5GHz on all cores never happens, unless you're overclocking manually.
9900K boost bin fuses: 1C = 50x, 2C = 50x, 3C = 49x, 4C = 48x, 5C = 48x, 6C = 47x, 7C = 47x, 8C = 47x.
Maybe 95w means all cores run at 3.6ghz , for 210w I think up to 5ghz on all cores.
Intel started to not disclose all core turbo states with the last gen ,with turbo 3 and other enhancements that are not static due to every core having different specs there really isn't any way to properly predict what a chip will do at what power consumption.The framing of this video is a bit misleading. It's not an issue of certain motherboards "throttling" the processor. Those motherboards are actually conforming to Intel specifications, by default, rather than using enthusiast settings.
This was complicated by the fact that Intel didn't disclose all-core boost this time around, likely because they knew the processor couldn't sustain 4.7GHz within the power envelope. ACT at 4.7GHz somehow became the gospel anyway.
Unfortunately for the average person (and tech YouTuber, apparently), it's an easy mistake to make.
To editorialize a bit, Intel was likely aware of the multicore enhancement backlash and chose to sneak around the issue this time by boosting power limits instead. I could be completely off-base, so apologies in advance.
Edit: And those motherboards with "only" 4-phase VRM (actually doubled to 8-phase) seemed to handle overclocked 8700K processors just fine.
There was also the first page in the Anandtech 9900K review.This is the closest thing I've seen to a real confirmation for that, thank you.
In our information escapades, we were able to obtain the per-core turbo values for each processor. Intel still classifies this information as ‘proprietary’, so does not distribute it. However Intel’s partners are more than happy to give us the information, given that it has to be coded into the system BIOS anyway.
This is the closest thing I've seen to a real confirmation for that, thank you.
And I want to apologize to everyone caught up in my mini-tirade. It's frustrating getting real information in a sea of nonsense.
They actually wrote even without an overclock air cooling is nonsense (they consider all core 4.7GHz stock though). Another interesting takeaway by them is that a lot of the rising power consumption is due to leakage at high heat which disappears when keeping heat down using the chiller, with the inflection point being above 80°C."the 4.7GHz all-core and a constant load are sufficient to lead air cooling ad absurdum."
That's a page translation from the TH article linked above.
Extrapolating from that, if you're using air cooling for an overclock, ~4.5GHz is about all you'll get without temps going mental.
Check out the Linus Tech Tips review below:Is there any measurable difference between 12MB L3 of the 9700K and 16MB L3 of 9900K? Any reviews with disabled HT on 9900K ?
Thanks
More random tidbits (all notes without delidding).
The 9900K runs very warm under stress tests, but in gaming/encoding/benchmarks temperatures are more realistic. The 9900K shines under a custom loop with a good waterblock. We'll be binning under the conditions of 240mm AIOs, but you can expect to stretch a 9900K's legs a bit further under custom water.
The 9700K doesn't really have the same thermal issues, and is just a bit warmer compared to a delidded 8700K. The advantage to the 9700K here, is it can use much higher voltages under stress tests than the 9900K.
What were considered fairly good motherboards on Z370 (Taichi, Maximus X Hero), are not making the cut. Overclocking headroom is reduced on these boards with a 9900K, with a tad of VRM throttling (especially the Taichi here.) The Z390 boards we're going through are looking pretty promising, you can take a look at the old Coffee Lake QVL to see what Z390 boards we are attempting to validate with.
With the higher current, Vdroop can be pretty extreme so LLC settings will need to be changed on most boards to make sure the proper voltage is being held under load.
From Silicon Lottery... so yes Intel is definitely pushing it.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/18068-silicon-lottery/1705980-coffee-lake-refresh-binning-12.html
The memory overclocking seems decent.
1.300V SA, 1.200V IO.
4500MHz itself should be doable, but not at these timings (DIMM limitation, too high voltage).
Nice. It's on a 2 dimm board though, so most others will likely top out at 4k.
Was there a timing margin / frequency improvement relative to the Z370 Apex on the exact DIMM & CPU specimen at the same SA/IO/VDIMM IMC PLLs (if the comparison can be made)?There will be a significant delta, but I don't think the difference will be that drastic.
Dual rank modules can do > 4000MHz on this board, so being 1 DPC is not much of an issue.
And if 32GB is not enough, you can get dual capacity DIMMs for 64GB memory config.
Someone mentioned previously that it's a motherboard manufacturer's race to the bottom/top. Not adhering to the recommended configuration simply because that makes their motherboards seem more performant. In reality it is more strapping a rocket to your backside for your casual cycle down the shop.
Of course, Intel doesn't complain about the extra performance because it can make the dubious claim that it meets the rated TDP at spec; what motherboard manufacturers do is their own business.
I'd hazard a guess that your warranty on your 9900k isn't valid if used on a motherboard that isn't configured correctly.
Smoke and daggers. Totally unnecessary too. All they needed to do was be honest about it, since we can all see that the actual performance is there.
No need to reconsider, as far as gaming is concerned both power usage and thermals will be far more manageable. Keep in mind that power management allows you set whatever custom power limits you desire, so you can simply evaluate your cooling once the system is up and running and set appropriate power limits. However, that air Noctua better be D14 / D15 class.Should I re-consider getting the 9900K in a soon-to-be-built PC gaming rig for my son and me? (The motherboard will be the Asus Maximus Formula XI with the EVGA 2080ti FTW3 Ultra. I do want to OC the cpu on air-Noctua).
For gaming, I don't think a i9-9900k is necessary. I think an i7-9700k would be fantastic. That's just me though.
No need to reconsider, as far as gaming is concerned both power usage and thermals will be far more manageable. Keep in mind that power management allows you set whatever custom power limits you desire, so you can simply evaluate your cooling once the system is up and running and set appropriate power limits. However, that air Noctua better be D14 / D15 class.
Yeah, it's the old "I don't need it, but I want it". This may be the last PC I purchase, so I'm going a bit nuts.
This is the worst year in history to build a high end gaming rig.
Rtx crappy gpus for mega money and 4 year old cpu tech for huge premiums.
I'll wait a year or so till this madness ends
Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk