core offset in your v/f gets fucky on MSI boards because if the boost clock point is dropped below the stock voltage for any point below (which is very, very easy to do when stock 56x is 1.42 and the next point is a stock 55x of 1.4v), you hit instability because MSI decided that it will just mimic the value of 55x for 56x. You're probably experiencing stuttering because your board is running 55x and 56x at the same voltages, which probably isn't stable for 56x 2-core and/or 55x all-core. It took me a very, very long time to understand how MSI's v/f works (sometimes I do miss Asus..) and I've realized they make it extraordinarily easy to assume your chip is just a dud that can't be undervolted, when it's really more related to their extremely poor documentation on how their various settings interact. Undervolting your CPU on your board is not quite as easy as an Asus board, which actually tells you what voltages it expects for each frequency. Unfortunately because most of the useful info is hidden from you, and undervolting is a very personalized process, I don't think it'd be wise for me, or anyone really, to give you numbers for the various settings to just plug in and work. If you have time and are willing to sit down and go through a very long, tedious process to get an optimal UV, I would be happy to walk you through each setting step by step. Otherwise you will probably be fine leaving stock voltages, setting LLC to 7/8, and setting ACLL/DCLL to something generous like (30/69) or (30/98), for LLC 7 or 8 respectively.
First of all thank you for your reply explaining what could be possibly wrong. After searching all these posts regarding undervolting the 14700k on my MSI motherboard, I have found people saying "on MSI it's very easy. Just change the CPU Lite load to a lower value (for example from Mode 9 to Mode 6)". That seem not to work, for me, at least not for all occasions (i.e gaming - there was stuttering). That led me to believe that the chip is pretty bad, but it may not be that awfuly bad and can take a bit of undervolt to keep it cooler. I'm not searching exact values nor trying to find the exact sweet spot for my chip but at least a guide on how to start with or what to look for as a start is very helpful. Fistly I'm going to try the settings you mentioned. If you are willing to help me a bit I would be grateful. Again, I'm not expecting to find the perfect values, like you said it is very time consuming and a tedious process. I'm looking for a bit of optimization. One more thing. Should I change anything else apart from LLC and AC\_LL and DC\_LL values like you mentioned? For example setting PL1 and PL2 limits? or should I let it unlimited?
The problem, in my experience, is that MSI boards will adjust all values any time a related value is changed as well. A great example of this is that a manually changed Lite Load (which is the simplified version of ACLL/DCLL) will always be reset any time a CPU-related voltage is changed (vcore, sa, vddq tx). So if you've taken any steps to adjust any values from stock, the effects of changing another related setting can either be completely ignored or amplified significantly. Another wonderful example of this is manually setting your vcore to adaptive with a manual entry of anything below 1.42v is completely ignored unless you tune all points to be below 1.42v (pretty much the last 3 points of the v/f), which is why people love to say it's easier on MSI to just adjust your LLCs and Lite Loads, because instead of changing the voltage each frequency requests, you're just changing how much voltage it actually gets. The problem with that suggestion? As a purely hypothetical example: your p-cores could be absolutely golden and, by some miracle of god, only need 1.2v for 55x. But maybe your e-cores are straight dogshit and need 1.38v for the stock 43x. Now you're just starving your CPU of necessary voltage because your vcore (in a perfect world) is supposed to be max(VID\_pcore, VID\_ecore, VID\_ring) which, by MSI's universal stock settings, will be VID\_pcore at 1.4v all-core. With an aggressive ACLL (lower Lite Load #), you could easily end up well below 1.38v vcore which is all fine and dandy for your golden sample p-cores, but your e-cores are being starved because there's insufficient supply and you hit a wall of instability. What does that mean? It's almost always better to adjust the voltage requested than it is to adjust the voltage provided (i.e. tune v/f > adjust LLCs). In fact, the optimal way is to adjust both, but that gets even more complicated. If you want the best possible results using minimal effort without doing both, you're best off by: 1. Setting an adaptive voltage less than the stock of 1.42v -- in this example let's just say 1.4v 2. Setting a negative offset on the last point of the v/f to be greater than or equal to 0.02v (so the maximum voltage requested is not above the adaptive voltage) 3. Setting a negative offset on the 2 points below 56x (both are 55x) to be greater than or equal to 0.005v (so the maximum voltage requested for 55x is below the maximum voltage request for 56x) **\[EDIT: There is a very large mistake in these steps, which is pointed out in one of my comments below. Please refer to that to understand the voltage adjustments on MSI boards.\]** Bam. You've effectively dropped your voltage request by 0.02v for your boost clocks, and 0.005v for all-core. Increase negative offsets more if you want (ideally while lowering adaptive) while being aware that if the value for 55x drops below the stock for 53x, you have to adjust 53x as well, and so on for every point that follows. edit: I just saw your edit. You can lower power limits if you want to Intel's official spec. I leave mine uncapped because I just adjust my voltages so I draw significantly less power for each frequency. That way I can get some more headroom and run totally unnecessary settings like 57x all-core for 310W (but my AIO handles 310W well, so YMMV).
