# i7-8086K



## FireFox (Jun 9, 2018)

Quick Question.

Does anyone own a i7-8086K?


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Jun 9, 2018)

But its just an over clocked 8700k?


----------



## FireFox (Jun 9, 2018)

FreedomEclipse said:


> But its just an over clocked 8700k?



Well because it is a K version i guess it can be overclocked further or am i wrong?


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Jun 9, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Well because it is a K version i guess it can be overclocked further or am i wrong?



Its just a binned 5ghz 8700k. It's cut from the same silicon as the 8700k. The most 8700ks max at 5-5.2ghz anyway


----------



## FireFox (Jun 9, 2018)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Its just a binned of 5ghz 8700k. It's cut from the same silicon as the 8700k. The most 8700ks max at 5-5.2ghz anyway



I still would like to see temps and voltages.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 9, 2018)

Seems like a good waste of money to get the 8086K. Just get a regular 8700K.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 9, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Just get a regular 8700K.



Why should i get something i already own since last year, is my signature or system specs invisible?


----------



## DR4G00N (Jun 9, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I still would like to see temps and voltages.


The 8700K and 8086K are identical in everything but stock clocks and name.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 9, 2018)

Thanks for the answer, anyway i guess i will give it a try.



xkm1948 said:


> Seems like a good waste of money to get the 8086K



Last thing i worry about is money


----------



## R0H1T (Jun 9, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Why should i get something i already own since last year, is my signature or system specs invisible?


So you want a rebadged 8700k? The 8086k isn't really worth it if you already have the 8700k, I can understand keeping it as some sort of a collectible item but that's about it.
As an aside does it come with some exotic cooler?


----------



## FireFox (Jun 9, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> I can understand keeping it as some sort of a collectible item



You got the point.


----------



## xkm1948 (Jun 9, 2018)

Dude just wait for the rumored upcoming Z390 8core. That would be a worthy upgrade.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 9, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Thanks for the answer, anyway i guess i will give it a try.



If you are set  on spending money on a CPU with higher stock clocks you might as well go for one of those binned 8700K than can do 5.2 Ghz.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 9, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Dude just wait for the rumored upcoming Z390 8core. That would be a worthy upgrade.



The 8086K it is not an upgrade it is as @R0H1T said ( a collectible item )



xkm1948 said:


> Z390 8core



Waiting for that.




Vya Domus said:


> go for one of those binned 8700K than can do 5.2 Ghz.



No worth because what they charge for it, the 8086K cost 360€ and a binned 8700K that does 5.2GHz cost way more.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 9, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> the 8086K cost 360€ and a binned 8700K that does 5.2GHz cost way more.



But at least you get more out of it in a guaranteed fashion.


----------



## Komshija (Jun 9, 2018)

Collectors will certainly have it. It's just a slightly better selected batch which should be as capable as 10-15% top i7 8700K CPU's. It means that it should (theoretically) overclock slightly higher and slightly better than the average i7 8700K. I would say it's a renamed golden chip aimed towards collectors and individuals who would like special i7 8700K variant.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 9, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> But at least you get more out of it in a guaranteed fashion.



I stick with the 8086K as it is a Limited Edition and collectible item, if i want 5.2GHz i would Overclock my 8700K.


----------



## las (Jun 9, 2018)

Intel should have fixed the TIM too, like they did on Devil's Canyon chips. i7-8086K still uses pigeon poop.



xkm1948 said:


> Dude just wait for the rumored upcoming Z390 8core. That would be a worthy upgrade.



Gaming-wise the 8 core will most likely perform worse because of lower clocks / less OC headroom.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 9, 2018)

las said:


> Gaming-wise the 8 core will most likely perform worse because of lower clocks / less OC headroom.



Do you have any idea what the clock speed will be?


----------



## las (Jun 9, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Do you have any idea what the clock speed will be?


I'd expect sub 4 GHz base, 4.2-4.4 boost all cores


----------



## FireFox (Jun 9, 2018)

las said:


> I'd expect sub 4 GHz base, 4.2-4.4 boost all cores



And 4.4GHz it is not enough for Gaming? however there is always the overclock option


----------



## MrGenius (Jun 10, 2018)

I heard they are using the high-grade pigeon poop on the i7-8086K. Same as on DC and HEDT/X-series chips. Heard it mentioned in a Computex coverage YT vid I was watching last night. Just a rumour at this point. Unless there's some documentation proving it one way or the other.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 10, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Last thing i worry about is money



In that case, do a frog a favor and send me some...  I need to buy some stuff to break.


----------



## Vario (Jun 10, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I stick with the 8086K as it is a Limited Edition and collectible item, if i want 5.2GHz i would Overclock my 8700K.


I want to see you buy this because I am curious about how well it overclocks and what volts it runs at compared to the 8700K.  My hunch is the same as 8700K, but I'd like to know either way, just because I am sure most people will not buy it due to the price.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 10, 2018)

Vario said:


> I want to see you buy this because I am curious about how well it overclocks and what volts it runs at compared to the 8700K.  My hunch is the same as 8700K, but I'd like to know either way, just because I am sure most people will not buy it due to the price.



360€ is nothing, at least for me, i am waiting till Tuesday because i have a friend of mine who works at a PC shop and he told me that maybe he could get it a few € cheaper, about voltages and how well it overclock i am curious too.


----------



## Vario (Jun 10, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> 360€ is nothing, at least for me, i am waiting till Tuesday because i have a friend of mine who works at a PC shop and he told me that maybe he could get it a few € cheaper, about voltages and how well it overclock i am curious too.


Let us know for sure!  I hope you get a good sample too.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 10, 2018)

Vario said:


> Let us know for sure!  I hope you get a good sample too.



My main concern is voltage.


----------



## biffzinker (Jun 10, 2018)

Vario said:


> I want to see you buy this because I am curious about how well it overclocks and what volts it runs at compared to the 8700K.  My hunch is the same as 8700K, but I'd like to know either way, just because I am sure most people will not buy it due to the price.


Your in luck, The Tech Report did a unboxing, and overclocking via live stream earlier today.
https://techreport.com/news/33784/join-us-live-at-noon-et-as-we-unbox-and-test-the-core-i7-8086k


----------



## FireFox (Jun 10, 2018)

I will watch it later when i arrive home, thanks for the link.


----------



## las (Jun 10, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> And 4.4GHz it is not enough for Gaming? however there is always the overclock option



We're not talking about what's "enough". 6C/12T at 5 GHz will beat 8C/16T at 4.6. Games are not heavily multithreaded and prefers higher clocks.
The OC headroom is going to be bigger on 6C version.
And you're going to pay more for a 8C version - Money that would be better spent on faster GPU or better RAM (high speed/low latency).

Personally not interested in neither tho. Waiting for Cannon Lake in early 2019 instead; New uArch (way bigger jump in performance compared to the last 3 gens), 10nm, spectre and meltdown fixes in hardware (instead of software fixes that lowers performance), new chipsets, PCI-E 4.0 or 5.0 and maybe even DDR5 support. Adding a GTX 1180/2080 to the mix too. 7nm + GDDR6. Gladly waiting for all this. 

Coffee Lake is simply just Skylake uArch with more cores. 2015 tech... Booooooring.
Z170, Z270 and Z370 are also identical.
Intel milked hard since Skylake. Good for AMD tho, they have gained alot of CPU marketshare lately.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 10, 2018)

las said:


> Games are not heavily multithreaded



Yes they are , wish we would be done with this myth already.


----------



## dj-electric (Jun 10, 2018)

AC:O is not "games".
This is a case-by-case situation. There will be 4C CPUs ahead of 8C ones in certain games.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 10, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> There will be 4C CPUs ahead of 8C ones in certain games.



Have I mentioned anything about that ? I only claimed the statement "games aren't heavily multithreaded" to be false.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 10, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> Yes they are , wish we would be done with this myth already.



I know, Denuvo takes a LOT of threads like that  Deus Ex, similarly puts 100% load on all cores you throw at it. Does not translate to a single FPS - you're still GPU limited for 90-95% of all gameplay.

Should that be any basis for a conclusion that 'you need 8 cores?' (which is what fired this multi core debate) NO. Note the similarities beyond 4c/8t CPUs. There is barely any performance to be had. All you do is remove the bottleneck for Denuvo to keep calling home.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 10, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> I know, Denuvo takes a LOT of threads like that. Deus Ex, similarly puts 100% load on all cores you throw at it. Does not translate to a single FPS.



You know I was always curios if Denuvo really does fuck things up to that degree. Unsurprisingly given the nature of something like that I cannot find any benchmarks from any reputable sites.

I do find , however , videos such as this along side many claims from people that it actually made no difference whatsoever.

http://www.game-debate.com/news/245...ows-no-performance-gains-over-legitimate-copy












Vayra86 said:


> Should that be any basis for a conclusion that 'you need 8 cores?' NO. Note the similarities beyond 4c/8t CPUs.



No , but it's enough to brake the myth that games don't use many cores. Which was ll that I had to say from the beginning.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 10, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> No , but it's enough to brake the myth that games don't use many cores.



That myth stems from pre-PS4, get with the times  Quad core + HT/SMT is still optimal though, 6 core is bonus. 8 core has no purpose.

I was going to look up the reddit post about Denuvo killing ingame performance, but its somewhere up here on TPU already and I cant find it. Both games (Deus Ex as well) do suffer from a repeated stutter every once in a while on 4c8t CPUs.


----------



## Kissamies (Jun 10, 2018)

Probaby generally unoverclockable without delidding like all the i7 115x chips since Ivy Bridge.


----------



## las (Jun 10, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> Yes they are , wish we would be done with this myth already.



No they are not. AC Origins is one of the ONLY games that are decently multi threaded. Yet 4C/8T still performs great, especially when those 4C are ran at high clocks (which they are not in that test).

They are using a 1700X/6850K for this. My old 6700K @ 5 GHz would beat both those CPU's in this game. They simply disable cores, which means their 4C/8T test score are ran with low clocks compared to how fast clocks mainstream 4C/8T usually run at, especially when OC'ed.
4 GHz is low.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 10, 2018)

las said:


> No they are not.



You may deny it as much as you want , games have been well threaded for years now. That doesn't mean they scale perfectly nor is it all that matters but it's the truth nonetheless. Anyway I went off topic for long enough.


----------



## las (Jun 10, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> You may deny it as much as you want , games have been well threaded for years now. That doesn't mean they scale perfectly nor is it all that matters but it's the truth nonetheless. Anyway I went off topic for long enough.



A newer Intel 4C/8T at ~5 GHz (*with RING BUS instead of MESH*) would beat those low clocked 6C/8C CPU's in AC Origins anyway.

The 4C/8T result is performed with low clocks. Still it's almost the same as the 6C/12T result...

More cores is good, as long as these cores are not gimped by low clocks.
4C/8T is still enough for gaming. It's a fact.


----------



## Vario (Jun 10, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I will watch it later when i arrive home, thanks for the link.


https://www.techradar.com/news/inte...-its-overclocking-potential-as-it-hits-724ghz


> Der8auer shows the process in a YouTube video (below) where he explained that he more or less used the same presets as when previously overclocking Intel’s 8700K, and that the new 8086K anniversary chip is essentially a “good pretest 8700K”.


----------



## cameronh779 (Jun 10, 2018)

Never even heard of this chip. Certainly an odd processor name.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 10, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> Your in luck, The Tech Report did a unboxing, and overclocking via live stream earlier today.
> https://techreport.com/news/33784/join-us-live-at-noon-et-as-we-unbox-and-test-the-core-i7-8086k



I started watching the video and when a saw a few BSOD i stopped, i rather test it when i get it.



las said:


> 6C/12T at 5 GHz will beat 8C/16T at 4.6.



Agree with you but we don't have any numbers yet, right now we are just guessing.



Vario said:


> https://www.techradar.com/news/inte...-its-overclocking-potential-as-it-hits-724ghz



I dont watch those videos where Der8auer does Extreme overclocking because those are overclock that wont be used for 24/7


----------



## therealmeep (Jun 10, 2018)

One on order, went to mc today and saw them, didn't buy one because mine has shipped, will report when it comes in.


----------



## biffzinker (Jun 11, 2018)

Wait for the i9-8088K anniversary instead?

PC Perspective has their 8086K in for review. Overclocking isn't any better than what The Tech Report managed.

Also the CPU doesn't want to Turbo up too 5.0 GHz even with a single core load, and the same issue with a second 8086K.


> Much to my surprise, even on purely single-threaded workload, such as Cinebench R15 in Single mode, the processor wasn’t getting close to its 5.0GHz Single Core Turbo Boost frequency, in fact, I never saw it get above 4.5GHz. We corroborated these issues with another piece of CPU monitoring software, HWInfo64.
> 
> As you can see in the screenshot from XTU, the processor was sitting at a cool 48C while this was going on, and no other alerts such as the motherboard power delivery or current limit throttling were an issue during our testing.
> 
> ...


https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Our-Core-i7-8086K-Experiences-Problematic-Best


----------



## Hood (Jun 11, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> I can understand keeping it as some sort of a collectible item


Is that even a thing?  Do people collect CPUs for historical value, and are rare ones worth a lot?  Or is it more like a keepsake, sentimental value only?  I see you can buy an original 8086 for $10 on ebay, so even chips from the 70s and 80s aren't very rare.


