[SOLVED] 10900k spiking to 100c

[Kenperry]

I had a corsair h100i running on my 10900k for about 5 months, yesterday when playing dying light 1 my PC shut off. I rebooted and ran the game again and about 30 mins later it happened again. So I ran CPUID and it was spiking to 100c on all cores and running in the 80-90c range during gaming.. I pulled the AIO off and put a Noctua d15 in. It now runs around 75c-85c running that game. There are still intermittent spikes to 100c, but rarely, and not on all cores. My question is, is it safe to have spikes like this? I have never had a cpu that runs this hot, so I am out of my depth seeing 100c. thank you all for your time, if anyone needs any further info please feel free to ask.

No O.C.
idles in the 35c-40c with spikes into 60c


i9 10900k
GTX 3080ti
32gig ram
gigabyte vision g
1000w platinum be quiet!
(currently) Noctua d 15

 

[Kenperry]

So I don't know if it is overclocked, it sounds like it might be. A lot of boards have an OC option that will apply the max single core boost speed to all cores, it might be something like that.

ok going to look and see if I can lower this, I'll report back in a few

 

[Kenperry]

No neither am I, it's too much heat and noise. Easiest way to get rid of it would be to just reset your bios to default values, this is assuming it does have some OC settings applied and there isn't something else wrong.

Also for measuring temps and v-core I would recommend using HWMonitor and HWInfo.

OK so the issue seems to have been a setting called intel turbo boost max 3.0. Since turning that off the max my temps have gotten to is around 48c even running the cpux benchmark. I ran prime 95 for a few minutes and same, nothing got past 48c. I feel like I may be undervolted but everything is set to auto in the BIOS. I only turned off that boost max thing. games are running at the same fps. This is really baffling that one setting could do all this. Thank you everyone for your help and your time. I'll be sure to post if I find anything weird happening with these low a$$ temps.

 

[Nighthawk117]

OK so the issue seems to have been a setting called intel turbo boost max 3.0. Since turning that off the max my temps have gotten to is around 48c even running the cpux benchmark. I ran prime 95 for a few minutes and same, nothing got past 48c. I feel like I may be undervolted but everything is set to auto in the BIOS. I only turned off that boost max thing. games are running at the same fps. This is really baffling that one setting could do all this. Thank you everyone for your help and your time. I'll be sure to post if I find anything weird happening with these low a$$ temps.

That's because it will be running at it's base frequency which is 3.7Ghz, at that frequency yes it will run extremely cool. Intel has a few turbo settings, they shouldn't have caused super high voltages and stuff like that.
What could is if the board had something called multi core enhancement, I can't remember what the Gigabyte equivalent was which took the max turbo boost setting and applied it to all the cores.

Yes you can still play games very well at 3.7Ghz with a 10 core chip but you'll be leaving a lot of performance on the table. I have a i9 10850K so similar chip to you (same chip 100mhz lower clocks) with a 240mm AIO. At stock mine runs quite hot with a 240mm at the default 4.8Ghz on all cores at 1.32v. I disabled the 3 turbo boost options and set the multiplier to 4.5Ghz. Vcore is then always 1.2+v and temps on a Cinebench R23 loop are 65C. That's a better compromise than leaving it at base clock.

You might want to consider updating your bios as well.

 

[Kenperry]

That's because it will be running at it's base frequency which is 3.7Ghz, at that frequency yes it will run extremely cool. Intel has a few turbo settings, they shouldn't have caused super high voltages and stuff like that.
What could is if the board had something called multi core enhancement, I can't remember what the Gigabyte equivalent was which took the max turbo boost setting and applied it to all the cores.

Yes you can still play games very well at 3.7Ghz with a 10 core chip but you'll be leaving a lot of performance on the table. I have a i9 10850K so similar chip to you (same chip 100mhz lower clocks) with a 240mm AIO. At stock mine runs quite hot with a 240mm at the default 4.8Ghz on all cores at 1.32v. I disabled the 3 turbo boost options and set the multiplier to 4.5Ghz. Vcore is then always 1.2+v and temps on a Cinebench R23 loop are 65C. That's a better compromise than leaving it at base clock.

You might want to consider updating your bios as well.

I still have the regular turbo boost on just not the max turbo thing. My cinebench score is 11648. Not sure if that is good or bad since I don't normally use it. I will adjust the vcore up till I am around 80c on full load and that will be the extent of my overclocking or whatever you call this journey

 

[mdd1963]

The Noctua NH-D15 is a good cooler, but, even it is insufficient for taming a 10900K even under stock conditions, and, absolutely insufficient once one has visions of MCE enabled, all core overclocks of anything above stock 4.7 GHz, etc...

You can try selecting a couple hundred less MHz for all core loadings via Intel's XTU, and/or apply a slight undervolt, until temps with moderate loads do not exceed 80-85C....(generally, 100-200 less MHz and a slightly lower core voltage can tame temps, and most do not notice an FPS decrease ffrom 150 fps to 140 fps, etc...)

 

[Nighthawk117]

I still have the regular turbo boost on just not the max turbo thing. My cinebench score is 11648. Not sure if that is good or bad since I don't normally use it. I will adjust the vcore up till I am around 80c on full load and that will be the extent of my overclocking or whatever you call this journey

11648 would suggest it's running around 4Ghz. Adjusting the vcore won't do anything, it will just make it use more power at it's current frequency. I wouldn't change the v-core, I would probably update the bios just in case your on an old version that pumps too much volts.

Personally I would either lower the turbo speeds, I'm pretty sure the Vision G lets you do this. Or disable turbo boost and just set the base frequency manually to something lower than it's standard all core boost of 4.9Ghz and leave voltages on auto.

 

[Nighthawk117]

I think I may have confused you with the OC turbo settings "A lot of boards have an OC option that will apply the max single core boost speed to all cores, it might be something like that. ". I was referring to something motherboard manufacturers implement which might have been enabled which could have caused your super high voltage. Sometimes it's called multi-core enhancement, or enhanced turbo. I didn't mean the intel technologies:

Intel® Thermal Velocity Boost Frequency
Intel® Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 Frequency ‡
Intel® Turbo Boost Technology 2.0 Frequency‡

 

[Kenperry]

I think I may have confused you with the OC turbo settings "A lot of boards have an OC option that will apply the max single core boost speed to all cores, it might be something like that. ". I was referring to something motherboard manufacturers implement which might have been enabled which could have caused your super high voltage. Sometimes it's called multi-core enhancement, or enhanced turbo. I didn't mean the intel technologies:

Intel® Thermal Velocity Boost Frequency
Intel® Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 Frequency ‡
Intel® Turbo Boost Technology 2.0 Frequency‡

I understand what you meant, Ill be adjusting the speeds up instead of using any turbo like you did. Seems safer that way.

 

[Kenperry]

The Noctua NH-D15 is a good cooler, but, even it is insufficient for taming a 10900K even under stock conditions, and, absolutely insufficient once one has visions of MCE enabled, all core overclocks of anything above stock 4.7 GHz, etc...

You can try selecting a couple hundred less MHz for all core loadings via Intel's XTU, and/or apply a slight undervolt, until temps with moderate loads do not exceed 80-85C....(generally, 100-200 less MHz and a slightly lower core voltage can tame temps, and most do not notice an FPS decrease ffrom 150 fps to 140 fps, etc...)

I have read plenty of posts with people running a 1090k well above 3700 with zero problems on a d15. While I wouldn't run one on a 5.3gz OC setup up it can more that do a good job at stock and medium OCs. Saying it can't handle it at stock is not at all true.

 

[helper800]

I have read plenty of posts with people running a 1090k well above 3700 with zero problems on a d15. While I wouldn't run one on a 5.3gz OC setup up it can more that do a good job at stock and medium OCs. Saying it can't handle it at stock is not at all true.

There does not exist a consumer CPU that the Noctua NH-D15 cannot handle at intel stock settings.

 

[Nighthawk117]

I understand what you meant, Ill be adjusting the speeds up instead of using any turbo like you did. Seems safer that way.

Ah ok, I actually don't use any turbo myself. I have all of the turbo boost options disabled and simply changed the base frequency from 3.6Ghz to 4.5Ghz. A concern I had was the vcore and temp spikes you had. Which made me think there was some sort of OC profile set which may still have things set that you don't want even though you have disabled one of the Intel Turbo options. On my Gigabyte Vision G it never applied any auto overclocking, it only removed the time limit for the turbo state but all Z490 boards do that. Do you recall if your CPU Load Line Calibration was set to auto?

Also do you know if Enhanced Multi-Core Performance was set, it should be under Tweaker?

 

[Kenperry]

Ah ok, I actually don't use any turbo myself. I have all of the turbo boost options disabled and simply changed the base frequency from 3.6Ghz to 4.5Ghz. A concern I had was the vcore and temp spikes you had. Which made me think there was some sort of OC profile set which may still have things set that you don't want even though you have disabled one of the Intel Turbo options. On my Gigabyte Vision G it never applied any auto overclocking, it only removed the time limit for the turbo state but all Z490 boards do that. Do you recall if your CPU Load Line Calibration was set to auto?

Also do you know if Enhanced Multi-Core Performance was set, it should be under Tweaker?

Ok cpu loadline is set to auto, enhanced multicore is enabled. Should I turn these off?

 

[helper800]

Ok cpu loadline is set to auto, enhanced multicore is enabled. Should I turn these off?

Turn off enhanced multicore and leave all other settings on auto.

 

[Nighthawk117]

Ok cpu loadline is set to auto, enhanced multicore is enabled. Should I turn these off?

CPU Load Line on Auto is fine. Enhanced multicore should be off, that's probably what caused your original problem. That would make sense with those voltage spikes then.

 

[Kenperry]

CPU Load Line on Auto is fine. Enhanced multicore should be off, that's probably what caused your original problem. That would make sense with those voltage spikes then.

Ok, having everything set to auto with enhanced multi core off (the option for turbo boost max or whatever it was called is no longer there, and I have no idea what happened to it) the clock still hits 5.3 under load but my temps haven't gone above 52c so far. If I have gimped it in anyway I can't tell, everything is just as snappy and runs just as smooth as before. If there is a test where I can benchmark and I know what number I should hit, I would try to match that just because, but for now everything is running great and my computer area is nice and cool now. Thank you everyone for all the help! If you still have any questions or suggestions please feel free to comment.

 

[helper800]

Ok, having everything set to auto with enhanced multi core off (the option for turbo boost max or whatever it was called is no longer there, and I have no idea what happened to it) the clock still hits 5.3 under load but my temps haven't gone above 52c so far. If I have gimped it in anyway I can't tell, everything is just as snappy and runs just as smooth as before. If there is a test where I can benchmark and I know what number I should hit, I would try to match that just because, but for now everything is running great and my computer area is nice and cool now. Thank you everyone for all the help! If you still have any questions or suggestions please feel free to comment.

You can run Cinebench R23 with your settings and compare your result to another stock CPU.

 

[Nighthawk117]

Ok, having everything set to auto with enhanced multi core off (the option for turbo boost max or whatever it was called is no longer there, and I have no idea what happened to it) the clock still hits 5.3 under load but my temps haven't gone above 52c so far. If I have gimped it in anyway I can't tell, everything is just as snappy and runs just as smooth as before. If there is a test where I can benchmark and I know what number I should hit, I would try to match that just because, but for now everything is running great and my computer area is nice and cool now. Thank you everyone for all the help! If you still have any questions or suggestions please feel free to comment.

Most manufacturers have an enhanced turbo mode that overrides the Intel specifications, rather than running at different turbo speeds depending on the number of cores active it applies the max single core boost to all cores instead. The most popular version of this is Multi Core Enhancement or MCE. It is essentially an overclock and if active would cause the sort of behaviour you experienced previously.

I thought Gigabytes version of this was Enhanced Multi-Core. I don't have my Gigabyte board built right now to check, but it does sound a bit like it from the manual:
"Enhanced Multi-Core Performance Determines whether to allow the CPU to run at Turbo 1C speed. (Default: Auto)"
5.3Ghz is the thermal velocity boost frequency which is the max single core speed, so having it disabled clearly isn't preventing it boosting high on one core.

To test what performance your getting use Cinebench R23. I would expect a 10900K running at stock to get between 15,000 and 16,000 points, it will vary slightly because the environment will impact the score relative to a clean test bench. For reference I got 15,224 on my i9 10850K at it's stock all core boost speed of 4.8Ghz. The 10900K is identical to the 10850K except it runs 100Mhz faster at 4.9Ghz.

I would use HWMonitor (latest version) to check what frequencies your boosting to on all cores and your max temps on each core.
52C sounds far too low to me, I would expect about 20C higher than that at least on a Noctua D15.