• 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.

I9 9900k

8 Pack said:
Nick you can bench with me if you want... I am preparing for Intel event in two weeks and have 300l in stock...
Click to expand...

would have loved too mate but no time this side of Xmas but thank you very much for the offer, maybe sort something in the new year if your up for it? And besides it may give me chance to try on DICE at the very least as it's been nearly 2 years!
 
Doug2507 said:
No backing down now Nick....

Careful though, you'll be back submitting to the (dead) bot by Xmas. ;)
Click to expand...

Too late!.... already have! Just enjoying a bit of tweaking again and I do love the whole sub zero thing, the highs and lows of benching are great when you can keep it fun and thats exactly what i intend to do. Met some fab people along the way and had some laughs. Good times.
 
5.1ghz with a vcore of 1.235v in bios, under load voltage was between 1.208v and 1.217v. VRM's max 43c.

800e3165-3d5b-48ea-8e6f-4f69b9c83fb3-original.jpg
 
Last edited:
So I put the 9900k into the rig.

9900k
GB Z390 Pro Aorus
Dark 4 cooler (weak link)
3600mhz BDie kit with manual timings

Running cinebench at a low vcore is fine but crashes at IBT. My goal is 24/7 stability at lowest vcore and lowest temp so I don’t have to upgrade the cooler.

For me to be stable across a range of test loads, I need 1.24v core with LLC turbo on the gigabyte board. I do have my memory over locked with tighter timings so not sure if it has an impact.

At 1.24v on the 9900k my temps are 5c lower than my 8086k at 5ghz at 1.325v with literally everything being exactly the same.

There does seem to architectural benefits beyond just being soldered.
 
Here's a 5.0ghz 9900k score so I have no idea how 5.2 would be that much lower:

COMMENT=MAXON CINEBENCH is based on the high performance animation and rendering software MAXON CINEMA 4D.
COMMENT=These are your MAXON CINEBENCH R15 results.
COMMENT=
COMMENT=Results Disclaimer - CINEBENCH results are indicative of overall system performance when using CINEMA 4D,
COMMENT=and do not necessarily reflect the performance of the tested hardware with other applications.
COMMENT=Performance of each component (processor, graphics card) does rely somewhat on other components in the system.
COMMENT=Results provided are typical, although not derived from specific testing procedures.
COMMENT=
CORES=8
LOGICALCORES=2
MHZ=3600.000000
PROCESSOR=Intel Core i9-9900K CPU
OPENGLVENDOR=NVIDIA Corporation
OPENGLCARD=GeForce RTX 2080 Ti/PCIe/SSE2
OPENGLVERSION=4.6.0 NVIDIA 416.94
DRIVERVERSION=416.94
CBTYPE=64 Bit
OSVERSION=Windows 8, 64 Bit, Professional Edition (build 9200)
CBCPU1=0.000000
CBCPUX=2227.047492
CBOPENGL=0.000000
CBOPENGLQUALITY=0.000000
C4DINFO=
C4DVERSION=15.038
C4DBUILDID=RC184115demo
 
Robert896r1 said:
Dont know what to tell you man. Being on air cooling sucks with an "ok cooler" Had to settle for 1.27v at 4.9 to keep temps down for 24/7. Here's a 2230 at 5.0ghz at 1.3vcore and Turbo LLC. Let me know if anything looks off.

TSr1I1f.jpg
VCN6APH
Click to expand...
I cant see the second image. Only thing i can see that might be different to other posted scores is that you have the cache at 47 instead of 43.

That isn't a bad thing.

Nice one. :)
 
Distracted said:
I cant see the second image. Only thing i can see that might be different to other posted scores is that you have the cache at 47 instead of 43.

That isn't a bad thing.

Nice one. :)
Click to expand...

The 2nd image is just being me screwing up linking. Good catch re: uncore frequency.

I can beat his 5.2ghz score with mine at 4.9ghz. Just ran a 2181 4.9ghz with 1.27v

u2HHbEd.jpg

If the haf x supported decent AIO's I'd get one tomorrow but I'm not sure I can be bothered with getting a new case.
 
Another reason why scores might be low is background processes and monitoring software. Whenever hwinfo offers to monitor a specific sensor it does tell me that it might be cpu intensive.

Also, just closing steam got me 50 points or more once i realised it was going in the background, so i imagine finding a couple of hundred points by running a clean os install is fairly easy vs one that's quite busy.

Thats not to take anything away from high scores posted here, just trying to figure out why 5.2 would be scoring lower while adding my own observations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom