8700k, z370 or z390

[jomari29]

Was cleaning my z97 Mobo and I overspilled thermal paste, wiped with tissue paper, tissue paper got caught in pins and well bent it lol. So bye bye 4790k.

I had no plans to upgrade as the 4790k is well capable, but unfortunately I have to, getting a 8700k and I'm confused between getting z370 or z390 chipset, obviously no plan on upgrading to the 9xxx series, but with overclocking capability, I'm planning on getting the

Gigabyte AORUS Z370 Ultra Gaming LGA1151-CL

Which is a z370, would the new z390 have better overclocking or stability over this?

Also have overclocking in mind, is there a better motherboard to get than this?

Thanks

 

[Rogue Leader]

There is no benefit for performance of your CPU to getting a Z390 board. If it costs you even a dollar extra its a waste of a dollar. It won't get you any improvements.

 

[bmockeg]

As Rogue Leader stated, there is no performance improvement. They do have stronger VRMs to deal with the additional cores of the 9000 series. They are definitely more expensive. The only reason to get it would be if you planned to upgrade again soon. Seeing as you are just now getting an upgrade for the 4000 series, chances are you will need another motherboard for your next upgrade. Get the z370.

 

[steelzoid]

Was cleaning my z97 Mobo and I overspilled thermal paste, wiped with tissue paper, tissue paper got caught in pins and well bent it lol. So bye bye 4790k.

I had no plans to upgrade as the 4790k is well capable, but unfortunately I have to, getting a 8700k and I'm confused between getting z370 or z390 chipset, obviously no plan on upgrading to the 9xxx series, but with overclocking capability, I'm planning on getting the

Gigabyte AORUS Z370 Ultra Gaming LGA1151-CL

Which is a z370, would the new z390 have better overclocking or stability over this?

Also have overclocking in mind, is there a better motherboard to get than this?

Thanks

Both can overclock so it comes down to if you need the extra features from the z390 or if you're looking to eventually upgrade to 9th gen which the newest z390's may be worth getting.

 

[Rogue Leader]

As Rogue Leader stated, there is no performance improvement. They do have stronger VRMs to deal with the additional cores of the 9000 series. They are definitely more expensive. The only reason to get it would be if you planned to upgrade again soon. Seeing as you are just now getting an upgrade for the 4000 series, chances are you will need another motherboard for your next upgrade. Get the z370.

There has been no indication even on something as hardcore as the ASUS Maximus that the VRMs have increased in size or power delivery capabilities. If that were true then it would be a boon for overclocking but its not. VRMs are the same. The only real differences are some additional USB support and integrated WiFi AC in the chipset.

 

[bmockeg]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-z390-motherboard-preview,5838.html

The gigabyte board is referenced as having additional power phases and the other boards are noted to have additional cooling for their VRMs. This may not be a huge imprivement and I should have stated improved instead of stronger I suppose. They should definitely have some advantage in overclocking.

 

[Rogue Leader]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-z390-motherboard-preview,5838.html

The gigabyte board is referenced as having additional power phases and the other boards are noted to have additional cooling for their VRMs. This may not be a huge imprivement and I should have stated improved instead of stronger I suppose. They should definitely have some advantage in overclocking.

Hah interesting, of course I only looked at ASUS which hasn't seemed to change anything. But yeah looks like other than in the MSI's case the extra power phases didn't do much performance wise. No big surprise MSI has quality issues.

Thanks for the reply.

 

[volkgren]

Something high-end like the Asus Maximus already had beefy VRMs. But the cheaper Z370 boards did get VRM improvements with their Z390 counterparts. The high-end Z370s didn't have any need for better VRMs.

 

[jomari29]

8700k and 9700k is priced exactly the same here in Australia, so I'll go with the 9700k instead, pairing it with the z390.

 

[bmockeg]

I would wait for the benchmarks myself.

 

[asinto]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-z390-motherboard-preview,5838.html

The gigabyte board is referenced as having additional power phases and the other boards are noted to have additional cooling for their VRMs. This may not be a huge imprivement and I should have stated improved instead of stronger I suppose. They should definitely have some advantage in overclocking.

Hah interesting, of course I only looked at ASUS which hasn't seemed to change anything. But yeah looks like other than in the MSI's case the extra power phases didn't do much performance wise. No big surprise MSI has quality issues.

