[SOLVED] max safe voltage/temps for I9-9900k?
- Thread starter Jonatron5
- Start date
Solution
Darkbreeze
Retired Mod
- Jun 24, 2014
- 80,411
- 7,631
- 176,790
Everything you need (Or want, or didn't want but ought to anyhow) to know.
forums.tomshardware.com
How To - Intel CPU Temperature Guide
Update: March 12th, 2024 Preface The topic of processor temperatures can be very confusing. Conflicting opinions based on misconceptions concerning terminology, specifications and testing leaves users uncertain of how to properly check cooling performance. This Guide provides an understanding...
forums.tomshardware.com
logikabg2004
Commendable
- Aug 12, 2018
- 70
- 3
- 1,545
The easiest overclock for 9th gen is:
Enable expert mode so you can manually overclock.
Raise the multiplier to 50 on all cores if you have good cooling.
Set the frequency to fixed.
Enable auto voltage with adaptive and offset mode.
Dont touch anything else.
If you ram has xmp , enable that too.
Run cinebench r20 ,intel xtu and if it doesnt crash you are set.
Voltage will be safe and the temps should be around 70-80 in benchmarks and 50-65 in games.
Darkbreeze
Retired Mod
- Jun 24, 2014
- 80,411
- 7,631
- 176,790
This is so far from reality I don't even know where to begin.
Rodrigodrt
Distinguished
- Nov 21, 2014
- 685
- 58
- 19,440
I dont know much about the 9 gen, but since what? 5th gen? the vcores were upped by a .1, so while on a 4gen 1.35v is the max safe, on 9 gen you could get to 1.45v safe as well, provided proper cooling, i cant tell how safe 1.5v is in that case, but you shouldnt need that much to hit your goal.
try 1.45v and see if its stable, then start lowering, check the temps out, dont let em' play at 90's for too long, tops a benchmark test, then stop.
try 1.45v and see if its stable, then start lowering, check the temps out, dont let em' play at 90's for too long, tops a benchmark test, then stop.
- Nov 13, 2006
- 6,374
- 279
- 38,240
Jonatron5,
As with the majority of Intel processors, although "Throttle" temperature or "Tj Max" for the 9900K is 100°C, it does not mean that it's OK to run it anywhere near that hot. The consensus among Intel's Engineers, well informed and highly experienced reviewers, system builders and expert overclockers, is that it's prudent to observe a reasonable thermal margin below Throttle temperature for ultimate stability, performance and longevity.
Core temperatures increase and decrease with ambient temperature, for which the International Standard for "normal" room temperature is 22°C or 72°F.
Contrary to logikabg2004's "easiest overclock" suggestion, it's not recommended to use “Auto” BIOS settings, motherboard features or software utilities, as significantly more Vcore than necessary is applied to maintain stability, which needlessly increases Power and heat. My esteemed and highly experienced colleague, Darkbreeze, knows this all too well, and explains it in great detail in his excellent "CPU overclocking guide and tutorial" which is recommended reading.
Moreover, Rodrigodrt's suggestions have some flaws. 1.35 Vcore for 22nm processors as well as 1.45 Vcore for 14nm processors are both above the "safe" level on the degradation curves. Additionally, 1.45 Vcore on an 8 Core 16 Thread Intel CPU, even if it's delidded, would be nearly impossible to cool at 100% workload by big Air, 280 / 360 AIO or anything less than a seriously capable custom loop.
Further, to approach overclocking, stability and thermal testing from the "top down" is the "completion backwards" principle. We all instead know that the correct approach is from the "bottom up", which is to slowly and incrementally increase frequency and voltage, without attempting to haphazardly circumvent the process and potentially risk damaging your hard-earned hardware for the sake of immediate gratification.
Each Microarchitecture has a “Maximum Recommended Vcore”. For example, it’s important to point out that 22 nanometer 3rd and 4th Generation processors will not tolerate the higher Core voltages of other Microarchitectures.
We know that over time, excessive voltage and heat damages electronics, so when using manual Vcore settings in BIOS, excessive Core voltage and Core temperature can cause accelerated "Electromigration". Processors have multiple layers of hundreds of millions of microscopic nanometer scale components. Electromigration erodes fragile circuit pathways and transistor junctions which results in the degradation of overclock stability, and thus performance.
Although your initial overclock may be stable, degradation doesn't appear until later, when increasingly frequent blue-screen crashes indicate a progressive loss of stability. The more excessive the levels of voltage and heat and the longer they're sustained determines how long until transistor degradation destabilizes your overclock. Decreasing overclock and Vcore may temporarily restore stability and slow the rate of degradation. Extreme overvolting can cause degradation in minutes, but a sensible overclock remains stable for years.
Each Microarchitecture also has a "Degradation Curve". As a rule, CPUs are more susceptible to electromigration and degradation with each Die-shrink. However, the exception to the rule is Intel's 14 nanometer Microarchitecture, where advances in FinFET transistor technology have improved voltage tolerance.
Here's how the Degradation Curves correspond to Maximum Recommended Vcore for 22 nanometer 3rd and 4th Generation, which differs from 14 nanometer 5th through 10th Generation:
Degradation Curves are relative to the term “Vt (Voltage threshold) Shift” which is expressed in millivolts (mv). Users can not monitor Vt Shift. With respect to overclocking and overvolting, Vt Shift basically represents the potential for permanent loss of normal transistor performance. Excessively high Core voltage drives excessively high Power consumption and Core temperatures, all of which contribute to gradual Vt Shift over time. Core voltages that impose high Vt Shift values are not recommended.
To achieve the highest overclock, keep in mind that for your final 100 MHz increase, a corresponding increase in Core voltage of about 50 millivolts (0.050) is needed to maintain stability. If 65 millivolts (0.065) or more is needed for the next stable 100 MHz increase, it means you're attempting to overclock your processor beyond its capability.
With high-end cooling you might reach your Maximum Recommended Vcore limit before you reach the ideal Core temperature limit at 80°C. With low-end cooling you’ll reach 80°C before your Vcore limit. Regardless, whichever overclocking limit you reach first is where you should stop. Thermal testing is explained in Sections 10 through 12.
Remember to keep overclocking in perspective. For example, the difference between 4.5 and 4.6 GHz is less than 2.3%, which has no noticeable impact on overall system performance. It simply isn’t worth pushing your processor beyond recommended Core voltage and Core temperature limits just to squeeze out another 100 MHz.
CT
As with the majority of Intel processors, although "Throttle" temperature or "Tj Max" for the 9900K is 100°C, it does not mean that it's OK to run it anywhere near that hot. The consensus among Intel's Engineers, well informed and highly experienced reviewers, system builders and expert overclockers, is that it's prudent to observe a reasonable thermal margin below Throttle temperature for ultimate stability, performance and longevity.
Here's the nominal operating range for Core temperature:
Core temperatures above 85°C are not recommended.
Core temperatures below 80°C are ideal.
Core temperatures above 85°C are not recommended.
Core temperatures below 80°C are ideal.
Core temperatures increase and decrease with ambient temperature, for which the International Standard for "normal" room temperature is 22°C or 72°F.
• Overclocking is always limited by two factors; voltage and temperature.
Contrary to logikabg2004's "easiest overclock" suggestion, it's not recommended to use “Auto” BIOS settings, motherboard features or software utilities, as significantly more Vcore than necessary is applied to maintain stability, which needlessly increases Power and heat. My esteemed and highly experienced colleague, Darkbreeze, knows this all too well, and explains it in great detail in his excellent "CPU overclocking guide and tutorial" which is recommended reading.
Moreover, Rodrigodrt's suggestions have some flaws. 1.35 Vcore for 22nm processors as well as 1.45 Vcore for 14nm processors are both above the "safe" level on the degradation curves. Additionally, 1.45 Vcore on an 8 Core 16 Thread Intel CPU, even if it's delidded, would be nearly impossible to cool at 100% workload by big Air, 280 / 360 AIO or anything less than a seriously capable custom loop.
Further, to approach overclocking, stability and thermal testing from the "top down" is the "completion backwards" principle. We all instead know that the correct approach is from the "bottom up", which is to slowly and incrementally increase frequency and voltage, without attempting to haphazardly circumvent the process and potentially risk damaging your hard-earned hardware for the sake of immediate gratification.
Each Microarchitecture has a “Maximum Recommended Vcore”. For example, it’s important to point out that 22 nanometer 3rd and 4th Generation processors will not tolerate the higher Core voltages of other Microarchitectures.
Here's the Maximum Recommended Vcore per Microarchitecture from 14 to 65 nanometers since 2006:
We know that over time, excessive voltage and heat damages electronics, so when using manual Vcore settings in BIOS, excessive Core voltage and Core temperature can cause accelerated "Electromigration". Processors have multiple layers of hundreds of millions of microscopic nanometer scale components. Electromigration erodes fragile circuit pathways and transistor junctions which results in the degradation of overclock stability, and thus performance.
Although your initial overclock may be stable, degradation doesn't appear until later, when increasingly frequent blue-screen crashes indicate a progressive loss of stability. The more excessive the levels of voltage and heat and the longer they're sustained determines how long until transistor degradation destabilizes your overclock. Decreasing overclock and Vcore may temporarily restore stability and slow the rate of degradation. Extreme overvolting can cause degradation in minutes, but a sensible overclock remains stable for years.
Each Microarchitecture also has a "Degradation Curve". As a rule, CPUs are more susceptible to electromigration and degradation with each Die-shrink. However, the exception to the rule is Intel's 14 nanometer Microarchitecture, where advances in FinFET transistor technology have improved voltage tolerance.
Here's how the Degradation Curves correspond to Maximum Recommended Vcore for 22 nanometer 3rd and 4th Generation, which differs from 14 nanometer 5th through 10th Generation:
Degradation Curves are relative to the term “Vt (Voltage threshold) Shift” which is expressed in millivolts (mv). Users can not monitor Vt Shift. With respect to overclocking and overvolting, Vt Shift basically represents the potential for permanent loss of normal transistor performance. Excessively high Core voltage drives excessively high Power consumption and Core temperatures, all of which contribute to gradual Vt Shift over time. Core voltages that impose high Vt Shift values are not recommended.
To achieve the highest overclock, keep in mind that for your final 100 MHz increase, a corresponding increase in Core voltage of about 50 millivolts (0.050) is needed to maintain stability. If 65 millivolts (0.065) or more is needed for the next stable 100 MHz increase, it means you're attempting to overclock your processor beyond its capability.
With high-end cooling you might reach your Maximum Recommended Vcore limit before you reach the ideal Core temperature limit at 80°C. With low-end cooling you’ll reach 80°C before your Vcore limit. Regardless, whichever overclocking limit you reach first is where you should stop. Thermal testing is explained in Sections 10 through 12.
Remember to keep overclocking in perspective. For example, the difference between 4.5 and 4.6 GHz is less than 2.3%, which has no noticeable impact on overall system performance. It simply isn’t worth pushing your processor beyond recommended Core voltage and Core temperature limits just to squeeze out another 100 MHz.
CT
- Dec 26, 2012
- 30,741
- 4,559
- 142,790
Cpus have a physical lifespan exceeding 20 years. That's a mechanical thing, hardware. It's entirely different from Usable Lifespan, which is set by software. Everything from OS to any program. Cpus just get too old, too slow, out-moded, non-supported or recognised.
I ran my i7-3770K at 1.32v @ 4.9GHz for the better part of 6 solid 24/7 usage. End result, I'm now at 4.6GHz at 1.19v. Stability issues and a cooler change. While that i7 is still plenty good for most programs, for gaming it's getting long in the tooth, just doesn't have the cajones that 8/9/10 gen have. Or even Ryzen. It's reaching my limit of its Usable Lifespan. It's also reaching its limit on physical Lifespan with 6 years of degradation. Which only exasperates its usable lifespan.
Temps rarely ever exceeded 55°C, basically only during the rare stress test.
But that's my cpu story. Not to say I haven't also seen cpus burned out after less than 6 months of use (read up on 1st gen Ryzen safe voltages, it's scary what ppl thought was a 'safe' vcore.)
Overclocking is a hobby, not a necessity, and should be treated as such, and as with any hobby, do so at your own risk. The small % gained by a 100MHz bump is not often worth the years it'll cost the cpu.
For many years, ppl assumed 1.4v was 3rd gen limit, and my i7 would get 5.0GHz at 1.41v, glad I wasn't a sheep and followed the crowd, my cpu would have long since burned out.
I ran my i7-3770K at 1.32v @ 4.9GHz for the better part of 6 solid 24/7 usage. End result, I'm now at 4.6GHz at 1.19v. Stability issues and a cooler change. While that i7 is still plenty good for most programs, for gaming it's getting long in the tooth, just doesn't have the cajones that 8/9/10 gen have. Or even Ryzen. It's reaching my limit of its Usable Lifespan. It's also reaching its limit on physical Lifespan with 6 years of degradation. Which only exasperates its usable lifespan.
Temps rarely ever exceeded 55°C, basically only during the rare stress test.
But that's my cpu story. Not to say I haven't also seen cpus burned out after less than 6 months of use (read up on 1st gen Ryzen safe voltages, it's scary what ppl thought was a 'safe' vcore.)
Overclocking is a hobby, not a necessity, and should be treated as such, and as with any hobby, do so at your own risk. The small % gained by a 100MHz bump is not often worth the years it'll cost the cpu.
For many years, ppl assumed 1.4v was 3rd gen limit, and my i7 would get 5.0GHz at 1.41v, glad I wasn't a sheep and followed the crowd, my cpu would have long since burned out.
Last edited:
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram