What do you have the host clock set to? Are you using turbo mode?

i have the same problem.when i set the clock 25 X 160 = 4000.reboot and the screen show this

 
when run in window the cpuz only show 22 x 160
 
 
 

 
pls help

dozer3000

Enable K-Boost, Speedstep, TurboMode.
Disable C-States, C1E.

That should work.. 

is ok now
thx your help

I enabled k-boost, Speedstep, Turbo Mode and Disabled c-state and c1e and I can only get the k boost multiplier to work? How would I go about getting like 3.3 4 core, 3.6 3 core 3.8 2 core and 4.0 1 core turbo I cannot figure out how to even get the turbo to kick on? What the heck does the turbo override (current power do) they have no units of measurement ffs 760??? 716??? I would love help to achieve my goals if anyone has suggestions?

will not work for me...

Think about this....
1-7 875 k is not overclockable enough for an unlocked multiplier  to be any use. 4.2Gh max
22x
base clock 191
v.vcore 1.35
qpi/vtt 1.2v
cpu pll of 191
 
Thanks,
Mack4033

875 k is not overclockable enough for an unlocked multiplier  to be any use. 4.2Gh max
 
That's not right.. 
http://hidestuff.de/OCS/IntelCorei7-875K/cpuz_valid.jpg
Working with Mulit 35 - stable - on a standard Intel board.
I don't wanna clock over the BLCK actually.. 
Normally with A70 160x28 works nice.. 
but at the moment I'm searching the highest clock..

More...
BX80616I5655K Conclusion The Core i5 655K performed decently against other CPUs. Thanks to features like Turbo Boost and Hyper-Threading, this sample was able to outperform the Athlon II X3 in nearly all the tests when they were targeted at multi-core solutions. Of course, if the benchmark measured pure raw Gigahertz, the Core i5 655K performed even better than 4-cores processors thanks to its higher frequency. The sample we received overclocked very well on air, but lacked of interest on subzero temperatures. Of course I know 99% of the time (if not more) the CPU will be working under air-coolers, but since it was targeted for overclockers, I would have loved to see some more MHz in our extreme tests. That said the Core i5 isn't as especial as you might think. Pair a good Core i5 660 CPU on a high-end motherboard and you could easily achieve 4GHz or similar on stock voltages, and somewhere near 4.5GHz adding some voltage, which means the only benefit of this CPU is that you don't need a high-complex BIOS & motherboard to achieve good frequencies. Again, if you're into overclocking, you probably have a decent setup, and you won't be limited by the motherboard. You'll also prefer to overclock by raising the BCLK to gain that small boost because of the higher QPI/Uncore/RAM frequency, so at some point, this CPU gets useless for "hardcore" overclockers.
There's not really a lot to talk about the construction of a CPU. Intel is going forward with 32nm manufacture and this chip has very low power consumption but very decent performance. It also included Intel GMA HD graphics running at 733MHz, and the graphics unit overclocks a lot too. Since I haven't seen a CPU die in my hands at the middle of the tests or while being delivered to our labs, I think CPUs construction is just as it should be, and the same applies for AMD in almost all areas.
Functionality can be a very questionable point for unlocked CPUs. If you see it from the buyers view, the extra money you end paying for this CPU may not worth it unless you're looking for an overclocked setup and you don't use heavily threaded (multi-core) applications. Intel is doing some damage themselves as the 4-cores/4-threads Core i5 760 CPU can be bought by the same price and AMD is fighting with their Phenom II X6 CPU at the same price level. So, at the end, it all depends on what kind of applications you're daily using. In conclusion, if you need more GHz, go for the Core i5 655K, if you need something between GHz and multi-cores go for the Core i5 760. Finally, if you need more cores go for the AMD Phenom II X6. That, or take the Core i5 655K just because you find very fun to overclock your CPU to the max.
The Core i5 655K easily overclocks to 4GHz with the right components. It's a lot easier since you don't need a high-end motherboard and memory to reach those numbers. If you start adding voltage, you will find yourself with a stable CPU running somewhere between 4.4GHz or maybe up to 4.7GHz. Our sample did 4.55GHz and it could have been improved to 4.6GHz with the right parameters, but don't expect every CPU to perform the same way since each one is made different. Anyway, Intel's K processors are the response to AMD Black Edition CPUs which were taking the crown even at low-price levels. It's good to see some competition in the area because that helps the market to improve from both sides, and the users get the benefit of a wider range of products to choose from. Let's keep our fingers crossed to see something similar with the new Sandybridge architecture instead of fighting against locked features and overclocking in the next generations.
Pros: Cons: Ratings:

• Performance: 9.00
• Construction: 9.50
• Functionality: 8.50
• Overclock: 9.50
• Value: 8.50

Final Score: 9.00 out of 10. Excellence Achievement: Benchmark Reviews Golden Tachometer Award.

I fail to see your point; though I understand, it is a great processor. Let me point out thge flaws in your comparison:
 
1. They make no reference to the i7 875K in those test results; or, to the i7 870, which it shares design specifications with.
 
2. The i5 655K is a Dual Core processor; where the 875K, is a Quad Core processor. The i5 655K does have the added benefit; of being a 32nm processor. It also has a 45nm Integrated Graphic's processor; paired with it, under that heatspreader. That, as you likely know; is only useful on an H55 or H57 motherboard.
 
3. The only thing the i5 655K, overclocked or not; really did better in, in those tests, was the music benchmark.
 
Here is a real comparison; of the processor's in question: http://www.guru3d.com/article/core-i5-655k-and-core-i7-875k-processor-review/8
 
 

Thx, but I know the history of 875K and the difference between it and 655k.
The 875k is just a 870 "unlocked" - of course.
But in several lists, you can see, that 4,5 GHz with a good cooling setup is not that problem..
So, the only thing I mentioned, was that 4,2 GHz is not the maximum for the 875k.
 

Ok 4.4 oc good but I need input on the less, -31 vs auto setting  I know about the 1189 KHZ and 634KHz settings
I have the A70 Bios and working good
 
CPU PWM Frequency: 1189KHz
VTT PWM Frequency: 634KHz
DDR PWM Frequency: 634KHz
CPU Signal 1: Less
CPU Signal 3: -31
CPU Signal 4: -31
CPU PCIE 1/2: Auto
DDR Signal 1/2/3: Auto
DMI Signal: -31
PCH Signal -31
Thanks,
Mack4033

Hi the EVGA community !
I already got an i7 875K on an evga P55 FTW. I was on an i5 760 on a Gigabyte GA-P55A-UD3. (4Ghz@1.28v stable aircooling, great mobo and cpu).

I'm running on the latest bios (A74).
First of all, i didn't understand why i couldn't increase multiplier. I could change it but it doesn't take any changes on Windows.
Never heard that we have to enable turboMode to make that change. It makes no sense. Not needed to enable it on the Gigabyte.
Secondly, i can't change the vcore. Of course i can choose it but doesn't take effect on Windows and on the health function in bios. It always stack on 1.22v.

Strange mobo.

Any help ? Thnx !