The truth about BCLK OCing

Noshuru

New member
I just wanted to let everyone know that BCLK OCing does not give you better performance than multiplier OCing. There was a problem with the AIDA64 benches and running a non-standard BCLK, and that's why you saw those insane numbers in TTL's review.
I helped the dev get his benches back on track, so they report correct numbers now:
http://forums.aida64.com/topic/2970-fixed-aida64-and-skylake-bclk-ocing/?p=13230

I'll repeat, BCLK OCing does not yield higher performance, it was down to faulty benchmarks in AIDA64.
Nevertheless, I'm running a 200MHz BCLK right now, just because I can't be bothered to change it back, lol.

Note: This is chiefly about Skylake.
 
Last edited:
I just wanted to let everyone know that BCLK OCing does not give you better performance. There was a problem with the AIDA64 benches and running a non-standard BCLK, and that's why you saw those insane numbers in TTL's review.
I helped the dev get his benches back on track, so they report correct numbers now:
http://forums.aida64.com/topic/2970-fixed-aida64-and-skylake-bclk-ocing/?p=13230

I'll repeat, BCLK OCing does not yield higher performance, it was down to faulty benchmarks in AIDA64.
Nevertheless, I'm running a 200MHz BCLK right now, just because I can't be bothered to change it back, lol.

Totally wrong

BCLK OCing will give performance gains in most CPU benchmarks.

A word of caution - not all CPU platforms are suitable for doing the above, perhaps this could be your problem.

Anyone remember getting the baseclock up to over 200mhz on X58.:D
 
So after looking over the thread that you linked to, what I am seeing and assuming is that the BLCK Overclocking actually caused a issue with Aida and the way it calculates the score.

Once the developers of Aida realised this, they fixed it so that it scores correctly and whilst you will not see a big a improvement in using just the BLCK, I reckon you will still see some improvement.

It's been a while since I touched the BLCK on a system, but I do remember that on X58 when using the BLCK there was a decent performance jump, in not only core performance on the cpu but also memory, PCI-E and Sata performance iirc.

It just wasn't as big a performance jump as software was reporting on initial release of new hardware. Most developers didn't get samples prior to launch to alter the benchmarks to take in to account the way the hardware works, be it cpu's, gpu's or motherboard chipsets.

Just blanketly saying it doesn't offer better performance because of one piece of software that needed to be fixed, is not only stupid but is also how wrong information starts being told to people just like the whole AMD Vs nVidia argument over power use, drivers and performance.
 
Totally wrong

BCLK OCing will give performance gains in most CPU benchmarks.

A word of caution - not all CPU platforms are suitable for doing the above, perhaps this could be your problem.

Anyone remember getting the baseclock up to over 200mhz on X58.:D

210 on my SR2.......

BCLK is win OC'ing.
 
Clearly, a lot of people who responded here didn't even bother clicking my link ...
People, please, I meant it doesn't offer any performance improvement over plain old multiplier OCing.
The reason you believe it does is because of TTL's Skylake review, is it not? If you've watched TTL's video review of Skylake, he specifically says that he believes programs will respond as well as AIDA64 did there to an OCed BCLK. Which is of course not the case, as the cause of those highly improbable results was an unoptimized benchmark.
Anyway, unless anyone here can prove they get better performance with BCLK OCing rather than multiplier OCing, I'm going to have to call confirmation bias.
 
Clearly, a lot of people who responded here didn't even bother clicking my link ...
People, please, I meant it doesn't offer any performance improvement over plain old multiplier OCing.
The reason you believe it does is because of TTL's Skylake review, is it not? If you've watched TTL's video review of Skylake, he specifically says that he believes programs will respond as well as AIDA64 did there to an OCed BCLK. Which is of course not the case, as the cause of those highly improbable results was an unoptimized benchmark.
Anyway, unless anyone here can prove they get better performance with BCLK OCing rather than multiplier OCing, I'm going to have to call confirmation bias.

Sign up to HWBot and every single person there will tell you all about the advantages of using BCLK and they will have plenty of proof.

Q.E.D.
 
Clearly, a lot of people who responded here didn't even bother clicking my link ...
People, please, I meant it doesn't offer any performance improvement over plain old multiplier OCing.
The reason you believe it does is because of TTL's Skylake review, is it not? If you've watched TTL's video review of Skylake, he specifically says that he believes programs will respond as well as AIDA64 did there to an OCed BCLK. Which is of course not the case, as the cause of those highly improbable results was an unoptimized benchmark.
Anyway, unless anyone here can prove they get better performance with BCLK OCing rather than multiplier OCing, I'm going to have to call confirmation bias.

I think the issue here is that your wording in your OP is wrong, not that no-ones reading it, or that there's confirmation bias.

Read your first post, it *EXPLICITLY* says:

I just wanted to let everyone know that BCLK OCing does not give you better performance.

Not "it does not give better performance over multi OC'ing"

I'll repeat, BCLK OCing does not yield higher performance, it was down to faulty benchmarks in AIDA64.

Again not, "higher performance than multi OC'ing "

Perhaps that is the better thing to clarify here
 
Sign up to HWBot and every single person there will tell you all about the advantages of using BCLK and they will have plenty of proof.

Q.E.D.

Indeed, also from my experience using my 6700K I get higher overclocks using BCLK overclocking that I do with traditional multiplier overclocking.

This was also the case with both of OC3D's Review samples for Intel's 6600K and 6700K.
 
Sign up to HWBot and every single person there will tell you all about the advantages of using BCLK and they will have plenty of proof.

Q.E.D.

Maybe you could link me to a thread where they talk about better performance due to BCLK OCing specifically?

Perhaps that is the better thing to clarify here
Revised.
Although, if people clicked my link they would notice that I'm comparing a multiplier of 46 and a BCLK of 100 with a multiplier of 23 and a BCLK of 200.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Also, if you'd like to add to a thread and you are the last poster, please use the Edit button at the bottom of your post instead of double posting.

Thanks (I merged your last couple for you)
 
Maybe you could link me to a thread where they talk about better performance due to BCLK OCing specifically?


Revised.
Although, if people clicked my link they would notice that I'm comparing a multiplier of 46 and a BCLK of 100 with a multiplier of 23 and a BCLK of 200.

I just gave you one lol

HWBot




Indeed, also from my experience using my 6700K I get higher overclocks using BCLK overclocking that I do with traditional multiplier overclocking.

This was also the case with both of OC3D's Review samples for Intel's 6600K and 6700K.

One of the advantages of raising the BCLK is it increases the speed the GPUs talk to the CPU through the PCI-E slots.:)
 
Last edited:
I just gave you one lol

HWBot
You just gave me a link? Is saying 'just google it' the same as giving someone a link?
I went and looked through their forums and no one was talking about Skylake and BCLK OCing.
Maybe I wasn't looking in the right parts, so, care to be a bit more specific?


One of the advantages of raising the BCLK is it increases the speed the GPUs talk to the CPU through the PCI-E slots.:)

Skylake's BCLK is supposed to be decoupled from PCIe. Anyway, if there was indeed an improvement you shouldn't have any trouble finding finding a plethora of benchmarks proving that--what are you waiting for?
 
Last edited:
You just gave me a link? Is saying 'just google it' the same as giving someone a link?
I went and looked through their forums and no one was talking about Skylake and BCLK OCing.
Maybe I wasn't looking in the right parts, so, care to be a bit more specific?

If you don't know anything about HWBot and what they do you should not be making statements about overclocking and bclk.


Skylake's BCLK is supposed to be decoupled from PCIe. Anyway, if there was indeed an improvement you shouldn't have any trouble finding finding a plethora of benchmarks proving that--what are you waiting for?

If you read my earlier posts I did say it was not suitable for all CPU platforms.

You should give it a break, you original statement in this thread was totally wrong and all you are doing now is showing your lack of knowledge and making yourself look silly.
 
I don't see how you can claim BCLK'ing doesn't give performance yields over Multi OC'ing. Instead of raising just the cores themselves, you also raise the PCI bus speed, the memory, cache, and basically everything related to the "south bridge". You increasing more than one frequency while maintaining the same core speed. Claiming it's slower is liked saying the faster everything communicates the slower it all gets. See your logic? It's basically what your saying, we are telling you you are wrong. It will give a small performance benefit. It won't be some amazing 5FPS but it'll be some.

Basically the software reported it wrong. They fixed it. It should still reflect a higher score but a more accurate one now. And like Kaap is saying, not all platforms, or even CPUs/boards for the matter, will respond well to BCLKing.
 
If you read my earlier posts I did say it was not suitable for all CPU platforms.

You should give it a break, you original statement in this thread was totally wrong and all you are doing now is showing your lack of knowledge and making yourself look silly.

You should provide some benchmarks.

@the above:
Yes, great, however there's multipliers for cache and memory, and you'll most likely have to adjust those as well, else your OC will become unstable.

Again, this is a Skylake thread. I made this thread because TTL took the AIDA64 benchmarks at face value, as you can tell by his video review.
 
Last edited:
You should provide some benchmarks.

@the above:
Yes, great, however there's multipliers for cache and memory, and you'll most likely have to adjust those as well, else your OC will become unstable.

Again, this is a Skylake thread. I made this thread because TTL took the AIDA64 benchmarks at face value, as you can tell by his video review.

No you added a note to your original OP afterwards lol.
 
Back
Top