I9 9900k

Distracted · 21 Nov 2018 at 20:14

Majek said:
Hi,

I am so glad to see this post! I am sorry but it gives me some solace that there are other people too with 9900k who don't get stable 5.0 below 1.3v.

It just seems that any forum I visit everyone is doing 5.0 to 5.2 at 1.2+v.

What board are you on?

I'm on z390 Aorus Master and I suspect I may need more than 1.32v at 5.0 (my current, seemingly stable setting).

have you set cache to 43?

Sem · 21 Nov 2018 at 20:39

moorhen2 said:
Ok, can we clarify that you are or you are not using AVX offset,?

The reason im asking is because if you were using an AVX offset, for instance -5, like I have just set in my bios for testing purposes, as soon as Realbench starts and the AVX intructions kick in the core clock will drop by a multiplier of 5, and hence a full load core clock of 4.7ghz from 5.2ghz.

So whatever AVX offset is used, this will be subtracted from the core clock under AVX load. And you did state 5.2 AVX.

Or do you mean 5.2 running a stress test that uses AVX.

just to clarify i am not using any AVX offset at all currently in the bios the AVX offset is set to 0 this is for all my runs from 5Ghz to 5.4Ghz
im running RB in the screenshot its 12mins into a 15min run if there was an offset it would show

robin66 · 22 Nov 2018 at 03:17

Hi,

I am so glad to see this post! I am sorry but it gives me some solace that there are other people too with 9900k who don't get stable 5.0 below 1.3v.

It just seems that any forum I visit everyone is doing 5.0 to 5.2 at 1.2+v.

What board are you on?

I'm on z390 Aorus Master and I suspect I may need more than 1.32v at 5.0 (my current, seemingly stable setting).

I'm using the ASUS Maximus XI HERO Wi-Fi.

moorhen2 · 22 Nov 2018 at 08:57

Sem said:
just to clarify i am not using any AVX offset at all currently in the bios the AVX offset is set to 0 this is for all my runs from 5Ghz to 5.4Ghz
im running RB in the screenshot its 12mins into a 15min run if there was an offset it would show

We had crossed wires I think, thanks for the reply.

moorhen2 · 22 Nov 2018 at 09:09

Well I now have the cache up to 50, had to add a little more voltage to get there, 30 odd minute run with Aida, still no FPU/AVX, that will be tried later.

0121danwilliams84 · 22 Nov 2018 at 09:27

moorhen2 said:
Well I now have the cache up to 50, had to add a little more voltage to get there, 30 odd minute run with Aida, still no FPU/AVX, that will be tried later.

What voltage are you setting in the bios? Does it go a lot lower in windows?

Majek · 22 Nov 2018 at 09:50

robin66 said:
I'm using the ASUS Maximus XI HERO Wi-Fi.

Thank you! I got a dud too. At 1.32 I can't even test Realbench before I go watercooling. CPU hits 90 C + after a few minutes, so I may not even be stable at this voltage. I could only test 1344 fft's with and without avx, cb15 and occt mid. So jealous of people with good chips.

Majek · 22 Nov 2018 at 09:53

Distracted said:
have you set cache to 43?

Most benches are stable with 45 cache ratio at 1.32v but Realbench BSODs with 45, so I did go down to 43. I got a dud. I feel like selling it and trying again but I don't want to spend any more money. Bought it right at the start at inflated price, so I would lose a lot of cash.

Distracted · 22 Nov 2018 at 10:20

Majek said:
Most benches are stable with 45 cache ratio at 1.32v but Realbench BSODs with 45, so I did go down to 43. I got a dud. I feel like selling it and trying again but I don't want to spend any more money. Bought it right at the start at inflated price, so I would lose a lot of cash.

I think we all started our testing with x43 on the cache. I know people are beginning to increase that now, but if you want to compare your cpu to the rest you are seeing then leave the cache at 43 and see how you get on.

As you've already seen with the change from 45 to 43 it makes a difference to the voltage you need.