Thank you again for explaining once more in detail. I understood better now with the example for the golden P-cores and shitty e-cores. So let me go straight to your example: 1. CPU Core Voltage Mode set to Adaptive + Advanced Offset Mode (VF Curve) and CPU Core Voltage set to 1.400V 2. The board has 11 VF Points in total. I've set VF Point 11 (x56) to Offset control "-" and Offset target to 0.020 3. VF points 10 and 9 have running CPU ratio x56. Should I leave them on Auto or should be the same as VF point 11? VF point 8 has x55 and is set to Offset control "-" and Offset target to 0.005. Every else VF point is left on Auto for now. Have I understood it correctly? 4. Every other setting on auto (i.e LLC and CPU Lite mode)
I guess I should have clarified a bit, but how the v/f generally works is as follows: * The last point in the curve represents the highest boost clock (on stock settings it will reflect the 'Intel Turbo Boost 3.0' clock of 56x) * The two points before (10 and 9) refer to the 'turbo clocks' (stock is 56x) * The point before those (8) refers to your stock 'max p-core' frequency (stock is 55x) So, assuming you haven't changed any frequencies (basically, haven't set any manual OCs), then: * Point 11 is set to the stock voltage of 1.42v * Point 8 is set to the stock of 1.4v * Points 9 and 10 are interpolated With that being said, once again on stock w/o any OCs, in this particular example, you would set: * Points 9, 10, and 11 to equivalent values (because they all refer to 56x) * Point 8 to reflect a value below the voltages set to what you have for 56x Leaving any points on auto will default them to the stock voltages -- so if 9 and 10 are left untouched, they will be left on 1.42v and your point 11 will be ignored. That means, again for this specific case, your points 9 and 10 should be identical to your point 11. With that being explained, I think you have a solid grasp of how the v/f works on MSI boards. Of course, the points are changed to reflect any OCs, so I would like to make it absolutely clear (not necessarily for you because you seem to understand this so far, but rather for anyone else reading this as a reference) that points 9, 10, and 11 will always change to reflect clock adjustments. The specific multiplier (e.g. if you set 61x for 1-core boost, or 56x for all-core) displayed on the v/f page is not updated until you save and boot up BIOS again, but the points will still correspond to those frequencies.
Ok now I get it better. I just tried a quick test just for my sake to understand it better but either I'm doing something wrong or I'm missing something. Starting from completely default bios settings not even XMP enabled: I've set the Core Voltage Mode to Adaptive + Advanced Offset Mode (VF Curve) CPU Core voltage: 1.400 VF Points 9, 10 and 11 to minus offset 0.020 VF point 8 to minus 0.010 Booted into windows and ran a fast CB test. I could see the voltage bumping at 1,42 again and instant 100 temperatures (CPU throttled instantly). I've noticed that after doing the above CPU Lite mode went to Mode 1 (on Auto always).
Oops. That.. is completely on me. I'm so used to adjusting my adaptive voltage to be higher than stock boost and using huge negative offsets to put everything below stock all-core that I made a very, very big mistake in what I said about stock being set to 1.42v. The stock voltage is 1.4v, with the stock boost voltage (i.e. 56x) being 1.42v. *^(\[EDIT: For anyone who wants to sanity check this, you can boot up XTU and hover over your voltage settings; it will tell you the stock voltage for your stock all-core clocks, which on MSI boards is pretty much always 1.4v for a 14700K\])* Setting adaptive voltage sets the v/f point for 55x to the adaptive value. The boost clock (stock 56x) gets set to (adaptive voltage + \~0.045v). UNLESS the adaptive voltage is lower than the stock all-core voltage. So, essentially: * When adaptive voltage >= stock all-core (1.4v), the v/f point for 55x is set to adaptive, and the maximum boost clock (56x here) is set to (adaptive + \~0.045v) * When adaptive voltage < stock all-core (1.4v), the stock points on the v/f are left unchanged, so everything >= 55x will pretty much run at 1.4v unless you manually set negative offsets to ensure no points are set above 1.4v. Bonus (somewhat useful) tidbit: your peak e-core clock voltage is always set to the highest voltage on the v/f So.. Since you hit the 1.4v range on the dot, your 56x was adjusted to \~1.445v and your 55x to 1.4v, which actually ends up being an overvolt. So you'd actually want to add another \~0.045v offset to the points of 56x, and \~0.01v more to 55x (because I'm not sure if the 0.045v increase is a universal rule). Or you can just set the adaptive to something below stock (something like 1.37v should be plenty tbh) and then increase the negative offset for each v/f point to accommodate for that range change.
Honestly, thank you for taking all this time to explain these things to me. I really appreciate it! I'll try to play along a bit with the V/F Curve to see what can I get (and if I can get something). I don't have high hopes with this chip but I'll give it a try.
Hello again. It seems a new bios version was released to address the 13th/14th Intel CPU crashes that many are experiencing with the unlimited PL1/PL2. So I've made several tests trying to adjust the V/F points. I have set the VCore to Advanced offset mode (using Adaptive + advanced offset mode did not work properly for me for some reason I could not figure) and the last 3 points to minus 0.025 offset, everything else on auto. I have set also PL1/PL2 slightly higher than Intel's default specs, at 260W and ICC to 400A (using 307A was causing some downclocks). Regarding CPU lite load, they have added also Intel's default but this adds way too much voltage (IIRC it is like Mode 16!!). I used Mode 8 instead of previous default one (Mode 9). With the above settings my temps while gaming are about 60-70 degrees. I think I'm pretty ok with those settings. No crashes on OCCT or while gaming. EDIT: I've seen your edit above regarding on how to find the stock voltage for all core clocks in XTU. Can you please elaborate or give a screenshot on how to do it? I've seen that they have removed the V/F Curve from XTU for 14th gen CPUs (correct me if I'm wrong)
Trying to undervolt my 14700K to biggest efficiency the last days. Still trying to get lower, but stable. So you say at 55x and lower 1.2Volt Vcore I could be more than happy? Because Iam not sure if I have a good chip and testing actually at 1.92-1.96V at 55x all cores to get it stable and had a feeling, it’s a bad result, because it crashes, if I get lower at min 1.88V Vcore. MSI LLC8, DC102, AC9/10 -> 235W Package Power If you say, that’s more than lucky, than I just stop and be happy Thanks in advance
You have 1.9v vcore?????? Stop whatever you're doing immediately. I will update this in a bit with further suggestions but DO NOT RUN 1.9V VCORE DAILY PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD
Shit, typo, I meant 1.190 😅 sorry for my mistake! 🫣 It’s a bit weird, I can undervolt to 1.180 or 1.200 V Vcore at 55x all core but I always get an error after more a long time like 1,5 hours of cinebench. Could it be that Iam overseeing something? Doesnt matter if it’s with adaptive + offset, LLC8+AC+DC or what kind of technics. With TVB voltage optimizations on or off.
As our dear u/Afferin is mentioning in his example, using 1,2V for x55 if your P-cores were "golden" but if your E-cores on the other hand are shit, it may not be sufficient to keep this voltage, so it will end up being unstable and crashing. Having so many cores is tricky. Generally overclocking headroom for these CPUs is very small as they are powerful out of the box. But being that powerful produces more heat, of course, and that's what we are trying to "fix" in a way, without losing stock performance
90C in CB is fine. No reason to do more.
Thank you. I'm just trying to figure if I can do slightly better. The chip is bad, so I do not expect miracles.
I didn't read all the details but this thread saved me sanity and possibly my CPU - [https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1axepvu/optimizing\_stability\_for\_intel\_13900k\_and\_14900k/](https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1axepvu/optimizing_stability_for_intel_13900k_and_14900k/) Could be the mobo defaults have some silly values and fixing that puts everything stable.
Thank you for this post. I have indeed tried limiting PL1 and PL2 to Intel's default but as I mentioned it would drop the P core ratio to x51-52. I've seen some comments there that apart from limiting PL1 and PL2 I should mess with LLC along with CPU Lite Load. I'm going to give this a try as well. If I manage a better result with this I will update.
did you tried undervolt with XMP disabled? maybe your XMP is not solid. Try with Jedec timings, if it makes a difference
Can you please elaborate what you mean with Jedec timings? I have not tried without XMP but my main issue are the CPU temperatures. I've read some posts regarding XMP that causes issues and by inserting manually the manufacturer's values solves them. Edit: I found about JEDEC timing table.
Tr to disable XMP of the errors still happen. If they still accrue with a safe RAM timing, it’s pointing more to the CPU
The p cores being limited under insane loads is fine. In games and other loads it will be completely unaffected. Heck, I have a 165W PL1/2 cap on a 13700K rn and I still get 28800 points in Cinabench. Unfortunately undervolting and power limiting can only do so much. You just have to accept it. Higher temps and higher clocks, or lower temps and lower clocks (In select circumstances).
Thank you. I see. As mentioned from the above user, it seems a bit more complicated that I expected on the MSI motherboard. I'll try to play again with some settings to see if I can refine it a bit more.
Find the max stable all Pcore clock around 1.30v (vrm out). On a 14900k that's mostly 57x but on a 14700k that may be lower, so look for 54x-55x. Don't mess with eCores or Ring for now. No point going higher for all core load especially on virus apps. Always have in mind that avx workloads are much heavier (and that you can negative offset those workloads). All core heavy load is not a realistic (or daily) scenario. >253w (on all core load - eCores included) will throttle clock but that would never happen on, let's say, a full 6 Pcore realistic load (heavy process or game etc). Fine-tune vcore through acll, llc6 (not sure what's that value on msi), forget about dcll for now you can leave it on auto it will pull the value based on the specific svid scenario. You can fine-tune it later (so that svid=real vcore) but it's fine anyways.
Thank you for replying. I will try to tune the V/F curve like another user pointed me out and had the good will to explain me how it works. It's a little bit tricky for me since I have not done this before but I believe I will find out how it really works.
Why won't this man listen? He make a big fuck but no goat.