EVGA Z77 FTW Overclocking

Note: Ivy Bridge does not overclock like Sandy Bridge.  For a detailed report on the effect of voltage on Ivy Bridge (and thus temperatures and power draw), please read Undervolting and Overclocking on Ivy Bridge.

Experience with EVGA Z77 FTW

With no automatic overclock options, users are forced to use either the BIOS to adjust the CPU frequency, or an updated version of ELEET software from the EVGA website.  Typically as an overclocker I jumped straight in with the BIOS.

The EVGA overclocking methodology is a little strange, albeit a bit simpler than some other implementations.  All the important options such as the CPU multiplier and voltages are all contained within the main overclocking menu.  There is even an ‘OC Mode’ option which disables all non-essential onboard controllers and ports to promote stability for competitive overclocking.  Memory has its own menu, which allows for full adjustment of memory parameters, but for BCLK adjustment users have to navigate to a completely separate menu just for the single value.

With the pair of ClearCMOS buttons on board, recovering from a failed overclock that did not correct itself immediately was easy enough to do and implement again in the BIOS.  If the system is not happy with the memory settings at boot time, the motherboard would produce the error code ‘55’ and beep several times to indicate this.

However memory can be a bit of an issue – I found that my kit would not perform at XMP. EVGA have said to me that memory is a priority right now and their board will work with the majority of standard mainstream kits.

When the more severe overclocks were being performed (4.6 GHz and above), the system would sometimes reduce the CPU multiplier automatically.  I found that this is due to the power settings in the BIOS, which need to be raised.  I personally set these at 250W (a value of 2000 as it takes values in 1/8 of a watt) and never had an issue, though without direct instructions do this seems a little odd.

Methodology:

Our standard overclocking methodology is as follows.  We select the automatic overclock options and test for stability with PovRay and OCCT to simulate high-end workloads.  These stability tests aim to catch any immediate causes for memory or CPU errors.

For manual overclocks, based on the information gathered from previous testing, starts off at a nominal voltage and CPU multiplier, and the multiplier is increased until the stability tests are failed.  The CPU voltage is increased gradually until the stability tests are passed, and the process repeated until the motherboard reduces the multiplier automatically (due to safety protocol) or the CPU temperature reaches a stupidly high level (100ºC+).

Our test bed is not in a case, which should push overclocks higher with fresher (cooler) air.  We also are using Intel's All-in-one Liquid Cooler with its stock fan.  This is a 120mm radiator liquid cooler, designed to mimic a medium-to-high end air cooler.

Manual Overclock:

Our manual overclock testing was simple, starting at our standard 1.100 volts and 44x multiplier with Ivy Bridge.  For stability we adjusted the VDroop in the BIOS to Disabled fairly quickly, and at higher multipliers the power limits of the CPU were adjusted to stop the system reducing the CPU multiplier.  Here are our results:

At 44x, the BIOS was set to 1.100 volts on the CPU and VDroop left at Intel SPEC.  In the OS this produced a memory error during PovRay.  Thus VDroop was adjusted to ‘disabled’, which gave stability.  The system showed 1.138 volts at load, with peak temperatures of 71°C during PovRay and 74°C during OCCT.

At 45x, the system was stable at a minimum BIOS voltage setting of 1.100 volts, which showed 1.126 volts in the OS at load.  Peak temperatures observed were 72°C during PovRay and 73°C during OCCT.

At 46x, the system was stable at a minimum BIOS voltage setting of 1.125 volts, which showed 1.150 volts in the OS at load.  Peak temperatures observed were 77°C during PovRay and 80°C during OCCT.

At 47x, the TDP limits for the CPU were raised to 250W.  With this, the system was stable at a minimum BIOS voltage setting of 1.175 volts, which showed 1.197 volts in the OS at load.  Peak temperatures observed were 82°C during PovRay and 84° during OCCT.

When attempting to reach 48x, the system was still not stable at 1.275 volts set in the BIOS, causing PovRay to hang the system after a couple of minutes and temperatures to rise above 100°C.

EVGA Z77 FTW In The Box, Voltage Readings Test Setup, Power Consumption
Comments Locked

24 Comments

View All Comments

  • goinginstyle - Thursday, August 23, 2012 - link

    I tried the G1 Sniper 3 and returned it a few days later. The audio was a significant downgrade from the Assassin series, EFI is clunky at best and the board had serious problems with a GSKill 16GB 2666 kit, not to mention the lousy fan controls.

    Purchased a Maximus Formula V and never looked back as the EFI, Fan Controls, Clocking and Audio are much better in every way compared to the Sniper board. There is no way Gigabyte has brought better value than ASUS with the Z77 chipset. You get what you pay for and the GB is overpriced once you actually use the board and compare it to ASUS or even ASRock.
  • JohnBS - Thursday, November 1, 2012 - link

    I am looking for a rock solid MB, so of course I turned to ASUS. However, the reviews from verified buyers showed multiple issues with 3.0 USB ports losing power, system instability after months of use, and multiple instances of the board not working in one or more memory slots. Bent pins from the factory and complete DOA issues as well. A few reports of complete failure when the Wi-Fi card was inserted, yet gone with the card removed. This was mainly the Maximus IV series. Then I thought I'd look into the Maximus V series, because I really wanted ASUS, and was kinda sad to read reviews. Same issues from verified buyers of the Maximus V, more so with the USB 3.0 problems and the Wi-Fi/Bluetooth add-on card failures. In common were multiple complaints about customer service.

    So I emailed the ASUS rep who was replying to everyone's post, with specific attention on the recurring problems and how I was concerned about buying a MB. I got the email back, stating they were aware of the recurring problems listed on the user reviews, but that they are isolated occurrences.

    I really need a rock solid x16 x 2 pci-e mb right now, and that's why I'm still searching. I'm planning on overclocking an i7-2700k with an gtx 690 and a 120z monitor for high res gaming. The sniper 3 looks good, but the front audio plug reaching the board's bottom audio header might be something I can't work around.

    Just want something reliable. If there's a known issue, I'm always in that percentile that gets hit with the RMA process. I'm trying so hard to avoid that.

    (Went with 690 instead of dual 680 for heat, noise, power draw considerations).
  • jonjonjonj - Friday, October 26, 2012 - link

    you mean gigabyte in the evga conclusion?

    "the EVGA does not keep pace with ASUS and EVGA even at stock speeds."
  • couchassault9001 - Friday, November 2, 2012 - link

    So for gaming benchmarks is it correct that the cpu multipliers were at 40 on the g1.sniper and 36 on the evga? if so it seems to be a rather unfair comparison. Being that the sniper cpu is running 11% faster

    I'd be amazed if someone was looking at these boards with no intent to overclock like crazy, as i'm trying to decide between these 2 boards myself, and i'm sure i'll be pushing my 3770k as far as it will go.

    The evga consumed ~8% less power than the sniper under load.

    dirt 3 showed a 9% frame rate drop in the frame rate going from g1 to evga. metro 2033 showed a 3.6% drop in frame rate going from g1 to evga. Both of these are on the 4 7970 benchmarks. the 3 and below the gap is much tighter with it being under 1% with one card.

    I know this may be nit picking to some, but i plan on running 5760x1080 3d so 4 7970 performance on a i7-3770k is exactly what i'm looking at.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now