If you are worried about losing performance don't be. I tested with cache at 43 and then at 50 and there was no difference in cinebench score at all so i dont think you lose any noticable real world performance.

moorhen2 · 22 Nov 2018 at 10:50

0121danwilliams84 said:
What voltage are you setting in the bios? Does it go a lot lower in windows?

To get cache stress test to run with the core at 52 and the cache at the 50 multiplier for over 30 minutes I used 1.390v in the bios, in Windows this shows between 1.368v/1.376v. LLC7. Under stress load the voltage was 1.332v.

Distracted · 22 Nov 2018 at 11:05

moorhen2 said:
To get cache stress test to run with the core at 52 and the cache at the 50 multiplier for over 30 minutes I used 1.390v in the bios, in Windows this shows between 1.368v/1.376v. LLC7. Under stress load the voltage was 1.332v.

Do you do any avx load testing?

moorhen2 · 22 Nov 2018 at 11:14

Distracted said:
Do you do any avx load testing?

As a rule no, I don't see the point, I don't use anything that uses AVX, or intend to. But I have run Realbench as you know, and as for P95 why crucify your silicon with the heat that app produces. I am an overclocker, so I just like to see how far I can go with the hardware in front of me, not for stability at high frequencies. For this kit I will probably run 50/43 at 1.20v for 24/7 use.

Distracted · 22 Nov 2018 at 11:20

The more i read about Prime 95 AVX the more i intend to steer clear of it. Seems like little more than an exercise in shortening the life of the silicon.

moorhen2 · 22 Nov 2018 at 11:23

Distracted said:
The more i read about Prime 95 AVX the more i intend to steer clear of it. Seems like little more than an exercise in shortening the life of the silicon.

We are on the same wavelength, nothing you would use in everyday computing would never load your cpu like P95 does, if your into rendering and binary crunching, maybe. But not for me.

Distracted · 22 Nov 2018 at 11:25

If i intend to render then I'll choose an appropriate stress test to see if I'm stable 24/7 for that particular application.
I read that someone else was doing that for their heavy workloads like encoding so I think thats the smart thing to do.

Prime avx is just bananas.

0121danwilliams84 · 22 Nov 2018 at 11:26

whats everyones opinion on the max safe voltage for 24/7?

Distracted · 22 Nov 2018 at 11:29

0121danwilliams84 said:
whats everyones opinion on the max safe voltage for 24/7?

I don't think there is a safe voltage for overclocking. But as long as you assume that any OC comes with risk I've seen 1.4v bandied about.

But I have also read several times that Coffee lake is a decade ahead in terms of voltage leak or some such and intel has set the max 'safe' voltage at something like 1.5x in one of their spec documents for the 9 series.

Distracted · 22 Nov 2018 at 11:31

Looks like intel recommends a max vcore of 1.52. But I'm sure thermal limits would apply long before reaching that.

Edit - this is for 8 series, i think it is even higher for 9 :eek:

0121danwilliams84 · 22 Nov 2018 at 11:32

Distracted said:
I don't think there is a safe voltage for overclocking. But as long as you assume that any OC comes with risk I've seen 1.4v bandied about.

But I have also read several times that Coffee lake is a decade ahead in terms of voltage leak or some such and intel has set the max 'safe' voltage at something like 1.5x in one of their spec documents for the 9 series.

Wondering if I set 1.340v in bios but highest I ever see is 1.312. If I could set it higher, say 1.4v it would only show about 1.350v in windows. Wonder if that would be the way to go to try and improve OC.

moorhen2 · 22 Nov 2018 at 11:41

0121danwilliams84 said:
Wondering if I set 1.340v in bios but highest I ever see is 1.312. If I could set it higher, say 1.4v it would only show about 1.350v in windows. Wonder if that would be the way to go to try and improve OC.

Use a higher LLC, vdroop is a good thing. What is your LLC at the moment. Have you done anything with power management in the bios.