whoisme555 :
Prime95 v29.4 with cpusupportsavx=0
whoisme555,
You've obviously done some research. Just FYI, another option is to use AVX Offset adjustments (downclock) in BIOS. -3 (300 MHz) or more may be needed to limit Core temperatures to 85°C. Nevertheless, for those who don't run any AVX apps such as for rendering and transcoding, it's counter-productive to configure BIOS to accommodate AVX stress test temperatures at the expense of lower performance.
Also for FYI, “Stress” tests vary widely and can be characterized into two categories;
stability tests which are
fluctuating workloads, and
thermal tests which are
steady workloads. Intel tests their processors at a
steady 100% TDP workload to validate Thermal Specifications. As per Intel’s Datasheets, TDP and Thermal Specifications are validated “without AVX”.
Prime95 version 26.6 Small FFT's is ideal for CPU thermal testing, because it's a
steady 100% workload with
steady Core temperatures that typically runs Core i variants with Hyperthreading and Core 2 processors within +/- a few % of TDP. No other utility so closely replicates Intel's test conditions.
Utilities that don't
overload or
underload your processor will give you a valid thermal baseline. Here’s a comparison of utilities grouped as
thermal and
stability tests according to % of TDP, averaged across six processor Generations at stock settings rounded to the nearest 5%:

Higher TDP tests produce higher Core temperatures. All tests will show 100% CPU
Utilization in Windows Task Manager, which indicates processor resource activity,
not % TDP
workload. Although actual Power dissipation (Watts) varies with Core Speed, Core voltage and workload, Prime95 v26.6 Small FFT’s always provides a true and steady 100% workload, whether you’re running stock or overclocked.
whoisme555 :
I'll hopefully play with the voltage tonight, but it's definitely stable enough for gaming. Played all night with no issues. I'm sure I'll run into further problems as I get into more CPU intensive tasks, but I'm not mad about where it sits now.
I want to up the voltage, and maybe see if I could push 5.2ghz, see how hot that gets. I'll post back to let you know if I have any success.
When tweaking your processor near it's highest overclock, keep in mind that for an increase of 100 MHz, a corresponding increase of about 50 millivolts (0.050) is needed to maintain stability. If 70 millivolts (0.070) or more is needed for the next stable 100 MHz increase, it means your processor is overclocked beyond its capability.
50 millivolts will significantly increase Core temperatures, especially on the 9900K. Considering that you're already at 84°C with 1.2 Vcore in normal ambient temperature, it's highly unlikely that you'll achieve 5.2GHz, as that would require at least 1.3 Vcore and a custom loop.
Although 9th Generation is soldered, the Die and solder are both considerably thicker than earlier Generations, which adversely affects thermal conductivity. Here’s an excellent and detailed explanation by Mechatronics Engineer, Roman “der8auer” Hartung -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5Doo-zgyQs
It would of course be fun to explore the overclocking limits of your particular 9900K sample for benchmarking purposes. But in my opinion, for everyday use I would stop where you are at 5.0GHz and declare victory, as there's little room for higher seasonal temperatures, which affects indoor ambient temperature.
CT
