Overclock.net banner
1 - 20 of 2625 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have questions!!!


I overclocked my 9900k (retail version) using asrock z390 taichi to 5.1 Ghz: Vcore=1.26v, AVX offset=0 (no offset) LLC=level 1

Result:
R15 = 2215 (average)
BMW(Blender benchmark) = 193s
BMW(Blender program) = 201s
stable in Aida64 stress test, Temp= 65 - 78 c (avg temp range) and 82 c (max), (my room temp=24 c)
(I observed that my cpu use a Vcore=1.280v when under stress test load)

My Questions:

1) Is my CPU bad? average? or good? (I am sooo confused)

2) Should I return the cpu for a better lottery?

3) Should I try to overclock to 5.2Ghz for daily usage?



I have tested 5.2Ghz... but for some reason, I couldn't get it stable in Blender. For some reason, my cpu is stable in aida64 stress test (with avx test), but never stable in blender at 5.2Ghz.
I tried Vcore=1.4v (in BIOS) with LLC=level2 and the resulting Vcore(under load during test)=1.409v <--- Stable in aida64, but not stable in blender!









Note: Please feel free to post your overclocking results for 9900k below, what's everyone's overclocking results? I want to know!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!






~
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,713 Posts
If your CPU is not stable in the benches, then it simply isn't stable and needs more voltage. Out of curiosity, what is your cooler?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
If you are stable at 5.1 and 1.26v that seems pretty damn good. I wouldn't complain about that. I also wouldn't go beyond that for 24/7 use. As you found out, you start needing a lot more voltage to get to 5.2 and 5.3.



I have a feeling maybe if I do Vcore=1.42v, I can get it to stable at 5.2Ghz, worth it?



Is going beyond 5.1ghz for 24/7 daily usage a bad idea?



Honestly this seems like an average cpu to me, everyone can get 5.1 ghz.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
I've watched a few review channels on YouTube in regards to overclocking the i9-9900K. If I remember correctly, I don't think any of them reached 5.1GHz, let alone using such low voltage like yours at even 5GHz. I would definitely keep it! Be happy with the result, and don't worry about upgrading for a really long time. Also, please don't go and delid your CPU. There's no need to do it any longer with the reintroduction of soldered CPUs from Intel. Your temperatures will drop very little in comparison to what they are already. I know you didn't say you were going to, but you did mention it nonetheless. :)

If you really want to push it to the extreme, find the highest voltage your CPU can run at for daily usage. Put it at that voltage, and then start bumping up your core clock little by little. You might be able to get 5.15GHz.
 

·
Covfefe
Joined
·
2,202 Posts
I've watched a few review channels on YouTube in regards to overclocking the i9-9900K. If I remember correctly, I don't think any of them reached 5.1GHz, let alone using such low voltage like yours at even 5GHz. I would definitely keep it! Be happy with the result, and don't worry about upgrading for a really long time. Also, please don't go and delid your CPU. There's no need to do it any longer with the reintroduction of soldered CPUs from Intel. Your temperatures will drop very little in comparison to what they are already. I know you didn't say you were going to, but you did mention it nonetheless. :)

If you really want to push it to the extreme, find the highest voltage your CPU can run at for daily usage. Put it at that voltage, and then start bumping up your core clock little by little. You might be able to get 5.15GHz.



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
@Wihglah Wow would you look at that. Well, it's still a fresh CPU that a lot of hands haven't got a hold of. You may or may not have gotten a golden chip. Time will tell until more results are shared from other users. If I had to bet on it though, I would say you got yourself a golden chip. If not, then some YouTube reviewers have no idea how to actually overclock which wouldn't be too surprising, or there's only so much time they have until they move on to a different piece of hardware to review.

PS: Do mention that your CPU is stable at that speed and voltage. I'm sure you know CBR15 is not a way to test a CPU's stability. Make sure that your CPU has been tested stable in Prime95 or LINPACK at that speed and voltage. Otherwise, enjoy the beast of a processor you have. :)
 

·
professional curmudgeon
Joined
·
10,582 Posts
@Wihglah
Wow would you look at that. Well, it's still a fresh CPU that a lot of hands haven't got a hold of. You may or may not have gotten a golden chip. Time will tell until more results are shared from other users. If I had to bet on it though, I would say you got yourself a golden chip. If not, then some YouTube reviewers have no idea how to actually overclock which wouldn't be too surprising, or there's only so much time they have until they move on to a different piece of hardware to review.
PS: Do mention that your CPU is stable at that speed and voltage. I'm sure you know CBR15 is not a way to test a CPU's stability. Make sure that your CPU has been tested stable in Prime95 or LINPACK at that speed and voltage. Otherwise, enjoy the beast of a processor you have. :)
prime95 is really a no no for intel chips anymore, unless using an old version of configuring it to NOT use AVX instructions by adding the following line to local.txt located in the same folder as the executable file:
CpuSupportsAVX=0
fwiu, just running prime95 will slam the cpu to 90c+ :devil:

but since i don't have a coffee chip, i could be mistaken.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
@looniam That reminds me of when I used Prime95 to stress test my X5690 before I ran it into the ground with 1.5V. It gave me a good excuse to finally upgrade. :)

Anyways, you should turn off AVX in the latest version of Prime95 using the line you've shown there in the local.txt document. I didn't need to when stress testing my AMD 1800X though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
This is on a custom loop with two 360 radiators if I am not mistaken, so the fact he got a stable 5.1 on one radiator seems pretty impressive to me. Also OP very few 8700k's ever reach 5.1. You got a strong chip hitting that on an AIO.
Ya. I am using 360mm aio (one rad).

Honestly I am satisfied getting to 5.1 Ghz super stable, but 5.2 Ghz super stable for 24/7 usage would be nicer though.....

Personally, I think I might have a individual core problem..... Maybe like 6/8 cores are super good , while like 2 of them are bad, that's why I couldn't get 5.2Ghz stable in blender. (It is stable in aida64 though.... that's the weird part)
 

·
WAT
Joined
·
227 Posts
Ya. I am using 360mm aio (one rad).

Honestly I am satisfied getting to 5.1 Ghz super stable, but 5.2 Ghz super stable for 24/7 usage would be nicer though.....

Personally, I think I might have a individual core problem..... Maybe like 6/8 cores are super good , while like 2 of them are bad, that's why I couldn't get 5.2Ghz stable in blender. (It is stable in aida64 though.... that's the weird part)
That makes sense based on the stock specs of the chip. There is a reason the stock boost is tiered by number of cores. Helps them save money on production no doubt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,166 Posts
Asus z390 Gene
9900k
g.skill 4266 stock
 

Attachments

·
Old to Overclock.net
Joined
·
363 Posts
Is there any statistics over 9900K potential? SL is dead silent ATM, I beleive they keep the statistics up to binned chips launch.

Though, 9900K is already around ~900$ here, in local stores. And thing that makes it more hilarious - that I found my cpu block with wrong jet installed, thus, with right one I get lower temps -> and -surprise- it occured my CPU handles 5 GHz at ~1.32V LLC5, which is fan-f-ing-tastic. And it makes 9900K upgrade even more questionable.
 

·
Network Enthusiast
Joined
·
4,793 Posts
Is there any statistics over 9900K potential? SL is dead silent ATM, I beleive they keep the statistics up to binned chips launch.

Though, 9900K is already around ~900$ here, in local stores. And thing that makes it more hilarious - that I found my cpu block with wrong jet installed, thus, with right one I get lower temps -> and -surprise- it occured my CPU handles 5 GHz at ~1.32V LLC5, which is fan-f-ing-tastic. And it makes 9900K upgrade even more questionable.
SL is still binning it, so they don't have accurate statistics yet. They will in a few days though. They stated they expect it to be thermally limited though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
262 Posts
i dont believe any of yours "stable" clocks.

or maybe on power throthling aka cpu clocks dropped down on some cores (LinX Gflops show how much GFlops you get=how fast yours cpu/ram truly are).

Give me picture with Prime95 (non-avx) with smallfft preset and 2 hours bench.

And benchmark LinX, at least 1 round calculated and it gives yours GFlops speed.

9900K @5.0Ghz stable with fast rams gives over 520 GFlops...at least here, in Finland. ☺

LinX dl link:
http://greentechreviews.ru/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/LinX-v0.9.0-E-x64-Ready-to-Start.zip
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Seeing as there is no dedicated 9th-gen Intel CPU's thread, thought I'd just post this here and see what other people get.

9700k @ 4.8Ghz ~1.225v
Have tried 4.9Ghz at ~1.285v but haven't done enough testing.
5Ghz would instant-crash at 1.35v so I haven't bothered.
Running -4 on the AVX for stability, not that I use many AVX workloads.

Temperatures are pretty hot with my NH-U14S, granted I live in Australia though and ambient was probably 27C
4.8Ghz with Prime95 (AVX Disabled) FTT ~80-85C. Gaming was ~60-65C
4.9Ghz with Prime95 (AVX Disabled) FTT ~92C. Gaming ~74-80C

So yeah, seems like I lost the silicone lottery here. I'm happy with 4.8Ghz I guess but 5Ghz would've been great.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Seeing as there is no dedicated 9th-gen Intel CPU's thread, thought I'd just post this here and see what other people get.

9700k @ 4.8Ghz ~1.225v
Have tried 4.9Ghz at ~1.285v but haven't done enough testing.
5Ghz would instant-crash at 1.35v so I haven't bothered.
Running -4 on the AVX for stability, not that I use many AVX workloads.

Temperatures are pretty hot with my NH-U14S, granted I live in Australia though and ambient was probably 27C
4.8Ghz with Prime95 (AVX Disabled) FTT ~80-85C. Gaming was ~60-65C
4.9Ghz with Prime95 (AVX Disabled) FTT ~92C. Gaming ~74-80C

So yeah, seems like I lost the silicone lottery here. I'm happy with 4.8Ghz I guess but 5Ghz would've been great.
Those are pretty insane numbers considering non-avx testing... vCore isn't that high aswell.
 
1 - 20 of 2625 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top