Thanks for the reply.

Alright so I've been doing some research for about a month now and I'm in this position. Problem is, I already bought my 8700k and I don't regret it because I'm saving money. Ultimately to future-proof my soon-to-be new computer, I will be looking to OC my 8700k later on and/or as soon as it's built.
I have a Noctua NH-D15s and some thermal grizzly ready to go, but my questions is the 370 or 390?
Additional power phases on some of the Z390's I like for the 8700k OC but I can't find anywhere giving me a comparison of heat on the 8700k with multiple boards. It's a niche I'm looking for I know.

So I appeal to Tom. Will additional phases help me with cooling on the 8700k and/or stability of a high 4.9+ OC? Is it worth the couple extra dollars for this and to have a socket/hardware for an i9 OC down the road? or should I just save the money and strap an 8700k with a 370 and crank the OC?



P.S. - Going to get a new high air flow case with some high performance mag-lev corsair fans, carry over my GTX 970 (next thing I upgrade) my module Corsair 850 PSU, Get some 2666+ Trident Z, probably OC the RAM too (Trident Z or Corsair Dominator, not sure yet) and of course the NH-D15s.

 

[Rogue Leader]

More power phases will ALWAYS give you a better OC. If you can afford it do it. Don't plan on getting a 9900k, have you seen the reviews? Not worth the bump over the 8700K if you already own it.

 

[asinto]

More power phases will ALWAYS give you a better OC. If you can afford it do it. Don't plan on getting a 9900k, have you seen the reviews? Not worth the bump over the 8700K if you already own it.

First question: When you say better, do you mean stable at higher speeds assuming I can cool it? Or that AND running cooler on the MOBO? I'm guessing the latter.

Also, you're right. I'm not paying 120-180$+ for an 9900k 8/8 @ 5.0 when I can get 95-102% (based on benchmarks seen around, in-game and synthetic) performance from an 8700k 6/12 OC at 4.9, it's ludicrous.

The idea is 390 board for the OC and to crank my high air-flow 120/140 corsair fans in the case + the NH-D15s to get the max OC I can, when needed. It won't be quiet but I have a nice pair of corsair void wireless headphones and there's no reason to be quiet in my house. I'm trying for an enthusiast air-cool build that can run with top end water cooled systems, and I think I'm going to hit it. I'm excited to post some stuff once I get it all built, pics and all!

So the question becomes. For this build I'm going for... 370 would work, 390 would be "better" but would a 390 board with extra power phases (12-16 is what I'm shooting for), would it help with the CPU cooling? and why?
Because the ambient tempature of the case is lower? Even though I will have high power fans in the case, it will most likely help toa degree regardless how well the fans "wick" the temps off the metal and heat syncs. (Guessing)
Or will it help the cooling because of the more phases it spreads out the temps on the Mobo?
Does it directly affect (or can it directly affect) the CPU temps?
Most likely not, and I understand how phases on a MOBO work, but I'm no expert.

 

[Rogue Leader]

Power phases have nothing to do with temperatures. it has to do with providing the CPU the stable voltage it needs for an overclock. The more power phases you have (and yes you should keep them cool) the more voltage your CPU has access to. More voltage, means you can clock it higher (sometimes). Now that said there is always a chance of course that your CPU just can't take any more voltage, but with more power phases you will find that edge further up. You need to of course work under the assumption that your CPU will be able to handle it, but during the OC process of course test and tune to what its actually capable of.

There are no guarantees here, however more power phases can give you more of a chance of a higher OC.

 

[bmockeg]

The extreme 4 I linked has a solid 12 phase VRM and will overclock,just fine.

 

[asinto]

Power phases have nothing to do with temperatures. it has to do with providing the CPU the stable voltage it needs for an overclock. The more power phases you have (and yes you should keep them cool) the more voltage your CPU has access to. More voltage, means you can clock it higher (sometimes). Now that said there is always a chance of course that your CPU just can't take any more voltage, but with more power phases you will find that edge further up. You need to of course work under the assumption that your CPU will be able to handle it, but during the OC process of course test and tune to what its actually capable of.

There are no guarantees here, however more power phases can give you more of a chance of a higher OC.

