[SOLVED] i9900k @ stock vcore

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

milu316

Commendable
Nov 6, 2016
24
0
1,510
I have a i9 9900k currently running at stock but have set a manual vcore due to most of the manufacturer boards supplying to much voltage on auto mode.

So stock is 1.20. I obviously tried 1.195 took a minute or so to crash running a prime 95 test.

1.20 crashes after maybe 10-20 minutes
1.205 crashes after about 40 minutes
1.21 crashes after about 80 minutes also had a whea error during testing

So assuming 1.21 is nearly stable I add an entire 0.1 volt so its now 1.22.

Bios reads it running at 1.212 when actually set at 1.22.

Tested for a good 100 minutes no crashes and no errors. So stable.

My question is shouldn't this chip run at stock 1.20 when set in the bios?

is it worth testing stability with 1.215?

or should i just leave it on auto?

Auto mode it jumps between 1.212/1.224 in the bios.

If prime95 small ffu is a bit to brutal for stability testing, do you have any alternative suggestions for testing stability?





 
Solution
Supahos
Yeah but it's nearly 2/3 over tdp at that speed. Staying in the 95w window leaves it at 3.6 @8 cores. So that's basically a factory oc.

Point being I'm not sure undervolt NG based off bios vaules at stock is a good idea. What does it pull in prime with everything on auto to reach 4.7
Sort by date Sort by votes
Supahos

Supahos

Expert
Ambassador
Nov 11, 2013
12,756
48
57,640
That brutal is what makes it useful as a stability tool..


I suspect your vcore was going well above 1.20 under load at "stock"

What clock rate does yours hit with all 16 threads loaded up? (Some boards differ as they play with the fake tdp)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

milu316

Commendable
Nov 6, 2016
24
0
1,510
4700.

I did attempt overclocking and got it to 4.9 all core with -2 avx offset @ 1.32 vcore running the avx version of prime safely but was way to toasty and for an extra 200mhz i deemed it not worth it and to just leave it at stock.

Testing the none avx version of prime i got a temperatures median of about 65 with 1 core at one point hitting 67.

I don't really see any benefit overclocking my specific chip personally for a 2-3% boost, its not worth the thermals for it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Supahos

Supahos

Expert
Ambassador
Nov 11, 2013
12,756
48
57,640
Yeah but it's nearly 2/3 over tdp at that speed. Staying in the 95w window leaves it at 3.6 @8 cores. So that's basically a factory oc.

Point being I'm not sure undervolt NG based off bios vaules at stock is a good idea. What does it pull in prime with everything on auto to reach 4.7
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
M

milu316

Commendable
Nov 6, 2016
24
0
1,510


132.8w package, 127w IA cores

1.165 vcore in hw,monitor
1.104 vcore in cpuz

Also no matter what setting I enable/disable I cannot get it to down clock for the life of me.


 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

milu316

Commendable
Nov 6, 2016
24
0
1,510


How do you work that out from those figures?i dont understand how 1.165 correlates to 1.20?

Those figures are from setting the vcore manually to 1.22

on auto I get 1.156 - 1.157 in hwmonitor & 1.164 in cpuz
147 watts package 140watts ia cores

Also runs 10 degrees hotter.

So am I undervolting it @ 1.22?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

milu316

Commendable
Nov 6, 2016
24
0
1,510


its at 1.22 atm on stock settings. Damn thing doesn't run prime with avx though it just crashes.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

milu316

Commendable
Nov 6, 2016
24
0
1,510


What do you know setting the avx offset to 2 lets prime 95 run @ 1.22

very respectable temperatures as well.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
M

milu316

Commendable
Nov 6, 2016
24
0
1,510


is there a quicker way to pick a starting vcore voltage for an overclock instead of multiple crashes or long winded crashes (take half an hour to come about)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom