That is probably the best overclocking guide specific to a motherboard that I have seen.
5.0 ghz is very respectable for 8 cores, albight high temps.
It looks like higher overclocks will need custom water for most cpus unless avx offset is dropped.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have a few questions if you all don't mind since I need to do an upgrade... just how far I don't know. My current motherboard has been having fits for months (half my HD's won't load when I boot, so I have to reboot several times, and 4 USB ports have permanently failed). I really hate Asus as I didn't even OC this board. And me previous Asus board was also troublesome after just a year.
1. Are the spectre and meltdown fixes not baked in?
2. Someone mentioned they had a 4000k series processor and that it was unaffected by those issues. Is that true? I have a 4790k right now.
3. Do you think the 9700k will have decently upgraded performance vs. the 4790k? My current bottleneck is cpu-based gaming performance.
4. Power draw and heat are a concern. I'm not seeing any good data yet, but would the power draw and heat output of a 4790k, 8700k, and 9700k all be similar in turbo mode?
5. Can you get a good overclocking motherboard for less than $300?
And thanks
1. Since 9th gen is just CFL-Refresh and CFL didn't have them, no.
2. Spectre/Meltdown do affect the 4000 series CPUs.
3. Upgraded performance, yes due to higher clock speeds and a little IPC improvement. If your apps use 4 or less threads, you won't notice much. If the apps heavily load more than 4 threads, you will see some better scaling.
4. Power draw and heat... All the CPUs are rated for almost the same TDP. I'm guessing they all won't be far off enough to offset the cost of buying a totally new platform.
5. Sure you can. Most of the midrange boards already overclock very well (it's up to you if you want that last 100mhz offered by the top end boards). It's just that the CPUs themselves are all nearing the limit anyway. 5.1-5.2ghz for a CPU that single core turbos to 5k isn't really that much of a feat anymore.
4. Power draw and heat... All the CPUs are rated for almost the same TDP. I'm guessing they all won't be far off enough to offset the cost of buying a totally new platform.
Thanks for all the answers. The games that Inplay that are having cpu bottlenecks are primary single dual core threaded, with just a smattering of extra cores for some. Disappointing to see the answers are what I feared.
At stock that's true, but overclocked definitely not true. The power and temp shown in the Gigabyte guide is absolutely insane. Under water at ~1.29V they are hitting 245W with peak temps in the upper 90s! For reference, an 8700K @ 5ghz and 1.3V generally does not exceed 200W in prime95 small ffts. The heat output of the 9900K is at least 25% higher than 8700K, and should be about 33% higher purely based on core count.
Why is this surprising? DId people think 2 extra cores running at the same 5GHz were going to not require any more power or produce anymore heat?At stock that's true, but overclocked definitely not true. The power and temp shown in the Gigabyte guide is absolutely insane. Under water at ~1.29V they are hitting 245W with peak temps in the upper 90s! For reference, an 8700K @ 5ghz and 1.3V generally does not exceed 200W in prime95 small ffts. The heat output of the 9900K is at least 25% higher than 8700K, and should be about 33% higher purely based on core count.
But magic solder!!Why is this surprising? DId people think 2 extra cores running at the same 5GHz were going to not require any more power or produce anymore heat?
Why is this surprising? DId people think 2 extra cores running at the same 5GHz were going to not require any more power or produce anymore heat?
Why is this surprising? DId people think 2 extra cores running at the same 5GHz were going to not require any more power or produce anymore heat?
It's not surprising to me but it seems to be to some. Some people think TDP and overclocked heat generation have anything to do with eachother when they don't, and some think Intel can do magic power optimizations or that solder somehow decreases heat output. Like I said, the baseline expectation of an 8 core on the same process and architecture would be 33% increased heat generation at a minimum... it seems like it might be a bit less so Intel may have done magic! But it's not going to defeat the laws of physics.
i think what people are hoping is that the new cpu will be better binned than the 8700k/8086k counter part.
if they can get +1 binn, they be able to run same frequency on 9900k as it is now on their 6 cores while getting 2 more cores only for like 10% more power rather than the 33% more power
It's not surprising to me but it seems to be to some. Some people think TDP and overclocked heat generation have anything to do with eachother when they don't, and some think Intel can do magic power optimizations or that solder somehow decreases heat output. Like I said, the baseline expectation of an 8 core on the same process and architecture would be 33% increased heat generation at a minimum... it seems like it might be a bit less so Intel may have done magic! But it's not going to defeat the laws of physics.
1. Since 9th gen is just CFL-Refresh and CFL didn't have them, no.
2. Spectre/Meltdown do affect the 4000 series CPUs.
3. Upgraded performance, yes due to higher clock speeds and a little IPC improvement. If your apps use 4 or less threads, you won't notice much. If the apps heavily load more than 4 threads, you will see some better scaling.
4. Power draw and heat... All the CPUs are rated for almost the same TDP. I'm guessing they all won't be far off enough to offset the cost of buying a totally new platform.
5. Sure you can. Most of the midrange boards already overclock very well (it's up to you if you want that last 100mhz offered by the top end boards). It's just that the CPUs themselves are all nearing the limit anyway. 5.1-5.2ghz for a CPU that single core turbos to 5k isn't really that much of a feat anymore.
9 AM easternWhat time does the Embargo lift?
9 AM eastern
Silly question maybe, but would the increased die size due to the extra cores not facilitate the cooling as there is more surface area to dissipate the heat, not that the cores are that big iirc the biggest thing on those dies is the iGPU.
T minus 2hrsT minus 15 hours
So is anyone shipping these yet?
Derbauer's video is very good.
"Did we play ourselves because we asked for [solder] and now the die is thicker? I'm really not sure."
Turns out the 9900K is a lot thicker than the 8700K and that might be because it needs to be sturdier to support the size and soldering process, or maybe not, who knows? Regardless, solder turns out not to be the magic make-everything-better solution, and that the CPU might have been much better for overclocks if it used paste and you could simply delid and apply LM without having to worry about *lapping* lmao.
View attachment 113278
For the 9900k reviews - 5.14, 5.1, 5.1, and 5.0 ghz were the overclocks I saw.
The 9700k does alot better from what I saw. 5.3 ghz from the one review I saw.
so what's the verdict on these new chips?...is the 9700K the best price/performance chip?...for 1440p gaming with no content creation/little multitasking?
Dunno- theoretically it should be, and if it is just a 9900K with HT disabled, then it would be. It should be faster than an 8700k nearly all the time, perhaps in anything that matters, and it'd be a hard case for it to be appreciably slower in gaming than the 9900K.
the 8700K has more threads while the 9700K has more cores...seems like a tradeoff