I9 9900k

[Distracted]

My friend RMAd his 9900k, no ETA for his rrplsreplac, anyone else been waiting ??

No idea, i remember you saying you sent yours back due to the packaging being tampered with. Did that result in a replacement or RMA, or did you get the refund in the end?

If the CPU was only recently bought it might be quicker to return for replacement / refund rather than waiting on an RMA.

 

[tyler_jrb]

The voltage and clocks vary a lot depending on the board, cooling and especially the quality of the silicon.

The best rough guide we have that takes a large number of cpus and tests them in a controlled way is the data from silicon lottery, see the spoiler below.

It is worth pointing out that their figures and settings are listed with stability on a 240aio in mind. Meaning that they can be probably be considered conservative in terms of vcore so you may be able to go lower with the voltage at each step and with better cooling you will be able to go higher with the frequency.

Cheers

Nice job on the delid btw. I wouldn’t mind delidding as I do have a custom tool to do it which I made for my 8086k, however being soldered unlikely I will do out of risk really, and wanting to keep warranty this time.

I’ll be happy at around 5ghz, hopefully end up with a decent sample. Will be on custom loop with 3x360mm rads so should hopefully be enough capacity.

 

[Distracted]

Cheers

Nice job on the delid btw. I wouldn’t mind delidding as I do have a custom tool to do it which I made for my 8086k, however being soldered unlikely I will do out of risk really, and wanting to keep warranty this time.

I’ll be happy at around 5ghz, hopefully end up with a decent sample. Will be on custom loop with 3x360mm rads so should hopefully be enough capacity.

Thank you.

I used der8auers delid die mate 2 and it was quick and easy. As for the solder I didn't scrape it away or use a knife on the silicon, i applied some quicksilver from Rockitcool and that took the lot off. Followed by a polish using flitz (came with the quicksilver) the die was shiny and solder and scratch / blemish free.

I wouldn't recommend it as a need but I think the results are great. As for the process it is far from difficult. The only difference between delidding a 9 series vs 8 is that it takes more time to remove the solder tim vs paste tim.

I didn't do any sanding of the die at all btw, just removed the stim with quicksilver and then polished the surface with flitz like i said.

 

[moorhen2]

Thanks. I didnt think so, i think it is only on the high end boards. I will double check anyway to rule it out since it is a good idea and wont be difficult.

Edit - There's no sign of it on the board and no mention of it in the manual. Perhaps the motherboard UEFI is set to up the CPU Standby Voltage setting once a given frequency or voltage load is reached on certain CPUs. I don't know, but I'll leave it fixed at 1v for now.

Yes, you would have a "Slow mode" switch and a LN2 jumper near the top right hand corner of the MB. I think its the Extreme and Apex that have these options, well I have on my Extreme anyway.

 

[tyler_jrb]

Thank you.

I used der8auers delid die mate 2 and it was quick and easy. As for the solder I didn't scrape it away or use a knife on the silicon, i applied some quicksilver from Rockitcool and that took the lot off. Followed by a polish using flitz (came with the quicksilver) the die was shiny and solder and scratch / blemish free.

I wouldn't recommend it as a need but I think the results are great. As for the process it is far from difficult. The only difference between delidding a 9 series vs 8 is that it takes more time to remove the solder tim vs paste tim.

I didn't do any sanding of the die at all btw, just removed the stim with quicksilver and then polished the surface with flitz like i said.

Some very helpful info thanks! Especially the quicksliver part as i would never have thought of that.

I certainly am tempted, however ill see what its like in terms of overclockability before making the decision. If it overclocks reasonably well then likely ill just leave as is for now.

 

[Distracted]

Some very helpful info thanks! Especially the quicksliver part as i would never have thought of that.

I certainly am tempted, however ill see what its like in terms of overclockability before making the decision. If it overclocks reasonably well then likely ill just leave as is for now.

No problem. My initial plan was to keep the cpu stock and then delid and oc in the future if needed to keep up with new releases in hw and sw. But then when i was looking at how to keep overclocks relatively safe I kept reading about how heat is a major contributing factor towards cpu degredation, so delidding for the extra 10-15 degrees of headroom started to make more and more sense for long term stability.

Plus i really, really wanted to pop the thing open

My experience so far with the 9900k is that delidding isn't needed, but it is far from difficult so no-one seeking more from their CPU should be put off by the STIM imho.

I hope you get a good one!

 

[Distracted]

I'm still testing but the higher frequency VRM changes do appear to help with the overclock. Obviously this is just one example so it may simply be a quirk of my board rather than something that can be repeated.

Temps are still a non issue with the VRMs which is to be expected given what i have spent on cooling them. That being said, they were running cool before they were put under water and testing has shown that the crosschill cooler performs better than the standard Hero heatsink, even when it is not in a loop and under the same conditions as a Hero motherboard.

I intend to keep the higher frequency on the VRMs and continue tweaking anything i can in the power delivery section of the UEFI.

