Hi,
Most will do at least 5.2 with less vcore voltage than 1.35v.
VID is another thing though lol that can be over 1.4v

 

FYI

 

Hi, all! Since Kaby Lake, the good-average chip will do 5ghz at 1.35v benchmark stable. Does anyone here own a 10900k that requires more than that? Not necessarily for p95 avx stability or something excessive.

Please state whether this 1.35v is BIOS SET VOLTAGE or load measured voltage please. Because the voltages for 10th gen chips seem to be just better than previous. Even 10700k's are on average doing better than the average non KS 9900k's were.

Because for example a 9900k that requires 1.35v LOAD VR VOUT at 5 ghz is horribly completely awful. And 1.35v set in BIOS means nothing without knowing what loadline calibration level and motherboard was tested.

And I have yet to see a single 10900k that needs 1.35v load voltage for 5 ghz. Zero. Even the worst SP63 chips don't need that much when trying to run small FFT AVX prime95!
I think the worst 10900k I saw needed like 1.240v for 5 ghz and 1.29v for 5.1 ghz, full load (AVX disabled prime95).

I don't even think there are any 10700k's that need anything too close to 1.35v load for 5 ghz, but plenty that are struggling to reach 5.1.

 

I don't even think there are any 10700k's that need anything too close to 1.35v load for 5 ghz, but plenty that are struggling to reach 5.1.

My 10700k is stable at 5ghz at just shy of 1.3v under load, but produces temps that at times are over 90c. 5.1 is stupidly doable for me, but any serious load thermal throttles under my out-classed at this level NH-D15S.

 

NVM

 

^^^^^^ Legend

 

5.0 cache 4.7 AC/DC load line 1/1 iddle voltage 1.315
5.2 cache 4.7 iddle voltage 1.435

MSI Z490 Unify
CPU batch x015e217

Im Winner here I think
At last IMC isnt bad. 2x16 can do 4600MHz cl17 flat. Maybe higher but mainboard bios limitation.

 

Just booted my 10700k for the first time, set memory to 4266 XMP and CPU multiplier to 51. Voltage is 1.2v. Prime 95 small fft currently running for a 5 minutes and all cores still at 100%. I might have hit the mega millions. Let’s see how high I can push it!

Edit: Now 5.2 @ 1.3v, but one of the cores is getting to 93 C.

 

What's the load voltage?
Are those voltages you are given what you set in the BIOS or at full load? If they are what you set in the BIOS, we need your loadline calibration level, (motherboard will help) and voltage at full load. If the newest beta of HWinfo64 shows VR VOUT on your board, that is even better.

 

time to post some wall of shame..
10700k SP 51

so count your blessings.. these L4 1.45v will only do 4.8ghz.. both hero. both vietnam batches.

m12e asus pretty much spot on for 5.1ghz on my 10700k and 10900k

 

HA...I could make identical pics, that's the same SP rating as my 10700k, also from Vietnam. My take: getting an extra 100 or 200 hz of clock is more of a mind game than something I'll really notice when using my computer.

 

My 10700K was made in Vietnam and it clocks really well, so that can’t be it. All I did was set the multiplier to 52 and CPU voltage to 1.3 and it runs at 5.2 all core at 1.31 vcore. Temps are in the high 80s to low 90s in Prime95 small ffts.

 

Well, seems my invitation to the 10700k loser's club has finally arrived. All my recent attempts to lock down a fully stable all core, 16 thread 5.0Ghz OC have failed: my NH-D15S just can't handle the temps generated by the load voltage needed to pass muster on being rock solid stable, not to mention my discomfort with the voltage needed. I don't blame my cooler, though I could. I could "fake it", but why bother for my 4.9Ghz, cache at 4.6Ghz, OC passes muster with complete comfort, as has 5.0/4.7 with HT disabled. At least my g.skill 2x16 3600 15-15-15-32 2T sticks are helping things out here @1.37v (though this is far from something to brag about).

Update: More details. 5.0 stable (if you want to call it that) takes a 1.39v manual voltage setting, (impolite phrase with words F and S removed)! An OCCT load averages about 1.3v, AVX loads average about 1.27v. OCCT and things like Blender, Cinebench, AIDA stress (full and fpu) demonstrate stability with temps from mid 70c up to the occasional mid 90c for OCCT linpack @ 222w. Prime95 AVX anything overwhelms my cooler and thermal throttles within two minutes. All these temps are reduced 10c when running at my 4.9 OC.

 

10850k 5 ghz, 1.25V Avx2 300W underload , how bad this cpu is ?

 

@cou60 What app? You have a really good 10850K man.

 

My 10850K requires 1.47V VID which translates to LLCd 1.32V for 5Ghz all cores with HT.

 

My 10900k at 5Ghz on all cores vcore voltage at bios 1.25, LLC level 3, when stress testing vid voltage is 1.275. ran aida64, occt , for 1 hour max temp was 78c, cinebench r23 for 30 mins same temps no errors i think this is good on aircool

 

Thought I'd pick up a 10900KF. I got a stinker SP63 too. 1.3v load for 5.1 GHz About the same as my above average SP51 10700k it replaced. IMC is very slightly weaker too. I tried 5.2 GHz with hyper-threading disabled and it was just too much volts watts and temperature.

