# How to push past 5Ghz on 8700K?



## silkstone (Nov 6, 2019)

Hi All,

Question for anyone who has got past the 5 ghz barrier on coffee lake chips.

I'm currently at 5 Ghz @ 1.415v and LLC of extreme. My temps seem pretty reasonable at ~72 C average and some spikes into the low 90's.
What settings do I need to look at next to getting past this level? My voltage seems a little high, and I'm hoping to run 24/7 so while I know I can likely get more speed out of more volts, is there anything else I can do for higher overclocks 24/7?


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 6, 2019)

I'd call you maxed out. 1.41V 24/7 is a lot and if you are reaching into the low 90s, that's it on temps too...

What did you use to stress test and reach those temps? Avg means little, note.

Edit: you seem to have a  negative offset?? Your settings confuse me. You have 1.3V set, an offset of -.11 LLC on extreme and reach. 1.41V on load?

System agent and vccio are likely a bit high for 16gb running at 3600mhz... I don't imagine either needing over 1v...


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Nov 6, 2019)

Delidding might help. I say 'might' - yes, no, maybe. Who knows


----------



## bonehead123 (Nov 6, 2019)

Just bump everything upwards by 50%, then pray you don't fry it hahahahahah 

j/k


----------



## silkstone (Nov 6, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> I'd call you maxed out. 1.41V 24/7 is a lot and if you are reaching into the low 90s, that's it on temps too...
> 
> What did you use to stress test and reach those temps? Avg means little, note.
> 
> ...



My settings confuse me as well, which is why I'm reaching out. Yeah. I had to set voltages manually to get 1.41, otherwise, it would automatically pump the voltage up to 1.5v!
Same story with the System Agent and VCCIO, I dropped them from 1.25 V. I'll try lowering them some more and test whether it's still stable.

The CPU is delidded and I'm stressing with AIDA, which is a pretty extreme test so temps never get that high in real world use. But, my aim is to get stability under this test.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 6, 2019)

I don't usually run a dynamic/offset in any way. I manually set things from the BIOS, not windows.

I would use 1.4V set manually and see what LLC is really needed to keep the load voltage the same as what you set in the BIOS. That is typically how it (LLC) should be used. Your negative offset and then LLC bumping it back up seems incredibly counterproductive.

But  yeah, System agent and VCCIO look high for the settings. You may be able to shave a degree or two off, but, you are tapped out temp wise currently. If you cannot beng Vcore and temps down, then you are where you are with this CPU.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 6, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> I don't usually run a dynamic/offset in any way. I manually set things from the BIOS, not windows.
> 
> I would use 1.4V set manually and see what LLC is really needed to keep the load voltage the same as what you set in the BIOS. That is typically how it (LLC) should be used. Your negative offset and then LLC bumping it back up seems incredibly counterproductive.
> 
> But  yeah, System agent and VCCIO look high for the settings. You may be able to shave a degree or two off, but, you are tapped out temp wise currently. If you cannot beng Vcore and temps down, then you are where you are with this CPU.



I just use the windows tool for testing values then set everything in the Bios.

I guess I don't get how LLC works, it doesn't seem to matter whether I put it as normal/high/extreme, it doesn't effect the load voltage.

Wouldn't manually setting the voltage keep it continually running at 1.4V? I'd like it to go down, when the cores are idle.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 6, 2019)

LLC prevents vdroop (the difference between idle and load voltage). Ideally, you should use the setting that has the voltage stay the same under load. To test, disable it(set to lowest if disabling isn't possible), and check load voltage... set to extreme, then run again... you should see a difference, then know which will be which. I don't know if using adaptive/offset works with LLC... again, I leave my voltage set manually so it is static (done so for decades, note).

Yes, you would be at 1.4V.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 6, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> LLC prevents vdroop (the difference between idle and load voltage). Ideally, you should use the setting that has the voltage stay the same under load. To test, disable it(set to lowest if disabling isn't possible), and check load voltage... set to extreme, then run again... you should see a difference, then know which will be which. I don't know if using adaptive/offset works with LLC... again, I leave my voltage set manually so it is static (done so for decades, note).
> 
> Yes, you would be at 1.4V.


