You gotta manipulate it with Adaptive + Offset Mode, preferably a current limit instead of temp limit, and the LLC Saturation Mode enabled.

 

The current power limit or limit on power consumption doesn't make a difference in terms of how stable the CPU is around 220-230W, at 85C, all-core, 5.9GHz. A 105C limit with a bit of overshoot at 110C is perfectly fine.

LLC Saturation only helps to boost voltage a bit higher to 6.0GHz for undervolted LLC, such as LLC8, at 1.25V all-core, 5.4GHz. However, it requires both a very good CPU and good VRM, otherwise, it won't work. My CPU crashes straight up with LLC8, LLC7, LLC6 with 1.44V overdrive for 6GHz. The voltage curve for other frequencies is too low. When the CPU runs with borderline LLC5 + Saturation above 40A, the 350W 105C thermal throttled voltage is 1.40V, which is even higher than Adaptive voltage 1.33V.

It's still the combination of LLC, TVB, and Adaptive + Offset voltage that makes a difference. The CPU cannot be stable when the voltage is lower than 1.42V at 5.9GHz, 85C. But there are only two points of effective offset voltage: the point of 6.0GHz, 1.44V, and the point below 5.7GHz, 1.35V. Other frequencies, such as 5.9GHz, 5.8GHz, will be affected by LLC. 5.4GHz is completely ineffective, no matter what the offset value is. LLC5 gets 1.412V at 5.9GHz, which is not stable at 85C, while LLC4 gets 1.426V at 5.9GHz. This also results in 1.41V at 5.7GHz, which can be offset to a lower voltage, but I would rather use a constant high voltage instead of a constant undershoot and overshoot due to higher LLC.

There are only three points of 8-Pcore TVB as well. Anything higher than 85C, I can only set 5.7GHz TVB, or I could have set more points, such as 5.8GHz at 85C-100C, then 5.7GHz 100C-105C.

 

I run the same mobo. Care to share a couple screen shots of your bios settings? Did you just set 60x fixed all core , manual
Volt 1.44? I mean for light/gaming loads and temps not a prob - your right, it will be good…I was running mine similarly at first but wanted to learn a little about turbo and llc, ac/dc ll so I mixed it up - but, Honestly I dislike there has to be so many settings with these Things we pay a fortune for…they should be able
To adapt on their own …I don’t render or use
High loads…just game, bench and mem test.

 

What are you cooling this with?

 

The PC is just a rendering machine with an old Corsair H115i 280mm AIO with 2 NF-A14 and 2 NF-A12x25.
If the CPU is delided with a custom loop the frequency under heavy load can go higher.

 

The PC is just a rendering machine with an old Corsair H115i 280mm AIO with 2 NF-A14 and 2 NF-A12x25.
If the CPU is delided with a custom loop the frequency under heavy load can go higher.

Hmm... would recommend investing in a custom loop. I'm not saying you're wrong here but I'm not convinced you've tested this long enough to make any definitive conclusion. At least I'm not ready to risk my $600 investment

I also think something is buggered with your volt tuning. I used this Guide and tuned my LLC ( AC_LL & DC_LL) and VF curve in accordance and my my volts are at 1.5 but my R23 watts are 290W, occasionally peaks to 300W. I'm rock steady form 6.2 light load to 5.7 heavy load. IIRC, settings were 60, 60, 60, 60, 59, 58, 58, 57 but I would generally get a 200Mhz boost at light and medium load even though TVB was disabled. Custom loop with direct die block.

But I'm now just running stock with LLC curve optimized IAW the above guide, Asus MCE disabled and with a 100W and 10*C drop, I'm still boosting very close to the same clocks as the OC with R23 only dropping 1k points.

 

That is a little toasty for me.

 

What that Intel engineer said is nothing new under the sun

"All there in the manual": if Tjmax for a 13900KS is 100C then 99C is long term reliable, which in turns makes 100C long term reliable and irrelevant too from a scientific standpoint since that's the temperature at which the CPU will regulate. That's all like he said "as long a you're under the stock voltage and PL1" which is said here too: voltage and frequency modifications are straight up considered overclocks (their long term reliability is out of the bargain) and here's mentioning processor base TDP which is PL1 for all intents and purposes.

Like it or not an stock Intel CPU can run at 100C during heavy load no problem and still last as intended. Another case is an overclocked CPU: that's actually when nothing is a given

So stop spreading statements out of context: if unsure double check the sources.

As for games thread usage that's too much work to know for certain: but nowadays little things are single threaded or even use a few cores.

Almost any game using DX11 uses at least 8 cores: depending on how demanding they're(and year of release) and target frame rate they may get away with 4 cores or 6 cores. Albeit strangling core count is may hurt stable frame rates: but even this can be countered with configuration, allow the game to prepare more frames on the CPU ahead of the GPU and there's a trade between more stable frame rate, but higher latency. But fixes it.

DX 12 use even more cores with more evenly spreaded load than DX 11: that's the main reason why DX 12 games(most modern ones) are actually able to render well past 200 FPS assuming the GPU doesn't botteneck. Again configuring frames rendered ahead by the CPU serves as a software workaround to fix unstable frame rate at the cost of increased latency.

But in general this is all too a complex scenario with many knobs to touch in order to get it working the best possible way in any hardware/software combo: so it's really way more complex than some arbitrary number of cores needed to run games.

 

What that Intel engineer said is nothing new under the sun
View attachment 2604957

"All there in the manual": if Tjmax for a 13900KS is 100C then 99C is long term reliable, which in turns makes 100C long term reliable and irrelevant too from a scientific standpoint since that's the temperature at which the CPU will regulate. That's all like he said "as long a you're under the stock voltage and PL1" which is said here too: voltage and frequency modifications are straight up considered overclocks (their long term reliability is out of the bargain) and here's mentioning processor base TDP which is PL1 for all intents and purposes.

Like it or not an stock Intel CPU can run at 100C during heavy load no problem and still last as intended. Another case is an overclocked CPU: that's actually when nothing is a given

So stop spreading statements out of context: if unsure double check the sources.

As for games thread usage that's too much work to know for certain: but nowadays little things are single threaded or even use a few cores.

Almost any game using DX11 uses at least 8 cores: depending on how demanding they're(and year of release) and target frame rate they may get away with 4 cores or 6 cores. Albeit strangling core count is may hurt stable frame rates: but even this can be countered with configuration, allow the game to prepare more frames on the CPU ahead of the GPU and there's a trade between more stable frame rate, but higher latency. But fixes it.

DX 12 use even more cores with more evenly spreaded load than DX 11: that's the main reason why DX 12 games(most modern ones) are actually able to render well past 200 FPS assuming the GPU doesn't botteneck. Again configuring frames rendered ahead by the CPU serves as a software workaround to fix unstable frame rate at the cost of increased latency.

But in general this is all too a complex scenario with many knobs to touch in order to get it working the best possible way in any hardware/software combo: so it's really way more complex than some arbitrary number of cores needed to run games.

Intel only said "may" result in damage when running out of specification. Since this is overvolted OC at 350W. It's already far from specification. What is the concern? Warranty? Degradation?

The CPU runs just fine. All it can be debated is something like "time will tell" several years later. But a year later a 14600K can run just as fast as 13900K. The OC is over then.

 

Yes, there are people that OC that don’t buy new chip each year 😂..

 

I do and it's not a question of money. More like time: since I watercool the hell out of everything tearing all apart means 1 month of fiddling during free time if not more. Then the fine tuning of the system itself.

I also like to be able to use my system without having up the top of my head a checklist of things I want to do over it.

So in the end I personally need a compromise between having fun with hardware fiddling and having fun using it at the same time.

Yearly schedule of CPU upgrading is too tight for me: let alone swapping or testing several manufacturers for single digit percents.
I would consider it if I didn't liked watercooling too and every swap was a straightforward as buy this week and plug & play the hardware itself in one day and you're ready to go.

 

So the purpose of OC is the hope it can last longer without upgrading while new chips can run much faster regardless.

CPU is one of the most resilient components especially this gen. Just sell the old to get a new one.

 

So the purpose of OC is the hope it can last longer without upgrading while new chips can run much faster regardless.

CPU is one of the most resilient components especially this gen. Just sell the old to get a new one.

I am not sure what the point is here.

You have an over volted and over LLC'd chip that runs at 100C and renders. Ok. StAndrew has a chip that clocks just as well and pulls less power.

I am struggling to see the point here.

CPU has been and probably will be the most resilient component for quite a long time, but not due to high temps, high volts and no vdroop.

The purpose of OCing used to be to get a processor at half the cost, have good cooling and OC the snot out of till it surpasses the most expensive thing that could be bought.

Have to admit, I am still missing what the bread and butter I am supposed take away from the OP is.

 

I'm not sure why the exposure, maybe its the Auto HDR feature but here is Warhammer II, my heaviest CPU intensive game.

 

I'm not sure why the exposure, maybe its the Auto HDR feature but here is Warhammer II, my heaviest CPU intensive game.

View attachment 2605020

So much for your all-core 6GHz. Only a few 6Ghz bouncing for a few seconds.

 

I'd be really, really interested in long-term stability. For example, will it last six months, a year, two, five, ten? What about constant (but fluctuating) load for around five months (which is the longest I've had any single work processing run take).

 

350w on this cpu is dangerous. what kill cpu is voltage and power. 1.42-1.44v in long term is imo to high like 350w. You risk in the future to kill it.

 

your power is so much higher cuz the thermals are bad resulting in massive leakage, i have seen shocking reductions in power draw from going down 30C in load temps

 

I had a 6700k that I ran at 4.9 at 1.45v, but under two 360 rads and a delid with liquid metal. I could prime 95 for 3 days and eventually get to 73C so I wasn't as worried. It can still do 4.9, at the same voltage, hasn't degraded.
You can pump voltage more if your temps are low, but voltage and temps out of control are a whole nother ballgame. I mean degradation takes time, but is this really contributing to an overclocking forum if you are just going to do a burn test on a CPU then just buy another next year?

 

Run a set load during winter months, observe the change in power required for X calculations as the temp goes down as you open the window, its absolutely huge difference like 30% sometimes going from 100c to 50-60c

 

What's the deal with winter? The CPU sill goes 100C regardless if you run a 360mm in Antarctica with 1.42v 350W.

 

OP must live in Alaska. 90% of homes in California where I live have no A/C. Try running that load 24/7 with no A/C for a year and tell me how your cpu holds up.

At the end of the day it should be said silicon varies. There is not a perfect voltage setting because they will all differ.

 

Thats the truth. No AC here in the bay area for the most part... I did end up buying a portable ac unit last year when it got bad and I couldn't take it anymore. Screw my 13900ks...Try taming the I9-7900x etc wtih out a delid and what not with no AC hah I only wish I had done a liquid metal application on that chip sooner then I did. Also im in the same boat now with my 13900ks its going to be rendering most of the time.

 

I personally would not like a 350watt render load I feel like you have a good chance at degrading your chip pretty quickly with that kind of load. just to be safe

 

The CPU runs like fine wine.

350W is nothing compared to the full protentional 500W load on the same CPU.

If you are afraid of a mere 350W then you are just like most of these "overlockers" who end up running only 5.7GHz on a game like Total War that pulls as much as 100W.

 

That’s warm! My current chip has never even seen 65C yet even with upwards of 360 watts. It came out of the box, right in to a delid tool, direct die and chilled water only.

😍

 

That's only warm. The chip can pull 500W 1.45V LLC 4 easily. Don't know how they are afraid of 350W 1.42V or 350W 1.3V smallFFT.

 

At least here in Cali PGE tripled their energy cost at the start of the year. Who cares if 350 watts works fine or not... At 24/7 full load.. start thinking about responsible energy use. Just because you can doesnt mean you should.

 

You are in Cali where you should install solar panels to generate your own electricity to use whatever you want. You are going to say goodbye to hit all-core 6.2GHz 1.48V.

 

You have all the answers dont ya

 

Of course I have seen somebody buy a Tesla but cannot afford the electricity lol.

 

Interesting post as I just recently upgraded from the 12900K to the 13900K and loaded one of my Unreal Engine 5 Projects and saw the chip temp reach 100C. The project however loaded way faster but realized I may need a bigger power supply. So I take it that the temps on the 13900K is normal to reach 100C?

 

So I take it that the temps on the 13900K is normal to reach 100C?

For people with an AIO or aircooling, yes but you seem to have a full custom loop, and then I would say it is a bit hot. 360W load at stock is very high. You could try to undervolt your CPU or set a lower custom power limit of say 300W.