 

[0121danwilliams84]

Has anyone had any strange issues with RAM before. They almost always stay just under 50c for me. I played Resident Evil 2 and noticed Ram stick 1 was at 65c for a second and then went back down. I thought they both stayed the same temp, but I have never really noticed this before. Not getting any errors of any kind. Thought it might be a bug or something.

 

[moorhen2]

Testing at 5.2ghz, 1.288v under full load, max temp 86c, not too bothered with this, as the system wouldn't be under full load constantly.

 

[duc999]

Thats a beast , what are you cooling it with ??

 

[moorhen2]

Thats a beast , what are you cooling it with ??

Thanks. Custom water loop for cooling.

 

[duc999]

GPU only ? The reason Im asking is that I'm trying to put together a system based on a pre binned 9900k at 5.1 and it always comes back to the cooling for me. Dont think any AIO will handle it so is water the only option ?

PS I could be wrong

 

[moorhen2]

GPU only ? The reason Im asking is that I'm trying to put together a system based on a pre binned 9900k at 5.1 and it always comes back to the cooling for me. Dont think any AIO will handle it so is water the only option ?

PS I could be wrong

An AIO would struggle to keep these chips cooled to a descent level IMO, but then again a lot would depend on what voltage it is using for 5.1ghz. Yes I only water cool my CPU, I have two 360's, one 240 and a 120 rad wise.

My chip can do 5.1ghz at a full load voltage of 1.243v.

 

[duc999]

Here's praying I get a good one too especially at those voltages Water it is then , many thanks for your advice bro

 

[moorhen2]

Here's praying I get a good one too especially at those voltages Water it is then , many thanks for your advice bro

No worries, and good luck.

 

[Distracted]

Testing at 5.2ghz, 1.288v under full load, max temp 86c, not too bothered with this, as the system wouldn't be under full load constantly.

Same here, max temps when fully stressed are beyond the reach of my everyday use, but it is good to know what the limits are.
Thats a really nice OC you've got.

 

[Distracted]

Has anyone had any strange issues with RAM before. They almost always stay just under 50c for me. I played Resident Evil 2 and noticed Ram stick 1 was at 65c for a second and then went back down. I thought they both stayed the same temp, but I have never really noticed this before. Not getting any errors of any kind. Thought it might be a bug or something.

I haven't noticed it, but I'll keep an eye out for it going forward and let you know if i see anything similar.

 

[Distracted]

I've found an answer of sorts regarding the question of which stress test to use to find long term system stability when overclocking.

I'm going to be using Realbench no AVX offset and Prime small ffts AVX off to test stability and thermal headroom. I'll also be using the various benchmarks to ensure scores are where they should be relative to frequency and as an additional step in finding stability.

I'm using this as my guide.


Here’s a sample of utilities grouped for thermaltesting and stability testing, shown according to % of TDP at Default BIOS settings:

TDP … Thermal Test - Steady Workload

129% … Prime95 v27.7 through v29.4 - Small FFT’s (AVX, No Offset)
101% <-- Prime95 v26.6 - Small FFT’s
89% … HeavyLoad v3.4.0.234 - Stress CPU
87% … FurMark v1.19.1.0 - CPU Burner
78% … CPU-Z v1.82.0 - Bench - Stress CPU
66% … AIDA64 v5.95.4500 - System Stability Test - Stress CPU
55% … Intel Processor Diagnostic Tool v4.0 - CPU Load

TDP … Stability Test - Fluctuating Workload (Peak)

123% … OCCT v4.5.1 - CPU: OCCT (AVX, No Offset)
118% … LinX v0.6.5 - Default
116% … IntelBurn Test v2.54 - High
113% … OCCT v4.5.1 - CPU: Linpack (AVX, No Offset)
110% … AIDA64 v5.95.4500 - System Stability Test - Stress FPU
99% <-- Asus RealBench v2.56 - Stress Test (AVX, No Offset)
94% … Sandra 2017.09.24.41 - Burn in - Processor Tests
92% … CineBench v15.0 - CPU - Render Test
79% … Intel Extreme Tuning Utility v6.4.1.15 - CPU Stress Test

Source - http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-3608171/realbench-strong.html

I know this kind of testing will still have people saying "well you aren't Prime AVX stable" or something similar, but I am not going to torture my CPU needlessly. I think the above, coupled with benches and my daily workload will be sufficient to determine whether there is long term stability or not.

I welcome your feedback.

I usually avoid Tomshardware these days but I think the answer given in the link above is a good read, as is the source article (http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1800828/intel-temperature-guide.html) of CT's info.

 

[tyler_jrb]

I've found an answer of sorts regarding the question of which stress test to use to find long term system stability when overclocking.

I'm going to be using Realbench no AVX offset and Prime small ffts AVX off to test stability and thermal headroom. I'll also be using the various benchmarks to ensure scores are where they should be relative to frequency and as an additional step in finding stability.

I'm using this as my guide.


Here’s a sample of utilities grouped for thermaltesting and stability testing, shown according to % of TDP at Default BIOS settings:

TDP … Thermal Test - Steady Workload

129% … Prime95 v27.7 through v29.4 - Small FFT’s (AVX, No Offset)
101% <-- Prime95 v26.6 - Small FFT’s
89% … HeavyLoad v3.4.0.234 - Stress CPU
87% … FurMark v1.19.1.0 - CPU Burner
78% … CPU-Z v1.82.0 - Bench - Stress CPU
66% … AIDA64 v5.95.4500 - System Stability Test - Stress CPU
55% … Intel Processor Diagnostic Tool v4.0 - CPU Load

TDP … Stability Test - Fluctuating Workload (Peak)

123% … OCCT v4.5.1 - CPU: OCCT (AVX, No Offset)
118% … LinX v0.6.5 - Default
116% … IntelBurn Test v2.54 - High
113% … OCCT v4.5.1 - CPU: Linpack (AVX, No Offset)
110% … AIDA64 v5.95.4500 - System Stability Test - Stress FPU
99% <-- Asus RealBench v2.56 - Stress Test (AVX, No Offset)
94% … Sandra 2017.09.24.41 - Burn in - Processor Tests
92% … CineBench v15.0 - CPU - Render Test
79% … Intel Extreme Tuning Utility v6.4.1.15 - CPU Stress Test

Source - http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-3608171/realbench-strong.html

I know this kind of testing will still have people saying "well you aren't Prime AVX stable" or something similar, but I am not going to torture my CPU needlessly. I think the above, coupled with benches and my daily workload will be sufficient to determine whether there is long term stability or not.

I welcome your feedback.

I usually avoid Tomshardware these days but I think the answer given in the link above is a good read, as is the source article (http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1800828/intel-temperature-guide.html) of CT's info.

I’ll be doing the same. I can’t see the point in overstressing it with something it will never experience.

I always use occt for all my testing. Has never let me down and all the systems I’ve built while testing it have never been unstable or other such issues.

I also got my 9900k fitted a few days ago, been at work and had next to no time to test but it seems a normal chip. 5ghz stable at 1.28v so far, haven’t tried to push further yet.

But on something like prime and occt it runs at around 65-70c with custom loop so still a little room to tune in hopefully to 5.1ghz. If not I’ll just tune it to 5ghz which I’m happy enough with.

 

[Distracted]

Spoiler: Statistics 17/11/18

Some stats taken from silicon lottery. Keep in mind their sample size is small and may not represent your own chances when buying a 9900k.

I think this is useful info for those overclocking. No info yet on why those particular voltages were chosen or any temperature data.


As of 11/17/18, 100% of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 4.8GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 48
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.275V
• AVX Offset: 2

As of 11/17/18, the top 82% of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 4.9GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 49
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.287V
• AVX Offset: 2

As of 11/17/18, the top 46% of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 5.0GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 50
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.300V
• AVX Offset: 2

As of 11/17/18, the top 14% of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 5.1GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 51
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.312V
• AVX Offset: 2

Spoiler: Statistics 7/12/18

Some updated figures regarding the silicon lottery.

Keep in mind their sample size and that it may not represent your own chances when buying a 9900k.

I think this is useful info for those overclocking. No info yet on why those particular voltages were chosen or any temperature data.

As of 12/07/18, 100% (no change) of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 4.8GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 48
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.275V
• AVX Offset: 2

As of 12/07/18, the top 85% (+3%) of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 4.9GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 49
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.287V
• AVX Offset: 2

As of 12/07/18, the top 41% (-5%) of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 5.0GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 50
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.300V
• AVX Offset: 2

As of 12/07/18, the top 11% (-3%) of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 5.1GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 51
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.312V
• AVX Offset: 2

Some updated figures regarding the silicon lottery.

Keep in mind their sample size and that it may not represent your own chances when buying a 9900k.

I think this is useful info for those overclocking. No info yet on why those particular voltages were chosen or any temperature data.

Bins are created for stability in nearly every workload and tested using a 240AIO. These percentages can be considered accurate, conservative or optimistic depending on your own expected use and cooling.

As of 2/6/19, 100% (no change) of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 4.8GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 48
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.275V
• AVX Offset: 2

As of 2/6/19, the top 86% (+1%) of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 4.9GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 49
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.287V
• AVX Offset: 2

As of 2/6/19, the top 39% (-2%) of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 5.0GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 50
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.300V
• AVX Offset: 2

As of 2/6/19, the top 8% (-3%) of tested 9900Ks were able to hit 5.1GHz or greater.

• CPU Multiplier: 51
• BCLK: 100.0
• CPU Vcore: 1.312V
• AVX Offset: 2

As their sample size increases both 5.0GHz and 5.1GHz samples again show a drop making them even rarer while 4.9GHz has become slightly more common.

A bin for 5.2GHz or higher is still noteably absent for the 9900k unlike the 9700k which had the 5.2GHz(10%) bin added at the end of last year/beginning of 2019.
This shows that silicon lottery is willing to update their bins when a new frequency becomes available in sufficient quantities, and that even with an AVX offset, 5.2GHz+ samples are in such short supply that there aren't enough that meet their criteria to be considered for sale as yet.
This mirrors the listings from both Caseking and OCUK that sell frequencies up to 5.1GHz with AVX offset but nothing higher.