I set it manually to 1.415 and disabled LLC, the computer instantly bluescreened 

Setting to 1.415 and LLC highest causes VCore to jump to 1.428 on load from 1.415 on idle, but it's stable


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 6, 2019)

Now try extreme... see if it works.....obviously 1.41V and no LLC has some droop and isn't stable.

You may need to lower your core clocks so it at least boots and runs a quick stress test to see the voltage change from off to extreme.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 6, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> Now try extreme... see if it works.....obviously 1.41V and no LLC has some droop and isn't stable.
> 
> You may need to lower your core clocks so it at least boots and runs a quick stress test to see the voltage.



Yeah, it works on turbo/extreme, though I have to set it to 1.405 and it jumps to 1.415 on load.

Excuse my ignorance, this is the first real attempt at tweaking an overclock since my 2500K. Why would this be better than setting dynamic offset whereby the voltage will lower itself when idle?


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 6, 2019)

It isn't better, per say... just the way I do it. Most prefer to have the voltage drop, but, Im from the old school and, frankly, don't care about playing games with offset and dynamic voltages... 

I simply cannot make heads or tails of how you come to 1.4xV. Looking at your screenshot, you have 1.3V set, a NEGATIVE offset for voltage, and you are managing to reach 1.428V... that doesn't make sense to me at all...

EDIT: Changing variables (vcore) isn't going to help determine what LLC setting yields the least/no droop. You don't want to overshoot it either. Leave it at a voltage and lower the core to isolate.

EDIT2: Honestly, I think you are at the limits as I said out of the gate. Temperatures are at the limit and the voltage is too...


----------



## silkstone (Nov 6, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> It isn't better, per say... just the way I do it. Most prefer to have the voltage drop, but, Im from the old school and, frankly, don't care about playing games with offset and dynamic voltages...
> 
> I simply cannot make heads or tails of how you come to 1.4xV. Looking at your screenshot, you have 1.3V set, a NEGATIVE offset for voltage, and you are managing to reach 1.428V... that doesn't make sense to me at all...
> 
> ...



Oh, I see what you mean. Dropping the offset to high (instead of Turbo) and Offset to -1.0 makes the voltage on load jump between 1.404 and 1.415.
Let me try with static . . .
Okay . . High LLC cause the voltage to drop by 0.25 V, Turbo LLC raises the voltage by 0.1 V

I'm testing stability now at -1 V offset, High LLC. This puts the core at an average of 1.406V (though I see jumps to 1.416 and drops to 1.39)

Edit - I think you're right about the limits. Though I am making progress on Temps, If It's stable.
I've down to 1.404 V LLC Turbo Max temp is 88 (Though it's only been 4 mins into the stability test)

Edit 2 - Should I play with disabling AVX and then setting an AVX offset in Bios? The stability test I am using has AVXC enabled at the moment.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 6, 2019)

0.25V was that correct? That is a HUGE (unbelievably huge) drop...

Due to using an offset, I am not sure we have any idea what is really the stock voltage (hence why I run manually). I'm not going to be much help with playing the offset/dynamic voltage game as it isn't a game I play. Sorry.

BUt either way you slice it, you are maxed out on temps and voltage.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 6, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> 0.25V was that correct? That is a HUGE (unbelievably huge) drop...
> 
> Due to using an offset, I am not sure we have any idea what is really the stock voltage (hence why I run manually). I'm not going to be much help with playing the offset/dynamic voltage game as it isn't a game I play. Sorry.
> 
> BUt either way you slice it, you are maxed out on temps and voltage.



My bad, I forgot a zero. 0.025 V. That is a drop with Static voltage enabled. With offset, the voltage variation is minor when loaded. It obviouslly drops when idle though.

I might have some luck disabling AVX in my benchmark. I got about 5 mins of stability at 5.1 Ghz with AVX disabled at 1.405 V


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 6, 2019)

I wouldn't do that, personally... more and more things are using AVX instructions and if you aren't stable, it will show when using such. The way to work around that is to use an AVX offset for the core speed. Typically this is 200-300 MHz.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 6, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> I wouldn't do that, personally... more and more things are using AVX instructions and if you aren't stable, it will show when using such. The way to work around that is to use an AVX offset for the core speed. Typically this is 200-300 MHz.



Yeah, though if I can get 5.2 stable without AVX, can I just set the offset in bios to 200 MHz and then have it stable with and without AVX?


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 6, 2019)

I have an Core i7 8700K@5 GHz with 1.36V. It is delidded and watercooled, so temps reaching at highest 60 degrees in prime 95. I would recommend to set your voltage manually, not dynamic and test how much voltage you need to reach your goals. Loadline Calibration use a mode with a flat line, so that voltage in idle is same as voltage under load. AVX Offset of -2 or -3, means -200 or -300 MHz should be fine, i have an negative offset of -2 for AVX instructions. So if you set your offset in BIOS to -200 or -300 MHz you can run your CPU stable at 5.2 GHz in non AVX instructions and 5 GHz or 4.9 GHz with AVX instructions.

Edit:
For testing you can use Prime 95 Version 26.6 for non AVX usage cause this version doesn't has AVX tests. So you can see if your CPU is stable at 5.2 GHz
Then use the latest Prime 95 Version with AVX for testing and you can see if your offset is fine or if you need another offset.

In Prime I use the following settings:
Custom Torture Test
Min FFT Size 1344, max FFT Size 1344
Run FFT in place

Run each test for 30 min, that should be enough

Edit 2:
There are also a few options you might look at. Don't know how it is named by Gigabyte but MSI names it:

- Long Duration Power Limit
- Short Duration Power Limit
- CPU Current Limit

Their usage is to set how much current the cpu can draw and you can push it to max. I have Long Duration Limit and Short Duration Limit of 4096 and CPU Current Limit of 256 which is max on my MSI Board. Also I set System over Current Protection to 140%. With this settings your CPU can use much more TDP values as it is specified. In a test with latest Prime 95 my CPU reaches 210 Watts at max although it is specified as 95 Watts TDP.


----------



## Kissamies (Nov 6, 2019)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Delidding might help. I say 'might' - yes, no, maybe. Who knows


At least it did with 7700K. 5.2GHz (AVX -2) stable with Alphacool Eisbaer 240. Without delidding, 5GHz was the absolute maximum.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 6, 2019)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Delidding might help. I say 'might' - yes, no, maybe. Who knows





Chloe Price said:


> At least it did with 7700K. 5.2GHz (AVX -2) stable with Alphacool Eisbaer 240. Without delidding, 5GHz was the absolute maximum.


He has already delidded.


----------



## Kissamies (Nov 6, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> He has already delidded.


Ok, I guess I need more coffee since I missed that.


----------



## Vayra86 (Nov 6, 2019)

My thought before entering the topic was a comment along the lines of "set multiplier at 51, done"... 

But yeah. 1.4V and up and you're well into the danger zone for longevity and diminishing returns.

As for lowering VCCIO and SA below 1V... My 8700K started spitting out WATCHDOG_ERROR BSODs when I did that. And that is with slower sticks too. Its lottery just like the rest of these tweaks...


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 6, 2019)

I wouldn't go much higher than 1.4V and of course setting higher voltage will reduce life span, but it will easy last for 5 years. Without OC it will last 7-8 years but most people doing oc are enthusiasts buying a new system much earlier.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 6, 2019)

JackCarver said:


> I wouldn't go much higher than 1.4V and of course setting higher voltage will reduce life span, but it will easy last for 5 years. Without OC it will last 7-8 years but most people doing oc are enthusiasts buying a new system much earlier.



Thanks. I'm working on Voltage now then. . . I guess if It can't get past 5 Ghz on 1.415, it's not worth it.

At the moment, I am down to 1.39 V @ 5GHz . . . Testing stability now.
I may try pushing it back up and disabling AVX after I find the lower limits of the voltage.


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 6, 2019)

Important is that your cooling is good enough, so that your CPU doesn't get too high and also your Mainboards VRM, cause they also have more work on OC systems. The Voltage at around 1.4V is ok then if you have good temps.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 6, 2019)

JackCarver said:


> Important is that your cooling is good enough, so that your CPU doesn't get too high and also your Mainboards VRM, cause they also have more work on OC systems. The Voltage at around 1.4V is ok then if you have good temps.



I'm aiming for under 90 C spikes in AIDA Extreme. I've pushed the voltage back up to 1.4 V from 1.39 as it wasn't stable 
I guess the chip is only mediocre, even when delidded. I'd hoped for more, but Before I started, I was only getting 4.6 on all core boost.


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 6, 2019)

Try testing with Prime95 Version 26.6 First, cause it has no AVX instructions. Try the settings I posted earlier and do it for about 30 mins. If you don‘t get any errors or Blue Screens you are fine. Then use latest Prime95 version with AVX support and test again to see if your offset is fine. Monitor the test with CPU-Z and CPUID Hardware Monitor to see voltages and temps. If both tests run stable for at least 30 mins you are fine.


----------



## Vayra86 (Nov 6, 2019)

JackCarver said:


> I wouldn't go much higher than 1.4V and of course setting higher voltage will reduce life span, but it will easy last for 5 years. Without OC it will last 7-8 years but most people doing oc are enthusiasts buying a new system much earlier.



Its still nice to be able to resell these CPUs or use them in another system for someone else, like the kids... and its even nicer if you didn't burn the CPU to a crisp by then just so you could grab that last 100mhz. Because that's what this is most of the time. So I wouldn't say 'enthusiast, so its fine'... its very clear this is a case of minimal gains at high cost. Its fine to go there, but let's not fool each other. These high end CPUs will remain relevant for quite some time.

A CPU with mild/ non extreme OC can easily last 10+ years without showing degradation (depending on how tight your OC is voltage wise). Go beyond feasible and that number goes down _fast. _Its even plausible that mild OC will improve longevity because you're also going to look at the spiky voltage behavior; lowering VCCIO/SA is beneficial and stock voltages always have some headroom.



silkstone said:


> I'm aiming for under 90 C spikes in AIDA Extreme. I've pushed the voltage back up to 1.4 V from 1.39 as it wasn't stable
> I guess the chip is only mediocre, even when delidded. I'd hoped for more, but Before I started, I was only getting 3.6 on all core boost.



Join the club. Mine is so-so as well. I've opted for going back to 4.6 Ghz all core (!) but then with rather low vcore, of 1.21-23V its not like I'm missing performance atm. And it is still not a very cool CPU.

Note: getting knocked back to 3.6 base clock is a sign your CPU ran into_ short or long duration power limit_, use the highest or a custom number there. Its Intel's way of limiting TDP over prolonged load.


----------



## Crowley (Nov 6, 2019)

silkstone said:


> I'm aiming for under 90 C spikes in AIDA Extreme. I've pushed the voltage back up to 1.4 V from 1.39 as it wasn't stable
> I guess the chip is only mediocre, even when delidded. I'd hoped for more, but Before I started, I was only getting 3.6 on all core boost.



Only getting 3.6 on all core is a problem. Without touching any settings you should be getting 4.3 on all cores. Right now I run 4.7 on all cores with only enabling Enhanced mode on my  Z390 Aurous Pro. I didn't touch any of the voltage settings and just left them at auto. I do have a Corsair H115i water cooler on it and during gaming sessions or Folding at Home I don't see temps above low 70's


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 6, 2019)

Yeah long duration and short duration power Limit needs to be raised up



Vayra86 said:


> Its still nice to be able to resell these CPUs or use them in another system for someone else, like the kids... and its even nicer if you didn't burn the CPU to a crisp by then just so you could grab that last 100mhz. Because that's what this is most of the time. So I wouldn't say 'enthusiast, so its fine'... its very clear this is a case of minimal gains at high cost. Its fine to go there, but let's not fool each other. These high end CPUs will remain relevant for quite some time.
> 
> A CPU with mild/ non extreme OC can easily last 10+ years without showing degradation (depending on how tight your OC is voltage wise). Go beyond feasible and that number goes down _fast. _Its even plausible that mild OC will improve longevity because you're also going to look at the spiky voltage behavior; lowering VCCIO/SA is beneficial and stock voltages always have some headroom.



Yes the benefit isn't that much, you can measure it in benchmarks but mostly you won't feel it. But on the other side water colling the entire system is also not necessary but it makes fun ;-)
I think it's like tuning a car, not necessary at all but fun. And I mean that most Core i7 8700K make that 5GHz with moderate voltage settings like 1.3-1.36.

Beyond 5GHz you need a very good CPU that you can reach it below 1.4V.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 6, 2019)

Crowley said:


> Only getting 3.6 on all core is a problem. Without touching any settings you should be getting 4.3 on all cores. Right now I run 4.7 on all cores with only enabling Enhanced mode on my  Z390 Aurous Pro. I didn't touch any of the voltage settings and just left them at auto. I do have a Corsair H115i water cooler on it and during gaming sessions or Folding at Home I don't see temps above low 70's



My apologies, it was late when I was writing that. I meant 4.6 Ghz (it was also using more voltage)

Urgh and back at 4.8 Ghz.

I'm not sure how or why, but even the old settings are now unstable at 5 GHz. I need to go back through everything 
I'll try with static voltage control this time to see whether that makes a difference.


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 7, 2019)

Yes try static voltage setting. It‘s more reliable than the dynamic modes. The only downside to dynamic modes is that voltage isn‘t lowered or raised while the frequency goes up and down. You still remain at fix voltage but for higher oc this is more reliable. Try 1.35 to 1.36v for 5 GHz all Core Turbo with AVX Offset of -2 or -3, this should be sufficient. If you go higher than 5 GHz then slightly raise voltage till you get it stable and test after each step.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 7, 2019)

JackCarver said:


> Yes try static voltage setting. It‘s more reliable than the dynamic modes. The only downside to dynamic modes is that voltage isn‘t lowered or raised while the frequency goes up and down. You still remain at fix voltage but for higher oc this is more reliable. Try 1.35 to 1.36v for 5 GHz all Core Turbo with AVX Offset of -2 or -3, this should be sufficient. If you go higher than 5 GHz then slightly raise voltage till you get it stable and test after each step.



Thanks.

I know it's stable at 1.4V (1.415 Real V) @5Ghz. I'm testing 1.39 V (1.405 Real V) @5Ghz for stability now.

No AVX offset.

Question. Is it safe to run at this voltage 24/7?

Edit - Additional Question: What voltages should I trust? I just downloaded HWInfo and it gives VID of under 1.37, but both AIDA and Gigabyte monitor give around 1.405 V
VID isn't the voltage supplied, I'm not sure how to use it to help overclock tho.

Edit 2 - At manual voltages, should I be changing the AC/DC LLC limits? I came across a post below, but it's pretty confusing. At the moment HW info is reporting my IA Domain Loadline as 1.7/1.7 MOhm and GT Domain LL at 3.1/3.1 MOhm





						Understanding LLC & Voltage readings (8700k Overclock)
					

Hi all, In the past I've followed overclocking guides & YouTube videos where there is little thought involved (On my behalf - Not to discredit the authors) and have blindly followed their advice - I'm now trying to steer away from this and gain an understanding of how each setting works. To s...




					linustechtips.com
				




Thanks for any help.


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 7, 2019)

I would suggest using an AVX offset. Only a few apps use AVX instructions, so it would be no problem running those apps with 200 or 300MHz below. I have an AVX offset of -3 and an all core turbo of 5 GHz which means in AVX apps the cpu runs at 4.7 and in non AVX apps with 5 GHz. You can easily reach those 5 GHz with lower voltage settings if you are using an AVX offset. AVX also heats up the cpu, so with offset it will stay cooler.

If your temps are ok and not too high, then those 1.4V are ok for 24/7 usage. I would monitor the temps in every day usage scenarios, so that you can see how far the cpu heats up in gaming, rendering or what you are using mostly. If you stay at max in the 70's or low 80's then there is no problem, you can use CoreTemp or similar apps to monitor your temps.

VID is not the voltage your cpu runs at, it is only a value from Intel which voltage is needed for which frequency. As an example the VID for 1.5 GHz may be 0.8V. So this is used in dynamic modes from your mainboards BIOS to supply your CPU with the right voltage according to the CPUs frequency. It helps nothing to overclock, you use static vcore and you have to test which vcore is needed that your cpu is stable at for example 5 GHz all core turbo. Test with prime 95 and when you get the needed vcore, then your cpu runs always at this vcore independent of the frequency. VID is only important if you use dynamic modes.

You should be using an LLC mode where the vcore in idle is same as vcore under load. You can use CPU-Z to monitor your vcore in idle and in benchmarks. It should not vary too much between idle and load, then it is ok. If you use an LLC mode where vcore under load is lower than vcore in idle, that's named VDROOP and that's the way Intel wants it, then you have to set a much higher idle vcore to get stable under load. For example you are stable under load at 1.35 GHz and you have a VDROOP of -0.05V, then you need an idle vcore of 1.4V to get stable under load. So much too high as what you need.
If you use an LLC mode where vcore idle=vcore load then you only need 1.35V.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 7, 2019)

Thanks.
I'm testing now at 1.38 V LLC High. For some reason, unlike higher voltages, this LLC results in little VDroop. (0.01-0.005)

Temps are spiking to low 90's on one core, but briefly and are otherwise spiking to low 80's on AIDA with AVX.

I'm going to keep dropping voltage until it becomes unstable and then raise it a few levels


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 7, 2019)

JackCarver said:


> I would suggest using an AVX offset. Only a few apps use AVX instructions, so it would be no problem running those apps with 200 or 300MHz below. I have an AVX offset of -3 and an all core turbo of 5 GHz which means in AVX apps the cpu runs at 4.7 and in non AVX apps with 5 GHz. You can easily reach those 5 GHz with lower voltage settings if you are using an AVX offset. AVX also heats up the cpu, so with offset it will stay cooler.
> 
> If your temps are ok and not too high, then those 1.4V are ok for 24/7 usage. I would monitor the temps in every day usage scenarios, so that you can see how far the cpu heats up in gaming, rendering or what you are using mostly. If you stay at max in the 70's or low 80's then there is no problem, you can use CoreTemp or similar apps to monitor your temps.
> 
> ...


Yep! I said all of this earlier!


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 7, 2019)

LLC mode is good and benchmark temps also. In most every day apps your cpu won't get as high as in benchmarks



EarthDog said:


> Yep! I said all of this earlier!



Yeah that's true


----------



## Vario (Nov 7, 2019)

silkstone said:


> Thanks.
> I'm testing now at 1.38 V LLC High. For some reason, unlike higher voltages, this LLC results in little VDroop. (0.01-0.005)
> 
> Temps are spiking to low 90's on one core, but briefly and are otherwise spiking to low 80's on AIDA with AVX.
> ...


My advice is to just drop it down to 4.8 and you won't notice any difference in frame rate, but you will use less voltage and generate less heat.


----------



## Vayra86 (Nov 7, 2019)

silkstone said:


> Thanks.
> I'm testing now at 1.38 V LLC High. For some reason, unlike higher voltages, this LLC results in little VDroop. (0.01-0.005)
> 
> Temps are spiking to low 90's on one core, but briefly and are otherwise spiking to low 80's on AIDA with AVX.
> ...



Good man, if you spike to 88-90C, its time to back down a little. Keep in mind, its not summer anymore either...

The spiky behavior is so crap with these CPUs, it really is a limiting factor. VCCIO/SA voltage reduction does some positive work here, but its really hard to get them out completely - I didn't manage to.

Funny to read your LLC is also wonky...  One thing to keep in mind is that Intel also sets a voltage table for each multiplier as a base for these CPUs and if you use offset voltage, you will see different volts at different clocks with the same settings. So losing frequency also drops voltage even if you may not intend it to. That's also how the AVX offset works (and why I don't fancy using it, because there is AVX code in many applications and also in games. Fire up Overwatch = AVX.)

Like @Vario said, don't go hard on the 5 Ghz but instead find a middle ground, just 100mhz less can make life alot easier. I will say, I thought I was fine at 4.7 last summer and then poof, BSOD on starting Overwatch  100C exceeded.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Nov 7, 2019)

At 5.4ghz 1.510v HT disabled.

Cache at 4.8ghz.

Max temp 73c.

I use this setting for benchmarking only.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 8, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Good man, if you spike to 88-90C, its time to back down a little. Keep in mind, its not summer anymore either...
> 
> The spiky behavior is so crap with these CPUs, it really is a limiting factor. VCCIO/SA voltage reduction does some positive work here, but its really hard to get them out completely - I didn't manage to.
> 
> ...



Hehe, I live in a place where the only season is summer. I'm down at areound 1.38 V stable right now @ Turbo LLC, spikes into high 80's on temps so am making good progress.
It's just really time-consuming retesting and watching/waiting for voltage spikes. So far they don't seem too high.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 8, 2019)

Why are you looking for voltage spikes? It shouldn't be doing that once you have the LLC and other voltage set.


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 8, 2019)

Well there are always voltage spikes when the cpu goes from idle to load and vice versa. That's because the VRMs cannot immediately provide the exact voltage when the state changes, it always comes to voltage over- and undershoot. I mean this effect is even higher when the state changes from idle to load and that's the reason Intel wants the loadline to provide less voltage under load. So the spikes won't exceed the critic voltage. But for all I know you can't see those spikes with tools like CPU-Z or HW-Monitor the only possibility to see them is an oscilloscope.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 8, 2019)

JackCarver said:


> Well there are always voltage spikes when the cpu goes from idle to load and vice versa. That's because the VRMs cannot immediately provide the exact voltage when the state changes, it always comes to voltage over- and undershoot. I mean this effect is even higher when the state changes from idle to load and that's the reason Intel wants the loadline to provide less voltage under load. So the spikes won't exceed the critic voltage. But for all I know you can't see those spikes with tools like CPU-Z or HW-Monitor the only possibility to see them is an oscilloscope.


Yes... and yes for the part where you cant really catch it. I d9nt think silk is talking about transient loads however. 

EDIT: All I am saying here is once you set the voltage and LLC, you won't be seeing any spikes... so just test.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 8, 2019)

I'm seeing spikes up to 1.488 volts right now while keeping the sensor software open.
That's with 'Turbo' LLC, so I may need to go back and recalibrate.


----------



## EarthDog (Nov 8, 2019)

Are you back on dynamic/offset? You shouldn't see any with manual/static. Using dynamic/offset will always show higher voltage because it is using the VID for the multiplier +/- your offset.


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 8, 2019)

According to other tests of Z370 Gigabyte Boards out there, trhey all use Turbo Mode for LLC. This should work. Do you use the latest BIOS version? Perhaps you need a BIOS reset before and then set the values again.

Edit:
If you did a BIOS update before then do also BIOS reset.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 9, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> Are you back on dynamic/offset? You shouldn't see any with manual/static. Using dynamic/offset will always show higher voltage because it is using the VID for the multiplier +/- your offset.



Nope, I'm on manual. The spikes are few and far between. If I leave HWInfo open in the background, it will eventually show 1.488 V as a max, but this doesn't happen on load


----------



## TxGrin (Nov 9, 2019)

The i9-9900ks will do 5.3Ghz with 1.32 voltage









						Intel Core i9 @ 5302.86 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[cs4dc6] Validated Dump by DESKTOP-SLI (2019-11-03 15:48:39) - MB: Gigabyte Z390 AORUS MASTER-CF - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## silkstone (Nov 9, 2019)

TxGrin said:


> The i9-9900ks will do 5.3Ghz with 1.32 voltage
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Very nice. I don't think I want to upgrade just yet though. I'm hoping this chip lasts me at least another 4 generations. My most recent upgrade path has been from E3110 - i5 2500K - 8700K. I try to run my hardware until it becomes almost obsolete.
Similar story with GPUs. 4850 - 6970 - 1060 - 1080Ti (the last upgrade to 1080Ti paid for itself through mining)


----------



## mobiuus (Nov 9, 2019)

hi all...
i am at 5.0ghz at 1.35v static voltage and bios 3.30 asrock z370 gaming k6...
what i wanted to say,,, on older bios i needed more voltage like 1.39 to achieve 5.0ghz so maybe u should try newer bios versions
i noticed asrock even released bios 4.20 for 9900ks, but i am  a little afraid to try that one coz it states that we wont be able to flash back to lower versions...


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 9, 2019)

The 9900KS is a binned 9900K which can do 5GHz all Core Turbo out of the box, so 5.3 GHz isn‘t that special. The 8700K has an one core turbo of 4.7, so 5 GHz all core is more difficult. But many chips achieve this. Perhaps the Mobo isn‘t that good for OC but these spikes of 0.1V shouldn‘t be like EarthDog said. That Problem is Mainboard related.


----------



## silkstone (Nov 9, 2019)

DarkStalker said:


> hi all...
> i am at 5.0ghz at 1.35v static voltage and bios 3.30 asrock z370 gaming k6...
> what i wanted to say,,, on older bios i needed more voltage like 1.39 to achieve 5.0ghz so maybe u should try newer bios versions
> i noticed asrock even released bios 4.20 for 9900ks, but i am  a little afraid to try that one coz it states that we wont be able to flash back to lower versions...



I have the latest bios. Spikes are still there with Turbo LLC. I'm pretty happy with 5Ghz all core, but I do like tweaking my system to get the best I can.
Right now, I'm at 1.375 fixed @ 5Ghz, though on load, the LLC kicks in and bumps it up a bit.

So far, I've gotten the temperatures more under control which is a win in my book. I just need to test some gaming.


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 9, 2019)

Did you do a BIOS reset after upgrading? It‘s strongly advised to do so


----------



## trog100 (Nov 9, 2019)

my 8700k would do 5.2 with no problem but it ran too hot.. i was gonna delid it and keep it but ended up buying a 9900k instead... 

i dont think the OP has a very good chip.. 

for what its worth my 9900k also runs too hot when firing on all cylinders.. he he

trog


----------



## Enterprise24 (Nov 9, 2019)

Assuming 30C ambient temperature with strong custom loop.
9900K is very hard to cool. At 1.4V even with delidding heat become problem.  Die lapping or direct die or both needed for further voltage pushing.
A good sample of delidded 8700K / 8086K at 1.5V is not temperature limit at all. This is current / voltage limited.


----------



## mobiuus (Nov 9, 2019)

Enterprise24 said:


> Assuming 30C ambient temperature with strong custom loop.
> 9900K is very hard to cool. At 1.4V even with delidding heat become problem.  Die lapping or direct die or both needed for further voltage pushing.
> A good sample of delidded 8700K / 8086K at 1.5V is not temperature limit at all. This is current / voltage limited.


i see u r using 9900k on taichi Z370 wich is very similar to mine mbo... how's it performing on ur mboard? are u happy? did u use perhaps 8700k before 9900k on that same mbo?
p.s. maybe a stupid one but how can i tell from the box if 9900k is p0 or r0?


----------



## JackCarver (Nov 9, 2019)

> maybe a stupid one but how can i tell from the box if 9900k is p0 or r0?



Use CPU-Z


----------



## TxGrin (Nov 9, 2019)

I have my 2nd pc a i7-6700k running 5Ghz after delidding it









						Intel Core i7 6700K @ 5001.2 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[gdzq7x] Validated Dump by i7-6700 Delid @ 5Ghz (2019-10-24 23:08:15) - MB: Gigabyte Z170X-Gaming 7 - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr


----------



## Enterprise24 (Nov 10, 2019)

DarkStalker said:


> i see u r using 9900k on taichi Z370 wich is very similar to mine mbo... how's it performing on ur mboard? are u happy? did u use perhaps 8700k before 9900k on that same mbo?
> p.s. maybe a stupid one but how can i tell from the box if 9900k is p0 or r0?



About 9900K look on IHS.
SRELS = P0
SRG19 = R0
The Z370 Taichi is a bit underperform with 8/16. My CPU can run Cinebench at 5.3Ghz on APEX XI but not on Taichi. The VRM is massively different (250A current output for Taichi , 960A on APEX XI).
However with 8700K 6/12 and 9700K 8/8 it is what the board is design for.
I got a slightly used Taichi for $130 in Jan 2018 (8th gen just released for 2 months) so I cannot complain at all. Best VRM for the money at that time.


----------