Ok, that's really helpful.

So I understand how power phases are only on a potion of the time divided by the amount of them. 12 phase system = 1 phase is on 1/12 of the time and then down the line it goes to the next. Obviously when things heat up, efficiency drops. So as I understand it, more phases, less heat, better efficiency in the power phase. I'm guessing this is a factor for CPU's being not fully stable under load/stress, but i digress.
More Phases = Better or stable voltage efficiency even at hot loads = stable at higher loads/speeds due to lower temps accrued on each phase
So the latter will also be true...
Less Phases = Hotter phase components, less efficient, voltage degradation to a certain point = CPU fails and reboots due to lack of voltage to run at that load or heat level.

So to be stable (assuming the chip doesn't say nope), either you increase the voltage so it's technically over-voltage at idle but when it's at 100% load, the phases are heated up, the phases go from 110% voltage to 100% voltage due to heat degrading the efficiency of the components
or
You run more phases or more cooling (assuming the in-case temp is hot, not the actual internal components in the phase) to drop the ambient temperature around the phase components and have them run cooler to guard against the heat degradation on the phase components.
ASSUMING I'm kind of right here, I'm guessing all of these factors will weigh on whether a chip is stable or not, and this is another factor (other than getting a good chip) of why some people can stabilize at 1.26 and others have to go to 1.31 voltage.... right?...
I Know there are no guarantees and I'm not going to blame anyone if I break something, but I love these conversations.

P.S. - I understand the whole "getting a good chip" thing, it's a lottery, I know. But I think these other factors may affect CPU stability, maybe only to a fraction, but it makes sense to me. I'm no electric engineer though.

 

[asinto]

The extreme 4 I linked has a solid 12 phase VRM and will overclock,just fine.

What about the Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Extreme at 16 digital phase?
That's what I'm trying to talk myself out of... [strike]it's around 300$[/strike] It's around 450$, I may want to rethink this

[strike]Update: The MSI MEG Z390 Godlike is an 18 Phase MOBO, but for 500$? I have to draw the line somewhere[/strike]
Update: The MSI MEG Z390 Godlike is an 18 Phase MOBO, but for 500$, now I have to rethink this plan... If I'm going 450 for 16, why not 18 for 500, and now we're getting too far gone....

 

[bmockeg]

You dont need 16 phase for an 8700k

 

[asinto]

Why not?
At what point is the voltage too high for an 8700k? If heat isn't an issue and if I cool it efficiently, the chip itself is the only thing stopping me.
The voltage capacity for an 8700k to be unstable depends on the chip itself, hence "good" chip vs a "bad" chip, Intel won't post the voltage capacity limitation range, it's not worth them doing the tests.
Plus... Future Proofing.



As stated on an above update, that Aorus Xtreme is 450... the 18 phase MSI is 500... I may have to rethink this...

Anyone know if they're making a reputable 14+ phase Z390?

 

[Rogue Leader]

That is a LOT OF MONEY for a motherboard. You are not going to get your money back in performance unless you are some sort of overclocking guru with an ultra exotic cooling system.

Don't waste the money. There comes a point....

 

[bmockeg]

Why not is because its a z390 board designed for 9900k 8 core CPU that needs a better VRM. 12 is plenty for an 8700k to overclock just fine.

 

[asinto]

This has been most enlightening.

Thanks for explaining so much Rogue, and thanks for being a realist and grounding my thoughts on this one bmockeg.

I'm going to do some more research on that Extreme 4, the Aorus Master, and alike Z390s. Might start a new thread for a new question.

 

[bmockeg]

Sounds good, if I had infinite money I would get a tachi ultimate. If I was thinking about buying what's needed and will work just as well with a budget in mind, extreme 4.

 

[Rogue Leader]

This has been most enlightening.

Thanks for explaining so much Rogue, and thanks for being a realist and grounding my thoughts on this one bmockeg.

I'm going to do some more research on that Extreme 4, the Aorus Master, and alike Z390s. Might start a new thread for a new question.

Glad to help. A new thread would be good I didn't realize this was actually someone elses thread we were responding to. But yeah there are diminishing returns when overclocking. Sure the most phases is the best, but when you're dropping $450-$500 on a board, that is just not worth it.