• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Core 9000 series

gavinh87 said:
Nobody, literally nobody runs them at stock? Bold statement........
Click to expand...

Jesus Christ you have issues dude, you seriouly do. You know exactly what I mean, 99% of people who buy a Vega 64 know what they are getting and know how to tune it accordingly.

Yes there will always be users who buy stuff and leave it at stock, stop being so childishly pedantic mate, it's not funny.
 
I'm no fan of AMD's current GPU's (hence the 1070 but they are not bad
BTVA said:
by 17% I mean this stat "As of 6/08/18, the top 50% of tested 8700Ks were able to hit 5.1GHz or greater." For 8600K it was 67% if I recall correctly. Enthusiasts tend to buy the i7 rather than i5 and they also have bigger budget to run with better cooling than people buying i5 which I think care most about Price/Performance, and pro-clocker bin i7 becaue on hwbot they are treated the same as 6 core cpu, that's why you see 8700Ks doing 5.2Ghz+ popularly
Click to expand...

A few more 8600K were able to hit 5.1Ghz than 8700K's 17 percentage points more, so the the 17% 8700K's clock what 100Mhz lower?
 
SiDeards73 said:
Jesus Christ you have issues dude, you seriouly do. You know exactly what I mean, 99% of people who buy a Vega 64 know what they are getting and know how to tune it accordingly.

Yes there will always be users who buy stuff and leave it at stock, stop being so childishly pedantic mate, it's not funny.
Click to expand...

Now its 99%...... We'll get the truth eventually.
 
gavinh87 said:
Actually a recently conducted survey shown that a very small minority overclock.
Click to expand...

Really on here you'd think every man and his dog be running these at 5ghz otherwise what's the point of the k series etc etc. Vega is just the same perhaps not at it's best in "out of the box" config. Incidently you could argue that exact line for a number of cpu's :D
 
humbug said:
I'm no fan of AMD's current GPU's (hence the 1070 but they are not bad


A few more 8600K were able to hit 5.1Ghz than 8700K's 17 percentage points more, so the the 17% 8700K's clock what 100Mhz lower?
Click to expand...
no it just mean that 8600ks, statistically, can reach 5.1Ghz easier than 8700K.
 
Pascal is a great GPU, i have a GTX 1070 and not a Vega 56 for a reason, that's not to say vega are bad GPU's, they are not.

But more to the relevant point, i'm not fooled by nVidia slapping a 150 watt TDP on my card, that's a bad joke, its a lot higher than that, it come with a 6 pin and an 8 pin power connectors for a reason.

BTVA said:
no it just mean that 8600ks, statistically, can reach 5.1Ghz easier than 8700K.
Click to expand...

That's almost semantics, almost meaningless.
 
@Panos
That leak of the 9700k from that 'Spanish guy ' is indeed on z390 board .

Check out H370 Aorus , C port internal header , then X470 Gaming 7, and finally 'leaked' z390 elite board.
It's only board to have its location there, z370 don't but that was based on z270 boards
 
Did anyone understand what that guys comments were about heat from the CPU? Was he saying it hit 95c only under stress at stock and that it should be good for 5ghz all core with plenty of thermal headroom left?
 
This what was translated

Focusing first on the temperature, we have to say that the Intel Core i7-9700K has reached 95º on average between its nuclei in the stress test of Aida64 , something that happens because the plate gives a very high voltage if we leave it in automatic. Surely with another BIOS the values will be adjusted to lower voltages, so we will approach the 70ºC that we achieved with 1.2V fixed.

On consumption , for the complete equipment , say that varies between 160W to 1.2V to 240W with the voltage in automatic, so we will see large differences depending on the motherboard used.

Finally, we need to talk about its ability to overclocking , which has been noticeably lower in this unit than in others that we have seen filtered on the network. With 1.4V fixed in BIOS, although it appears 1.3V in CPU-Z, we have managed to reach 5.00 GHz , a really not insignificant figure, more for a total of 8 cores. Regarding the published filtration, if it were real, we could be facing a 'black leg' silicon (CPU selected by hand knowing that it is better).

I copy pasta'd that directly from the translation
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom