Question i9-9900k overclocking 5.0ghz

Nknpon

Prominent
Aug 5, 2019
30
2
535
0
HI!
i just upgraded to an i9 and im desperately trying to run it @5ghz.
I keep getting bluescreen´s on Pirme95 (Small FFPs) and Im almost accepting the fact that i got a bad pick out of sillicon lottery
My Cooling isnt good enough to run it on the voltage it needs to be stable @5ghz
But im also a noob and all information i got is out of youtube videos.
Maybe you guys can help me?

My setup:
i9-9900k
Gigabyte z390 Gaming sli
750w bequiet Dark power Pro 11, 80+ Platinum
Corsair H100i, 240mm
rtx2060 super
4x 8GB G.Skill Trident Z DDR4-3200 14c
I did update BIOs to the newst version befor i put in the 9900k.
What i changed in the BIOs:
Enabled XMP Profi1
Disabled Enhanced Multi-Core Performance
CPU Clock Ratio: 50
CPU Vcore: 1.300v
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo
TJMax Temperature 110°C
Enabled Intel(R) Turbo Boost Technology and set all cores to 50
Disable Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology
Enabled Hyper Threading Technology

I instantly get bluescreens on Prime95 with these settings so i tried going up with voltage.
With 1.350v, Prime runs for a minute befor cpu hits 110°C and i get a bluescreen.
Then i tryed it with AVX Offset 1, and lower voltage (1.310) and was able to run Prime for half an hour. (i stopped because i think its stable)
But that way its only runnig @4,9ghz right?


Any suggetions how i could run it constantly and stable @5ghz?
Do i need better cooling for that? Im running everthing on 100% while testing with Prime95.
In idle the h100i keeps the cpu @28-30°C on any oc settings
Let me know if you need anymore information.

Sorry for my bad english :D
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/40612571
 
Last edited:

Nknpon

Prominent
Aug 5, 2019
30
2
535
0
I tried to go down from 1.350v until the point where i instantly got bluescreen on prime (1.330v) and it seems like it has not enough power anymore to run @5ghz.
I cant finde the spot where its stable and doesnt overheat on 5ghz.
Then i did put the clock ratio to 51 and voltage to 1.450, just for fun.
Surprisingly it startet and i prime was running for like 40sec befor it overheated.
Maybe my cpu sample isn't that bad how i thought in the first place?
Simple benchmark @5.1 was no problem too:
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/40621779
Shouldnt i be able to run it stable on 5.0ghz then?? I dont get it .
 

Zerk2012

Titan
Ambassador
HI!
i just upgraded to an i9 and im desperately trying to run it @5ghz.
I keep getting bluescreen´s on Pirme95 (Small FFPs) and Im almost accepting the fact that i got a bad pick out of sillicon lottery
My Cooling isnt good enough to run it on the voltage it needs to be stable @5ghz
But im also a noob and all information i got is out of youtube videos.
Maybe you guys can help me?

My setup:
i9-9900k
Gigabyte z390 Gaming sli
750w bequiet Dark power Pro 11, 80+ Platinum
Corsair H100i, 240mm
rtx2060 super
4x 8GB G.Skill Trident Z DDR4-3200 14c
I did update BIOs to the newst version befor i put in the 9900k.
What i changed in the BIOs:
Enabled XMP Profi1
Disabled Enhanced Multi-Core Performance
CPU Clock Ratio: 50
CPU Vcore: 1.300v
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration: Turbo
TJMax Temperature 110°C
Enabled Intel(R) Turbo Boost Technology and set all cores to 50
Disable Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology
Enabled Hyper Threading Technology

I instantly get bluescreens on Prime95 with these settings so i tried going up with voltage.
With 1.350v, Prime runs for a minute befor cpu hits 110°C and i get a bluescreen.
Then i tryed it with AVX Offset 1, and lower voltage (1.310) and was able to run Prime for half an hour. (i stopped because i think its stable)
But that way its only runnig @4,9ghz right?


Any suggetions how i could run it constantly and stable @5ghz?
Do i need better cooling for that? Im running everthing on 100% while testing with Prime95.
In idle the h100i keeps the cpu @28-30°C on any oc settings
Let me know if you need anymore information.

Sorry for my bad english :D
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/40612571
I will tell you one thing stop what your doing and reset BIOS back to stock settings, enable XMP for the memory.

Your temps are crazy hot buy better cooling if you wish to overclock.
https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics

9900K4.80GHz4.60GHz1.275V100%
9900K4.90GHz4.70GHz1.287VTop 91%
9900K5.00GHz4.80GHz1.300VTop 30%
9900K5.10GHz4.90GHz1.312VTop 5%
 

Nknpon

Prominent
Aug 5, 2019
30
2
535
0
I will tell you one thing stop what your doing and reset BIOS back to stock settings, enable XMP for the memory.

Your temps are crazy hot buy better cooling if you wish to overclock.
https://siliconlottery.com/pages/statistics

9900K4.80GHz4.60GHz1.275V100%
9900K4.90GHz4.70GHz1.287VTop 91%
9900K5.00GHz4.80GHz1.300VTop 30%
9900K5.10GHz4.90GHz1.312VTop 5%
sound like im stress testing wrong? When my Prime95 version is based on avx (i dont know how to deactivate avx on prime), its no surprise its overheating @5ghz based on the chart you linked?
 
Last edited:

Nknpon

Prominent
Aug 5, 2019
30
2
535
0
does it make sense then, to try settings like 5ghz @1300v with AVX overrite 2?
So when ever an programm uses SEE it clocks to 5ghz and when a program uses AVX is clocks to 4.8? Or did i get that wrong?
 

Zerk2012

Titan
Ambassador
does it make sense then, to try settings like 5ghz @1300v with AVX overrite 2?
So when ever an programm uses SEE it clocks to 5ghz and when a program uses AVX is clocks to 4.8? Or did i get that wrong?
Their a bunch your missing about overclocking that processor.
5.0 is in no way a magic number and overclocking all cores will give you very little performance increase, certainly not worth damaging your chip or board with crazy temps.

The 9900K will boost the speed already to 5.0 when just using 1 or 2 cores so if your game or program can only use 2 cores you gained 0 performance.
Up to 4 cores 4.8 so you gained 4% overclocked to 5.0 and this does not scale exact so the true performance gain is a bit less for gaming in theory you would go from 100 FPS to 104 FPS not much is it?
All core boost is 4.7 so overclocked to 5.0 gives you a whopping 6% gain. Do you see where this is going?

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-9900k-9th-gen-cpu,5847.html

People are saying that a couple games can use all the cores I can only think of 3 and then it's using all cores sure BUT if you actually looked at each core you would probably see 3 or 4 fully loaded and the rest a lot lower %.

Now your question on AVX and SSE.
These are different instruction sets for the chip could be one or 2 games that use AVX (none that I know of I haven't researched it) in general it's more of a work program thing.

AVX puts more stress/load on the processor so to have a stable overclock using AVX instruction sets you would need more voltage thus putting out more heat to have a stable overclock at the same speed as you would with just SSE.

Now their specific settings to use to test with Prime 95. I don't use it.
Download OCCT and run it if you use programs that use AVX instructions then click it if not then don't, start the test and check your temps (it will show them) if your going over 85C then your to hot in my opinion for a safe long use overclock.
(the version of OCCT I have will stop the test if you hit 85C)

Your hardware your money so you can take my advice or not.
 
Reactions: TravisPNW

Nknpon

Prominent
Aug 5, 2019
30
2
535
0
Thanks for the anwer

Their a bunch your missing about overclocking that processor.
5.0 is in no way a magic number and overclocking all cores will give you very little performance increase, certainly not worth damaging your chip or board with crazy temps.
I know im not a oc pro, thats why im here and ask questions.
Im overclocking because i actually want to learn more about it by doing it and i love minmaxing. I did oc my ram and my gpu and now i got this i9 i want to oc.
As far as i know and experienced with my other component there isnt very much you can do to break todays hardware. And if it breaks, i can finally uprade to next gen x)

The 9900K will boost the speed already to 5.0 when just using 1 or 2 cores so if your game or program can only use 2 cores you gained 0 performance.
Up to 4 cores 4.8 so you gained 4% overclocked to 5.0 and this does not scale exact so the true performance gain is a bit less for gaming in theory you would go from 100 FPS to 104 FPS not much is it?
All core boost is 4.7 so overclocked to 5.0 gives you a whopping 6% gain. Do you see where this is going?
I thought about the same thing this moring, when i stableiced my i9 to 4,9ghz because it couldnt handle 5ghz.
As you say, most games only use 1 core so it would be more like a decrease instead of an increase to clock it at 4.9 right?
Even stock speed would be better.
When we talke about overclocking specifically for gaming, wouldnt it be more usefull to only overclock the turboclock?
so it doesnt run like that:
5.05.04.84.84.74.74.7
instead you overclock it like that:
5.15.14.94.94.84.84.8
or even that:
5.25.05.04.94.94.84.8
That would be much more efficient for gaming right?
And it would not requier that much voltage and produce less heat than overclocking all cores?

Now their specific settings to use to test with Prime 95. I don't use it.
Download OCCT and run it if you use programs that use AVX instructions then click it if not then don't, start the test and check your temps (it will show them) if your going over 85C then your to hot in my opinion for a safe long use overclock.
(the version of OCCT I have will stop the test if you hit 85C)
I did download an old version of Prime95 (v26.6) which i read from diffrent sources doesnt use AVX.
I was able to run prime for 15 mins @5ghz and 1.325v (startet from 1.310v but only got bluescreens)
Temperature wise i barely hit 90°C but as soon as i tried the other primeversion with AVX, i came close running into heat problems(103°C max) even with AVXoffset 1. Nothing froze and no bluescreen, but over 15 min the effective coreclock average was like 3.6ghz because it was throttleing down that much.
I dont think i will be able to run it stable and efficient @5ghz.
When i tired 4.9@1305v with AVXoffset1 it was throttleing down on the AVX Prime verison, even tho it basicly was only runnig @4,8 because of the offset.

Is the throttleing like that normal with AVX? It was jumping up an down every second from 800mhz to 4.8ghz on all cores.
 
Last edited:

MonsterMaxx

Honorable
Jan 23, 2015
103
15
10,585
0
IMHO P95 is totally artificial stress. It's good maybe for 1 full bar of CPU in task manager than I shut it off. If the machine is weak it'll show up in this 2min burn. There are better tools.

Your temps are crazy high. I'm amazed that thing is running. It might just be a very good chip if you OC it right. I know mine won't run at 110C

My 9900k runs all cores at 5Ghz, uses the same H100i water cooler and has a voltage of 1.26-1.27.

Just did a P95 torture on mine and it hits 80C. So, yours, way HOT! Turn the voltage down for starts.
 

Nknpon

Prominent
Aug 5, 2019
30
2
535
0
Your temps are crazy high. I'm amazed that thing is running. It might just be a very good chip if you OC it right. I know mine won't run at 110C
It doestn really run at 110C^^ I had one Prime95 Test with AVX on where i hit 107°C after 1 minute and after that it was throttling down super hard.
Average Clockspeed is ass.
4,9ghz@1305 with AVX offset 1



Heres the test with AVX off and same CPU settings.


And i actually dont know how to OC it the right way because there a so many diffrent opinions on this.
And the guide i´watched on Youtube was for a Gigabyte Aorus/Gaming X mainboard and some setting where actaully missing for me.
These dudes did put a lot of settings in there (i wrote them down in my first post)
I tried it with less settings without success. (only CPU ratio and vCore with XMP for RAM)
 

MonsterMaxx

Honorable
Jan 23, 2015
103
15
10,585
0
Also, you need to do things in stages.

First get the RAM OC'd and running happy. XMP will give you timings, but you have to do voltage yourself. It may not reach the XMP speeds either so you may have to turn down the ram speed a click or two while you tweak things until you have the RAM running where you want it.

(Optional) once the ram is stabile at speed, you can adjust the strap. This is the highway between CPU and Memory. We'll come back to this once you get it going.

Then it's a simple matter of CPU multiplier and voltage and all the other settings that go with the CPU. It's your machine, but I wouldn't go over 85°C, yes, I have seen 90°C, but I turn off the stressor immediately. Too hot.
 
Reactions: Nknpon

Nknpon

Prominent
Aug 5, 2019
30
2
535
0
then the dude in the video explained it wrong. He said it would more "aggressivly" supply the CPU with voltage up to the manuell set vCore
 

Nknpon

Prominent
Aug 5, 2019
30
2
535
0
Im actually running my RAM on 3600@1.400v with auto timings

i only did Prime Blend test for 20 minutes and had no problems for now.
But i think ill turn it back to stock XMP.
Thats with stock XMP https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/40653736
And thats with RAM OC https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/40654388
RAM itself performes better but my overall raiting did go down.
I think i have to set timings to let it work. Overclocking ram takes way to much time.
Since i bought this setup i did run lot of stresstests and never had an issue with stock XMP settings.
But you recommend to stresstest XMP stock befor overclocking the CPU?
I had an i5-9400F befor which performed insane with the RAM https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/19835046
I realised the performance went down when i put in the i9.
 

Nknpon

Prominent
Aug 5, 2019
30
2
535
0
okay, so what he was saying in the video about the CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration wastn wrong?
He said when set to turbo it would more "aggressivly" supply the CPU with voltage up to the manuell set vCore and make it more stable.
But i guess it also generates more heat so i want to turn this back to auto too?
 

rickypicky5

Commendable
Sep 9, 2019
848
105
1,340
55
Hmmm. I'm more than a bit skeptical about altering the BIOS value for TjMax at all. I mean, to me, if the TjMax value is 100, changing it to 110 or 115 is a bit risky? Am I missing something here? Somebody set it to 100 for a reason, right? You know, like maybe going above 100 was a bad idea?
 

TravisPNW

Upstanding
Aug 26, 2020
359
131
360
0
5.0 is in no way a magic number and overclocking all cores will give you very little performance increase, certainly not worth damaging your chip or board with crazy temps.

Your hardware your money so you can take my advice or not.
Solid advice.

I'm about to drop my 10900k back down to stock because I'm just not seeing the benefits of boosting to 5.2 all core outside of flexing over benchmarks.
 

Nknpon

Prominent
Aug 5, 2019
30
2
535
0
Solid advice.

I'm about to drop my 10900k back down to stock because I'm just not seeing the benefits of boosting to 5.2 all core outside of flexing over benchmarks.
Like i said, i oced almost all of my components. I didnt do that to damage my hardware. Instead im very interested about that stuff, whats probably the reason you overcloced too, right?
And if i want to learn i guess i have to start somewhere?
I love min maxing! If i get 3% more out of my CPU GPU and RAM, that almost 10%! At least by my math 🤓
Maybe I am a little bit careless about it but if something goes wrong I got to life with it.
I like to know what my computers is capable of, but im not running these oc´s in daily use. Only oc thats runnig every time is a low gpu oc and XMP stock.
 

TravisPNW

Upstanding
Aug 26, 2020
359
131
360
0
Like i said, i oced almost all of my components. I didnt do that to damage my hardware. Instead im very interested about that stuff, whats probably the reason you overcloced too, right?
And if i want to learn i guess i have to start somewhere?
I love min maxing! If i get 3% more out of my CPU GPU and RAM, that almost 10%! At least by my math 🤓
Maybe I am a little bit careless about it but if something goes wrong I got to life with it.
I like to know what my computers is capable of, but im not running these oc´s in daily use. Only oc thats runnig every time is a low gpu oc and XMP stock.
I get what you're saying and I don't have anything against overclocking... both my GPU and CPU are running a stable overclock. I just mentioned dialing back down to stock because today's CPUs are so much better than those back in the day... and there isn't much of a need IMHO to boost all cores when the CPU rarely uses all cores.

The GPU is a different animal altogether... but at the end of the day the overclock at 4K resolution is only worth a few fps... so again, is the long term wear on the hardware worth it? To each their own. It gave me amazing benchmark scores I'm just not seeing a need for it in every day use.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY