TerraRaptor says:

1 year and 1 months ago – What a strong clocks! Great one.

Seby says:

1 year and 1 months ago –

I got a run in with "7.3 GHz" actually and really strong mem settings, but the effective turned out being a bit lower, seems like a big issue with these chips when really pushing them, similar to the 8GHz "trick", but it seems like Intel didn't fix it properly on the locked chips.

Massman says:

1 year and 1 months ago –

6 hours ago, Seby9123 said:

I got a run in with "7.3 GHz" actually and really strong mem settings, but the effective turned out being a bit lower, seems like a big issue with these chips when really pushing them, similar to the 8GHz "trick", but it seems like Intel didn't fix it properly on the locked chips.

Did you set FLL OC mode manually?

Seby says:

1 year and 1 months ago –

Yep, I tried Normal (now called Ratio OC) and Extreme Elevated (now called BCLK OC), didn't make a difference at all. 

Also just noticed that my valid at the time, which was just the usual unchecked, now shows as rejected. https://valid.x86.fr/emdu4z and https://valid.x86.fr/xcvpfu

Idk if this is cuz leeghoofd told cpu-z about these subs or if over time it was eventually "checked"

Massman says:

1 year and 1 months ago –

Ah.

Yea, FLL OC Mode to enable high OC frequency is only supported from ucode 0x12. So not supported in the 0x9 ucode you're using for non-K OC. That's probably why setting it in BIOS doesn't do anything.

As far as I know, CPU-Z has server-side checks for FLL and microcode to ensure the proper configuration is used for validations (to weed out any of those false high frequencies). My guess is that your validation got blocked because it lacks the proper ucode/FLL OC configuration (not because someone manually intervened).