But I set my expectations correctly to just moar coars, still a disappointment.

Maybe delidding will help a tad

 

How can you tell how good a CPU is without ASUS board to tell you SP?
I looked at Silicon Lottery, but I don't know where I can check die sense voltage, 1.17V for 5 GHz, 68% CPUs:

Historical Binning Statistics

Historical binning statistics from Silicon Lottery

siliconlottery.com

And here I also don't know how to check if mine is 99%, 68% or 21%:

Intel Core i9 10900K @ 4.9GHz Boxed Processor

10900K In stock! Intel Core i9 10900K Overclocked and Binned CPU.

siliconlottery.com

Intel Core i9 10900K @ 5.0GHz Boxed Processor

10900K In stock! Intel Core i9 10900K Overclocked and Binned CPU.

siliconlottery.com

Intel Core i9 10900K @ 5.1GHz Boxed Processor

10900K In stock! Intel Core i9 10900K Overclocked and Binned CPU.

siliconlottery.com

Anyway, my 10900K needs for Prime95 Small, voltage set in BIOS and same in CPU-Z, LLC Auto:
non-AVX
4.8 GHz - 1.15V
4.9 GHz - 1.19V
5.0 GHz - 1.25V
5.1 GHz - 1.31V

AVX
4.7 GHz - 1.17V
4.8 GHz - 1.20V
4.9 GHz - 1.25V

IMC, dual rank:
4133 16-16-16 - 1.15/1.15V
4200 16-16-16 - 1.15/1.20V
4266 17-17-17 - 1.20/1.10V
4400 17-17-17 - 1.25/1.20V
4533 18-18-18 - 1.40/1.25V

IMC, single rank:
4000 15-15-15 - 1.10/1.00V
4266 16-16-16 - 1.20/1.10V
4400 16-16-16 - 1.25/1.20V
4600 17-17-17 - 1.35/1.30V

Everyone says Prime95 is too power hungry. How else can you test stability? It would be nice if I can get 5.2 GHz without AVX offset.

Everything is just so hard now, long gone are days of just setting FSB and voltage.
Athlon 64 days, only 2250 MHz on 3000+ and I knew right away I had the worst one when good ones could make 2400 MHz easily. My worst OC-ing CPU to this day, but later ones were all Intel anyway. Before 10th gen I didn't even know some can be considered very bad. I just hope I don't have the worst, it would break my heart.

 

Think I have a huge turd. Cooler is Corsair H100i V2 (240mm), Mobo ASUS Strix z490-G gaming (wi-fi). My Asus score is 63. Ambient temp today while I was testing was 21-22c

Auto everything no XMP.
Cinebench 15084 score, cpu hits 100c very fast and throttles. Stable on prime95(avx) and cinebench

Core All 4.7, cache ratio auto(4.3) bios set vcore 1.21V, bios CIO set 0.9V, bios VA 1.03V, ICO load 0.960V, VA load (??), core VID idle 1.14V, core VID load 1.179V
Cinebench stable for 10 mins score 15043, prime95 WHEA

to get prime95 stable @ 4.7 for over 10 mins I need
VCore set in bios to 1.275V, VCore under load 1.172V

I guess while gaming it might okay.

EDITED to add image.

 

Now running at 5.0 throttles heavily under load. Stable in Cinebench R23 for 8 mins and p95 NO AVX for over 10 mins. Crashes almost immediately with AVX active on p95.

Here are some pics of the HWinfo under load and idle. What do people think? This is with 1.39V VCore bios setting and LL4. Everything else auto and XMP off.

 

I would run this one at max 4.9 GHz. Average one like mine does 5.0 GHz 1.25V and 5.1 GHz 1.35V. But 1.35V is too much for air cooling or sub 360mm AIO.
I wouldn't really be happy even with the best 10900K, I'm waiting for less power hungry CPUs and with better IPC. 5600X is best this gen for just gaming, 10900K is not worth the trouble. I only bought it for playing with memory OC.

 

Thanks for the reply. I was checking where everything was before my delid and copper IHS came in today. Though I messed up I accidently ordered the 9th gen copper IHS.... i9 9th gen, easy to mistake but I'm the idiot who never confirmed on like ark or something. Not sure I'll order the 10th gen copper IHS now, maybe if I can sell the 9th gen one for profit.

So yeah I'll most likely run at 4.9, maybe I'll toy around with different OC for different cores, though my board doesn't seem to be able to set specific cores. I noticed core 01,8 and 9 never hit 100c.

 

my i9 10850k can do 4.9GHz All core @ 1.29V. my Kraken X62 is barely keeping up temps are low to mid 90's. I wonder if I can push it more with an NH-D14 hmmm

 

D14 is pretty bad, D15 is much better, at least I noticed around 7°C less. Though quality wise D14 is miles better.
I think Kraken X62 is just fine, I would lower it to 4.8 GHz and around 1.20-1.24V.

 

NH-D15** just a typo my friend.

I'm sticking with 4.9. let it run hot it's ok

 

.