----------



## therealmeep (Jun 11, 2018)

8086k is in!
Benchmark results/pics in a bit (at stock)
Specs:
i7 8086k
Corsair h115i
Maximus X Hero
32 GB Ballistix sport 2400
Gtx 1080
Samsung 960 Evo 500GB
CPU-Z validation:
valid.x86.fr/900v8v
Comparison: 6800k@4.4GHz
valid.x86.fr/a1cnqh
Edit:
Score for 5GHz all core
valid.x86.fr/ksayi6


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 12, 2018)

las said:


> I'd expect sub 4 GHz base, 4.2-4.4 boost all cores


Stop being a troll.


----------



## natr0n (Jun 12, 2018)

Entered an Intel contest with a high probability I will win this chip.


----------



## therealmeep (Jun 12, 2018)

Decent chip, yet to really push it all I've done is up the core turbo from 1 core to all core 5ghz. Chip hits about 80c under 280mm rad. Would probably be a star with a delid as it's pretty snappy with the uncork (all core turbo instead of single)


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 12, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> Also the CPU doesn't want to Turbo up too 5.0 GHz even with a single core load, and the same issue with a second 8086K.



Now that's hilarious.


----------



## las (Jun 12, 2018)

It will hit 5 GHz on a single core, not for long tho. Rest of the cores boosts exactly like 8700K.
What a joke. If Intel had fixed the TIM issue, it would hit 5 GHz all core with air cooling no problem.
If Intel is not ready with 10nm for Zen 2 release (and/or fixes TIM/gap issues) they will loose alot of market share in the consumer space.


----------



## phill (Jun 12, 2018)

I look forward to hearing your results @Knoxx29   What board will you be putting it in to?  Sig setup?


----------



## FireFox (Jun 12, 2018)

therealmeep said:


> 8086k is in!
> Benchmark results/pics in a bit (at stock)
> Specs:
> i7 8086k
> ...



Too much voltage for 5.0GHz, I dont know if you just did a quick test or took your time to do some Fine-Tuning OC Settings, the temperature is ridiculous but for that I do not blame you, the  *Corsair h115i* does not do miracles 



Hood said:


> Do people collect CPUs for historical value,



That is not my Goal, i don't care if today i pay 400€ for it and in 10 or 15 years or less it cost 5€, i want the CPU  because i can afford it and i dont care wasting the 400€



las said:


> It will hit 5 GHz on a single core, not for long tho. Rest of the cores boosts exactly like 8700K.














phill said:


> I look forward to hearing your results @Knoxx29  What board will you be putting it in to? Sig setup?



Just in case i decide to do some test i will use the Maximus X Hero if i don't do any test i wont open the box and it will sit on my Desk.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jun 12, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Just in case i decide to do some test i will use the Maximus X Hero



And a WB with the Chiller of Course  looking forward to this potential Test


----------



## las (Jun 12, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Too much voltage for 5.0GHz, I dont know if you just did a quick test or took your time to do some Fine-Tuning OC Settings, the temperature is ridiculous but for that I do not blame you, the  *Corsair h115i* does not do miracles
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Why are you linking me this video..

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/in...turbo-bins-are-close-to-similar-to-8700k.html


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Jun 12, 2018)

You can find reviews of this processor online. It is shown that it's nothing more over than 8700K that can turbo to 5ghz by default. So if you're looking to upgrade then you're wasting your money. It's only going to be a few FPS difference at best.

Edit: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12945/the-intel-core-i7-8086k-review/16


----------



## FireFox (Jun 12, 2018)

las said:


> Why are you linking me this video..



I dont know what you meant by saying that It will hit 5 GHz on a single core, maybe i picked you wrong, not a native English speaker or writer over here


----------



## las (Jun 12, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I dont know what you meant by saying that It will hit 5 GHz on a single core, maybe i picked you wrong, not a native English speaker or writer over here



Oh ok. I was talking about 8086K vs 8700K turbo boost clocks 

Realworld performance difference between them are less than 1%. In most reviews (if not all), performance was identical, since they will be running the exact same boost clocks when 2 cores or more is used... Nice one Intel !


----------



## FireFox (Jun 12, 2018)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> So if you're looking to upgrade



Upgrade? i never said or mention anything about upgrade, in case you dont know why i want the CPU try reading from the post #1

If the 8086K was a 4.5GHz CPU i would buy it anyway, i guess people don't understand why i want the CPU even i keep repeating it


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Jun 12, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Upgrade? i never said or mention anything about upgrade, in case you dont know why i want the CPU try reading from the post #1
> 
> If the 8086K was a 4.5GHz CPU i would buy it anyway, i guess people don't understand why i want the CPU even i keep repeating it


I see it. I saw it. I still dont really get it. Maybe im just too damn tired? 

If youre just getting it to own it as a collectors item, who cares about speed and voltage if youre not going to use it?


----------



## FireFox (Jun 12, 2018)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> If youre just getting it to own it as a collectors item, who cares about speed and voltage if youre not going to use it?



In fact as i said before even it was a 4.5GHz i would buy it.


----------



## therealmeep (Jun 12, 2018)

It's collector's chip, and I left the board completely stock with the Asus voltage. The voltage listed is not right on the cpu-z page, it was at 1.19v not 1.38.
Forgot to mention that most of the validation things in cpuz were wrong.
Edit:
Just completely disregard this, I'll figure it out when I get home.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 12, 2018)

therealmeep said:


> It's collector's chip, and I left the board completely stock with the Asus voltage. The voltage listed is not right on the cpu-z page, it was at 1.19v not 1.38.
> Forgot to mention that most of the validation things in cpuz were wrong.
> Edit:
> Just completely disregard this, I'll figure it out when I get home.



That sounds way better than what i saw


----------



## therealmeep (Jun 13, 2018)

Corrections: cpu@ 1.33v runs ~65C under benchmark, 30C idle


----------



## FireFox (Jun 13, 2018)

therealmeep said:


> Corrections: cpu@ 1.33v runs ~65C under benchmark, 30C idle



That's way better than before 

Do you mind to post a few screenshots?


----------



## therealmeep (Jun 13, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> That's way better than before
> 
> Do you mind to post a few screenshots?


Will a little later probably tommorow, gonna probably push it up to around 5.2-5.3. Works great and is a nice little chip.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 13, 2018)

therealmeep said:


> Will a little later probably tommorow, gonna probably push it up to around 5.2-5.3. Works great and is a nice little chip.



Take your time.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 13, 2018)

It seems like this 8086k really is just for giggles. Even though it says 5.0 Ghz on the box... that is only the 1 core boost. All other turbo frequencies are 100% identical.

So basically what they've done is printed something else on the heatspreader and that's all

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12945/the-intel-core-i7-8086k-review


----------



## Tatty_One (Jun 13, 2018)

Surely if anyone buys this as a "Collector's" chip, it shouldn't even come out of the box? Although it does sound like more fun trying to break a collectors chip


----------



## trparky (Jun 13, 2018)

Has anyone ever thought about buying one of these just for the sake of buying it? You know, something that just sits up on the shelf as a collector's item.

Obviously this would be for people with money to burn. If I had money to burn I buy it just let it sit, hell... I'd buy two of them, one to use and one to keep in the box on the shelf.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 13, 2018)

trparky said:


> Has anyone ever thought about buying one of these just for the sake of buying it? You know, something that just sits up on the shelf as a collector's item.
> 
> Obviously this would be for people with money to burn. If I had money to burn I buy it just let it sit, hell... I'd buy two of them, one to use and one to keep in the box on the shelf.



I can see you missed most of my posts, try to read it there are just a few.


----------



## therealmeep (Jun 13, 2018)

It's definitely a killer chip, and for the price it's cheaper than getting a binned 8700


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 13, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> And a WB with the Chiller of Course  looking forward to this potential Test



Hahah I wonder how long we will be using that line. Its quite successful marketing actually, Intel surely is in our hearts and minds nowadays lol


----------



## dorsetknob (Jun 13, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> Hahah I wonder how long we will be using that line.


What line is that ?
My comment was refering to a WB (Water Block for CPU ) and a Chiller ( Water Cooling Chiller which
*Knoxx29 Has for his Current Main System ).*


----------



## xorbe (Jun 13, 2018)

He's referring to Intel's recent 28 core PR stunt with chilled water (is that not obvious?)

Edit: maybe I misunderstood?  Oh well, my bad, carry on. Off topic anyway as you point out, sorry.


----------



## MrGenius (Jun 13, 2018)

Yeah...except that's not what he was referring to...when that was referred to. Soooo...

We should probably stop this cycle of stupidity now. Before it goes way too far...


----------



## looniam (Jun 13, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I still would like to see temps and voltages.











https://www.anandtech.com/show/12945/the-intel-core-i7-8086k-review/3


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 13, 2018)

las said:


> What a joke. If Intel had fixed the TIM issue, it would hit 5 GHz all core with air cooling no problem.



Thermals don’t seem to be the culprit.


----------



## xorbe (Jun 13, 2018)

I got my cpu, motherboard on the way, but I'm traveling soon, won't finish the build for a while, sigh.  Need a new hsf cooler!!!


----------



## Vayra86 (Jun 14, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> What line is that ?
> My comment was refering to a WB (Water Block for CPU ) and a Chiller ( Water Cooling Chiller which
> *Knoxx29 Has for his Current Main System ).*



Ah I thought it was a reference to the Intel 28 core demo


----------



## las (Jun 14, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Thermals don’t seem to be the culprit.



Uhm several tests shows 90C+ at 5 GHz and Guru3D (I think it was) had 98C at 5.1 GHz... using 240m aio


----------



## Melvis (Jun 14, 2018)

therealmeep said:


> It's definitely a killer chip, and for the price it's cheaper than getting a binned 8700



It costs $130 more here over the 8700k, I cant see that as been "cheaper" Waste of money in my eyes


----------



## FireFox (Jun 14, 2018)

Melvis said:


> It costs $130 more here over the 8700k, I cant see that as been "cheaper" Waste of money in my eyes



Of course it cost more than the 8700K, today you get a 8700K for 340€ or maybe a little less but when it was released it cost 450€+ depending where you ordered it, Intel makes you pay what they printed on the box of the i7-8086K ( *Limited Edition *)


----------



## therealmeep (Jun 14, 2018)

Melvis said:


> It costs $130 more here over the 8700k, I cant see that as been "cheaper" Waste of money in my eyes


For similarly binned chips from somewhere like silicon lottery its upwards of 6-700$ for a chip that can reach the same clocks.



R-T-B said:


> Thermals don’t seem to be the culprit.


 At least after doing a bios update on my Maximus X it seemed to drop cpu temps (only thing I can think of is a new profile for voltage or something) by upwards of about 15C. Before at 50 it was running ~85C and after patch it's down to about 60.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 14, 2018)

las said:


> Uhm several tests shows 90C+ at 5 GHz and Guru3D (I think it was) had 98C at 5.1 GHz... using 240m aio



I meant for it nonturboing to 5Ghz on a single core.  It's not hot when refusing to do that...


----------



## Totally (Jun 14, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I stick with the 8086K as it is a Limited Edition and collectible item, if i want 5.2GHz i would Overclock my 8700K.



Then if you want it as a collectible, what is the point of this thread?


----------



## FireFox (Jun 14, 2018)

Totally said:


> Then if you want it as a collectible, what is the point of this thread?



What if I test it or what if i buy too?


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 14, 2018)

Knoxx29 is a known Intel Fanboy, to the point that I'm pretty sure he won't even consider that an offensive comment (wasn't meant as one man  ).

That said, he is not incompetent or stupid, and his testing is still relevant to all of us.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 14, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Knoxx29 is a known Intel Fanboy, to the point that I'm pretty sure he won't even consider that an offensive comment (wasn't meant as one man  ).
> 
> That said, he is not incompetent or stupid, and his testing is still relevant to all of us.



2 weeks or less i have it here, my friend that works at the PC shop is getting one for me and the price is very good plus i am one of their best customer


----------



## Hood (Jun 14, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> What if I test it or what if i buy too?


I hope you have a better experience than PCPerspective - 
"Much to my surprise, even on purely single-threaded workload, such as Cinebench R15 in Single mode, the processor wasn’t getting close to its 5.0GHz Single Core Turbo Boost frequency, in fact, I never saw it get above 4.5GHz. We corroborated these issues with another piece of CPU monitoring software, HWInfo64.

As you can see in the screenshot from XTU, the processor was sitting at a cool 48C while this was going on, and no other alerts such as the motherboard power delivery or current limit throttling were an issue during our testing.

Moving to another motherboard, the ASUS Strix Z370-H Gaming, again on the latest UEFI release, we saw the same behavior.

So far, we have been unable to get this processor to operate at the advertised 5.0GHz Turbo Boost frequency, on a multitude of different hardware and software setups.

However, if we manually overclock the processor, we can get an all-core frequency of 5.1GHz, although with a temperature around 85C."

techreport.com concluded the same - 
"As an actual processor, the i7-8086K isn't worth the $75 upcharge over the i7-8700K at stock speeds. Outside of its rarely-seen 5-GHz top Turbo bin, the i7-8086K performs the same as an i7-8700K the vast majority of the time. That's because the rest of its Turbo Boost 2.0 table is identical to the i7-8700K's. There's only so much a chip can do within the same thermal budget. It would have been nice to see Intel really take the leash off this thing and push TDPs or implement something like its Thermal Velocity Boost feature on this chip to truly make it something special for those who don't want to overclock.

The story changes a little—and I do mean a little—when we take advantage of the i7-8086K's unlocked multipliers. It's tricky to recommend a processor on the basis of its overclocking prowess alone, because no two chips will overclock alike. That said, our retail i7-8086K made it to 5.1 GHz on all cores without any AVX offset and nothing more than the usual thermal challenges of modern Intel CPUs. No  i7-8700K in our labs can run at speeds higher than 5 GHz for non-AVX workloads, and they require -2 AVX offsets to remain stable.

For all that, the i7-8086K's slightly higher overclock didn't translate into many practical performance benefits in our tests versus a run-of-the-mill 8700K at 5 GHz. Still want to pay that $75 extra?"


----------



## Totally (Jun 14, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Knoxx29 is a known Intel Fanboy, to the point that I'm pretty sure he won't even consider that an offensive comment (wasn't meant as one man  ).
> 
> That said, he is not incompetent or stupid, and his testing is still relevant to all of us.



Nonetheless, this back and forth polling people's opinions when he's already decided on what he wants to do is going nowhere and pointlessly silly.



Knoxx29 said:


> What if I test it or what if i buy too?


Proving what everyone already knows? And you bought yourself a new thing...congrats?


----------



## looniam (Jun 15, 2018)

Hood said:


> I hope you have a better experience than PCPerspective -
> "Much to my surprise, even on purely single-threaded workload, such as Cinebench R15 in Single mode, the processor wasn’t getting close to its 5.0GHz Single Core Turbo Boost frequency, in fact, I never saw it get above 4.5GHz. We corroborated these issues with another piece of CPU monitoring software, HWInfo64.
> 
> As you can see in the screenshot from XTU, the processor was sitting at a cool 48C while this was going on, and no other alerts such as the motherboard power delivery or current limit throttling were an issue during our testing.
> ...


https://www.anandtech.com/show/12945/the-intel-core-i7-8086k-review/16


> Given the nature of PCs having multiple applications open at once or running in the background, a truely isolated single-core load almost never happens: in fact with our processor we only able to trigger a core to 5.0 GHz unless we set the affinity to a single core. In that respect, the Core i7-8086K is very limited, especially when it commands a premium price ($425) over its nearest rival, which is often sold at much less (8700K at $350 or below)
> (image)
> In our ‘stock’ results, this analysis bore fruit. In most benchmarks, the 8086K was on par with the 8700K. In a few, like CineBench R15 ST, it took a lead and afforded a new record due to the high frequency, but in others it seemed to perform worse, such as Blender and WinRAR, likely due to the thermal performance and response of our specific chip.
> 
> For anyone looking to buy the Core i7-8086K to run it at stock frequencies, save your money. There are better deals elsewhere.



ryan shrout, ken addison and jeff kampman were getting the riot act read to them by Francois Piednoel for not using a motherboard/bios suggested by intel, to which ryan replied:


Spoiler: tweet









francios's tweets weren't protected then, but the way he was being . . .cranky and blunt in the discussion . . well, i am not surprised they are now.

so would a new bios solve the discrepancy? w/intel being very quit on how turbo boost works, i think it's hard to tell w/o reasonable speculation.

not trying to argue (at least not this time), just trying to share what i think i know.


----------



## therealmeep (Jun 15, 2018)

My chip was very picky with it's turbo clocks at stock. It ran at around 4.4 all cores (which its rated to do) and did so at about 60 degrees with a 280mm aio. The point of the chip is not to be some special enhanced performance chip. Does it do 5GHz? Yes. Does this mean anything outside of bragging rights? No. At it's core its an 8700k with some slightly tweaked/bumped clock speeds and its always going to run like that. (hotter, slightly better performing, more power usage) The point of the chip isn't to be used as a system chip, some of them are good at overclocking and would benefit from a delid. However this chip is really meant to be a collectible and I think that's what people should buy it for. (hence why I got mine)


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 15, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Knoxx29 is a known Intel Fanboy, to the point that I'm pretty sure he won't even consider that an offensive comment (wasn't meant as one man  ).
> 
> That said, he is not incompetent or stupid, and his testing is still relevant to all of us.


Except that he often defends AMD from an objective perspective. Gotta disagree with this fanboy statement.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 15, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> Except that he often defends AMD from an objective perspective. Gotta disagree with this fanboy statement.



Are you out of your mind?

@R-T-B knows me well.


----------



## looniam (Jun 15, 2018)

less talk, more BENCHING!


----------



## FireFox (Jun 15, 2018)

Agree with you


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 15, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Are you out of your mind?
> 
> @R-T-B knows me well.


No, I pay attention. You have been objective about AMD and not infrequently. Go review your own posts if you don't believe me..


----------



## Fourstaff (Jun 16, 2018)

Thread cleaned at the request of OP. Please stay on topic.


----------



## las (Jun 22, 2018)

Uhm I delidded a 8086K yesterday. Hit 5.2 GHz at 1.385v With -2 AVX Offset.

Better binned for sure. But probably not worth the extra money anyway. As 8700K have improved since launch too.


----------



## qubit (Jun 22, 2018)

trparky said:


> Has anyone ever thought about buying one of these just for the sake of buying it? You know, something that just sits up on the shelf as a collector's item.
> 
> Obviously this would be for people with money to burn. If I had money to burn I buy it just let it sit, hell... I'd buy two of them, one to use and one to keep in the box on the shelf.


That's exactly what like to do. And like you, I don't have the money to burn lol.


----------



## xorbe (Jun 25, 2018)

edit: never mind seems like software make or makefile issue, I'll hit the Linux forum and try to find out why make behaves differently for HT vs non-HT.  Still waiting for the m.2 drive, but using sata ssd to test the 8086K currently.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 25, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> Except that he often defends AMD from an objective perspective. Gotta disagree with this fanboy statement.



I mean, you are literally talking about the guy who told me he'd only buy an AMD CPU (no matter how much it outperformed Intel) to "flush it," but ok...

I myself am no fanboy.  Owned a Ryzen not too long ago, and my miner is still based on one...


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 25, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> I mean, you are literally talking about the guy who told me he'd only buy an AMD CPU (no matter how much it outperformed Intel) to "flush it," but ok...


If memory serves, that was last year, wasn't it? Maybe I misinterpreted, but he seemed to be saying that in jest.. Could be wrong..


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 25, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> If memory serves, that was last year, wasn't it? Maybe I misinterpreted, but he seemed to be saying that in jest.. Could be wrong..



I mean, he basically confirmed it here several times after too, as well as more or less here.

I did say he was competent.  I do believe he has technical knowledge.  But he's definitely a fan of intel above and beyond most.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 25, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> I mean, he basically confirmed it here several times after too, as well as more or less here.
> 
> I did say he was competent.  I do believe he has technical knowledge.  But he's definitely a fan of intel above and beyond most.


Fair enough, shutting up about it.

So back on topic, what's the final word on the 8086k?


----------



## FireFox (Jun 25, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> If memory serves, that was last year, wasn't it? Maybe I misinterpreted, but he seemed to be saying that in jest.. Could be wrong..



For sure you misinterpreted, i have never ever said anything in favor Intel's rival, as @R-T-B S said i have ever confirmed it to a point i got in some kind of trouble 

In a week or so i have the CPU, couldn't before due an operation.


----------



## FireFox (Jun 28, 2018)

As promised


----------



## dj-electric (Jun 28, 2018)

Nice one. Awaiting my sample, should arrive somewhere next week


----------



## FireFox (Jun 28, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> Nice one. Awaiting my sample, should arrive somewhere next week



Let us know how it performs.


----------



## xorbe (Jun 29, 2018)

So I tracked down my 8086K performance problems under Linux.  It's the KPTI and spectre_v2 mitigations, mostly the latter.  Turned 'em off and bam, performing as expected.  Magic kernel options are "nopti spectre_v2=off".


----------



## FireFox (Jun 29, 2018)

Clock speed and voltage?


----------



## xorbe (Jun 29, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Clock speed and voltage?



I haven't gotten that far yet, messing around with ram timing/testing in Linux.  Installing Win10 for the first time ever (for me) this evening.  At first blush I don't think I got an upper-bin cpu.


----------



## cadaveca (Jun 29, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Clock speed and voltage?


what's stock voltage on first boot into BIOS? that's some good info to get


----------



## FireFox (Jun 29, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> what's stock voltage on first boot into BIOS? that's some good info to get



Mine is still in the box, i can't answer that question.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 30, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Mine is still in the box, i can't answer that question.


Is it staying in the box as a future collectors item?


----------



## FireFox (Jun 30, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> Is it staying in the box as a future collectors item?



I will test it because i am getting another one.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 1, 2018)

Under Linux, the AVX offset seems to apply 100% of the time, rendering it useless.  5.0 GHz is impossible with Prime95, cpu is on fire.  Raising the voltage results in hard thermal throttling to less than 4000, and it's still crashing at that point, so that's an exercise in futility.  4.9 to 5.0 is a voltage wall.  Aiming for 4.8 here.  I'm thinking to use the boost table vs sync all cores, maybe something like 50/50/49/49/48/48 would work.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 1, 2018)

xorbe said:


> Under Linux, the AVX offset seems to apply 100% of the time, rendering it useless.  5.0 GHz is impossible with Prime95, cpu is on fire.  Raising the voltage results in hard thermal throttling to less than 4000, and it's still crashing at that point, so that's an exercise in futility.  4.9 to 5.0 is a voltage wall.  Aiming for 4.8 here.  I'm thinking to use the boost table vs sync all cores, maybe something like 50/50/49/49/48/48 would work.


These chips are binned for over 5 GHz. There's something else going on here.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 1, 2018)

xorbe said:


> Under Linux, the AVX offset seems to apply 100% of the time, rendering it useless.  5.0 GHz is impossible with Prime95, cpu is on fire.  Raising the voltage results in hard thermal throttling to less than 4000, and it's still crashing at that point, so that's an exercise in futility.  4.9 to 5.0 is a voltage wall.  Aiming for 4.8 here.  I'm thinking to use the boost table vs sync all cores, maybe something like 50/50/49/49/48/48 would work.


That CPU is designed to hit 5ghz on 2 cores by itself. 5ghz on all cores full time with a slight voltage bump should be easy.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 1, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> These chips are binned for over 5 GHz. There's something else going on here.



Agree with you, i saw one at 5.0GHz 1.20V all cores and 5.2GHz with 1.27V all cores

Why am i so lazy to test mine


----------



## xorbe (Jul 1, 2018)

At stock settings, sure I see 4950 with one thread of mprime (Prime95 on Linux).  Constant 5GHz is easy compiling Linux, etc.  With avx mprime that's a no-go.  I don't ever do that typically, but it doesn't give me a fuzzy feeling that there exists code paths to crash the cpu with those settings.  It's possible I got a dud cpu -- it likes to error out one thread after 30 minutes or so.  Also, the first overclocking compilation errors manifest as mce in dmesg.  Maybe I got a cpu with a crap cache / tlb array.  It's entirely possible I'm doing something wrong.  Part of the reason I'm doing a build is because it's been 4 years since the 4790K, lol.  I realize I'm burning money here, it's just a hobby machine for fun.

proof


----------



## FireFox (Jul 1, 2018)

I forgot to ask Watercooled or Aircooled?


----------



## xorbe (Jul 1, 2018)

That's the ubiquitous Noctua NH-D15 (with one fan off at the moment) in the pic. [I see I added pic after you posted.]


----------



## FireFox (Jul 1, 2018)

I don't think it's a Cooler issue, i mean i hope, or maybe is it?


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 1, 2018)

xorbe said:


> That's the ubiquitous Noctua NH-D15 (with one fan off at the moment) in the pic. [I see I added pic after you posted.]


That's part of the problem. Yes, these CPUs are highly sensitive to temps.

You'll have to play with IO/ SA voltages a bit to match you ram speeds and how hard the cache is getting hammered from the CPU speed. If you wanna max out the CPU, you really gotta fine-tune it. Looking at how much power just the CPU is pulling would really tell us so much here...



Knoxx29 said:


> I don't think it's a Cooler issue, i mean i hope.


Really, high-end water is required if you expect big clocks. I thought Intel had made that kind of plain...


----------



## FireFox (Jul 1, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> Really, high-end water is required



Or second option, Delidded.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 1, 2018)

Delid means pop lid, change thermal goo, replace lid, right?  (ie, you need the lid in the end!)


----------



## jboydgolfer (Jul 1, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> You know I was always curios if Denuvo really does fuck things up to that degree. Unsurprisingly given the nature of something like that I cannot find any benchmarks from any reputable sites.
> 
> I do find , however , videos such as this along side many claims from people that it actually made no difference whatsoever.
> 
> ...



I wouldn't say its a "myth",  since by far,  most games don't Benefit from more threads.  You can't define the subject by the exception.  Would it be more factual to say "most games don't benefit from more threads"? Yes, of course.  But you calling it a myth is even more unfactual then what you're pointing out to be unfactual.

If I was to say ,"all people like icecream", it doesn't become a myth just because it's not factually true,  some people don't like ice cream. It's merely a generalization


----------



## FireFox (Jul 1, 2018)

xorbe said:


> Delid means pop lid, change thermal goo, replace lid, right?  (ie, you need the lid in the end!)



Yes it means pop lid but you don't have to replace the lid, after Delidded temps should drop between 10c to 25c depends how lucky you are.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 1, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Yes it means pop lid but you don't have to replace the lid, after Delidded temps should drop between 10c to 25c depends how lucky you are.



Wait, what?  You mean the cooler will sit directly on the die again?!  Isn't that how we got cracked die corners back in the day?  Wouldn't the hsf mounting need to be shimmed to mop up the 1-2 mm gap I'm assuming no-lid would introduce?


----------



## sneekypeet (Jul 1, 2018)

xorbe said:


> Wait, what?  You mean the cooler will sit directly on the die again?!  Isn't that how we got cracked die corners back in the day?  Wouldn't the hsf mounting need to be shimmed to mop up the 1-2 mm gap I'm assuming no-lid would introduce?



Google .... delid die guard.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 1, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> You'll have to play with IO/ SA voltages a bit to match you ram speeds and how hard the cache is getting hammered from the CPU speed.



Yeah okay my auto settings are pushing sa/io sky high compared to recommended oc settings, will have to play with those.



cadaveca said:


> Looking at how much power just the CPU is pulling would really tell us so much here...



5GHz 1.395v, compiling source code 223w at the wall, prime95 thermal throttling to 3.6GHz 258w at the wall.


----------



## Vario (Jul 2, 2018)

xorbe said:


> Yeah okay my auto settings are pushing sa/io sky high compared to recommended oc settings, will have to play with those.
> 
> 
> 
> 5GHz 1.395v, compiling source code 223w at the wall, prime95 thermal throttling to 3.6GHz 258w at the wall.


Wow you got a bad chip.  Would be thinking somewhere around 1.3V at the most for 5GHz.  Thats what the better 8700Ks run at.  Don't bother delidding that turd, instead return it or sell it and get another.  Best to not delid bad chips, makes it harder to sell them later for a better sample.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 2, 2018)

Are most people using AVX offset 2 though?


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

1.25V in bios

I played Games for 7 hours, i haven't tried with low voltages yet.








1.35V in Bios

I played Games for 7 hours, i haven't tried with low voltages yet.





At least i can play Games and it doesn't crash.

I don't expect to hit 5.3 with less than 1.4V or maybe a little bit more since the CPU it's not Delidded.


----------



## dj-electric (Jul 2, 2018)

Tasty. Can we have some Cinebench single-core?


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> Tasty. Can we have some Cinebench single-core?



If it doesn't crash yes however i will run the test later after i finish to play.


----------



## dj-electric (Jul 2, 2018)

If single core CB crash might as well run like headless chickens.  An unstable OC is like an online catfish - it might look sexy but if its not there, you can only stay with a screen shot.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> If single core CB crash might as well run like headless chickens.  An unstable OC is like an online catfish - it might look sexy but if its not there, you can only stay with a screen shot.



I am aware of that.


----------



## Vario (Jul 2, 2018)

Looks like a nice one Knoxx.  Are you going to delid it and run direct die?


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> Tasty. Can we have some Cinebench single-core?



*Single core*







*Multi core*






https://valid.x86.fr/bnwgme




Vario said:


> Are you going to delid it and run direct die?



I wont, if low temps are needed i use the Waterchiller


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 2, 2018)

That single core though - hopefully my 7740x is a good bin to come close haha


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

Big surprise.

At 5.2GHz Cinebench score is higher than 5.3GHz


----------



## las (Jul 2, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> *Multi core*



This seems very low? Some 8700K/8086K's hits 1600-1700 multi
Or did they update Cinebench?





https://techreport.com/review/33786/intel-core-i7-8086k-cpu-reviewed/6


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

las said:


> This seems very low? Some 8700K/8086K's hits 1600-1700 multi
> Or did they update Cinebench?
> 
> 
> ...




I could get higher numbers but this is me been lazy and not in the mood to be tweaking here and there i just ran a few quick tests because @dj-electric asked me otherwise i wouldn't do it.



las said:


> Or did they update Cinebench?



Cinebench latest version is R15.038, i am using R15.0


----------



## dj-electric (Jul 2, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Big surprise.
> 
> At 5.2GHz Cinebench score is higher than 5.3GHz




That's not surprise, that's instability 
CB score is a great way to face real performance instabilities in a short manner.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 2, 2018)

I'd say the 7740x has pretty decent oc range, I've always wanted a 8700k - shame in the UK cex sold me the i7-7740x for £125 posted and the i5x was £130 lol. The 8700k is easily £270 here, that 8086k though is a mad overclocker, delid that beast.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> That's not surprise, that's instability



I wouldn't be that sure there is something else going on because even after increasing the voltage to 1.45V it is the same.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 2, 2018)

Thermal throttling probably?


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Thermal throttling?
> 
> 
> Thermal throttling?



Nope, the Water's temp is 10c and max Temp when running at 5.3GHz 1.45V Cinebench is 51c


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 2, 2018)

It's definitely not enough voltage then - It probably needs more.

You've hit it lucky with the silicon lottery without a doubt still - I haven't been lucky at all and gone through around 20~ different cpus. Awaiting for the money for a x299 mb then i can see if i got lucky with my 7740x. I'm glad my 6600k does 4.5 at 1.27v I need to push it further tbh.


----------



## fireedo (Jul 2, 2018)

definetely not enough voltage
I'm sorry for attaching my result for my 8086K OC'ed to 5.3Ghz CB15, but for 5.3Ghz you should get around this


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> It's definitely not enough voltage then - It probably needs more.
> 
> You've hit it lucky with the silicon lottery without a doubt still - I haven't been lucky at all and gone through around 20~ different cpus. Awaiting for the money for a x299 mb then i can see if i got lucky with my 7740x. I'm glad my 6600k does 4.5 at 1.27v I need to push it further tbh.



For more than 10 years i have been lucky every time i bought a CPU.



fireedo said:


> but for 5.3Ghz you should get around this



As said before it was just a quick test, i have/had a few things running in background.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 2, 2018)

fireedo said:


> definetely not enough voltage
> I'm sorry for attaching my result for my 8086K OC'ed to 5.3Ghz CB15, but for 5.3Ghz you should get around this
> View attachment 103394


Yeah, that looks about right.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 2, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> For more than 10 years i have been lucky every time i bought a CPU.


Let's start up a silicon lottery business, you can buy the cpus for me haha.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

I just need my time.


----------



## las (Jul 2, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I just need my time.
> 
> 
> View attachment 103401



What did you "tweak" compared to the last result? Memory speed and timings?
They are now in line with others. The last one was very low, as in lower than 8700K stock.

Seems like a good chip, grats


----------



## Vario (Jul 2, 2018)

Great results so far Knoxx, that is an impressive result so far.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

I disable a few programs that were running in background which uses some CPU % and set my Ram  once again at 3300 instead of 2800 ( Ram is rated 3000 ) and done


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 2, 2018)

xorbe said:


> Yeah okay my auto settings are pushing sa/io sky high compared to recommended oc settings, will have to play with those.
> 
> 
> 
> 5GHz 1.395v, compiling source code 223w at the wall, prime95 thermal throttling to 3.6GHz 258w at the wall.


yeah, broaching that 225-250W mark is going to lead to throttle.you either need to tame the power use somehow, or get a new chip. 



Knoxx29 said:


> I wouldn't be that sure there is something else going on because even after increasing the voltage to 1.45V it is the same.


Probably a bit anemic on the current limits.



Knoxx29 said:


> I disable a few programs that were running in background which uses some CPU % and set my Ram  once again at 3300 instead of 2800 ( Ram is rated 3000 ) and done



What rams? Getting 4 GHz rams really lets these chips fly; when it comes to OC, the best are ones that have every part of the chip scale up in speed to match the CPU frequency. Sometimes that costs lots.. other times you get lucky... you say you are lucky... just how lucky?


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> Probably a bit anemic on the current limits.



Everything is fine now.



cadaveca said:


> What rams?



What is Ram for you?



cadaveca said:


> you say you are lucky



Did i say that?


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 2, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Everything is fine now.
> 
> 
> 
> What is Ram for you?




Its no Bueno. 5 GHz scores get just under ~1700.. you have 5.1 GHz cinebench result score imho.


I'm pushing 3600 MHz on all these kits (this is just a small group), except the 4 GHz kist that I am pushing @ 4500. 







Knoxx29 said:


> For more than 10 years i have been lucky every time i bought a CPU.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> 5 GHz scores get just under ~1700.. you have 5.1 GHz cinebench result score imho.



You mean that at 5.3GHz should be higher?


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 2, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> You mean that at 5.3GHz should be higher?


Yeah, unfortunately. My 5.3 GHz with 3600 MHz rams is just shy of 1800 points..1786.Try 19-19-19 rams @ 3600 MHz, see if it helps the score?


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> I'm pushing 3600 MHz on all these kits (this is just a small group), except the 4 GHz kit that I am pushing @ 4500.



And what do you mean by that?

When i say i was lucky i meant that when i bought a CPU i never had issues with voltages and clock speed, like some other folks.



cadaveca said:


> Yeah, unfortunately.



Well a few points more wont change my life or the CPU will performance better at least it OCs not that bad and it doesn't need a lot of voltage.


----------



## r9 (Jul 2, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Thanks for the answer, anyway i guess i will give it a try.
> 
> 
> 
> Last thing i worry about is money



Can I have some ?


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

r9 said:


> Can I have some ?



Hard earned and many years of work


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 2, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> And what do you mean by that?
> 
> When i say i was lucky i meant that when i bought a CPU i never had issues with voltages and clock speed, like some other folks.



I'm saying your rig has some luck left in it.. keep playing!  None of those rams is special.. the 4000 kits obviously are good Samsung B-die (there is bad B-Die too), and the lowest any kit has got is 3600 MHz.





Knoxx29 said:


> Well a few points more wont change my life or the CPU will performance better at least it OCs not that bad and it doesn't need a lot of voltage.



The score, as DJ electric mentioned, does hint at you being not 1000% stable. Just trying to help...  Could be ASUS's fault tho. I haven't pushed that board hard; I prefer ASRock and MSI for clocking right now.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 2, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> I'm saying your rig has some luck left in it.. keep playing!



As soon as i feel better i will, after an operation still feel a lot of pain and the painkillers are killing me. 



cadaveca said:


> Just trying to help...



I know you are and i really appreciate it


----------



## r9 (Jul 4, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Hard earned and many years of work


That's yes or a no ?


----------



## xorbe (Jul 4, 2018)

RMA'd the first chip.  New one runs Cinebench 5.2 GHz @ 1.36v score 1695.  Is that more in the ballpark now?  Can't maintain 5.3 GHz, that's a reboot during CB even with big voltage.  To be prime95-avx stable is much, _much _tougher, like 4.8 to avoid throttling.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 4, 2018)

xorbe said:


> RMA'd the first chip.  New one runs Cinebench 5.2 GHz @ 1.36v score 1695.  Is that more in the ballpark now?  Can't maintain 5.3 GHz, that's a reboot during CB even with big voltage.  To be prime95-avx stable is much, _much _tougher, like 4.8 to avoid throttling.



Way Way better.

That 1.36V full load running Cinebench?

Mine is at  5.2GHz 1.328V idle and full load 1.36V when running any test and when playing games it stays at 1.328V.

This was yesterday





https://valid.x86.fr/525y0c


----------



## xorbe (Jul 5, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Way Way better.
> 
> That 1.36V full load running Cinebench?
> 
> Mine is at  5.2GHz 1.328V idle and full load 1.36V when running any test and when playing games it stays at 1.328V.



Right, it was 1.36v under load.  I'm running with small vdroop (personal preference).  It was 1.375 idle iirc for that 5.2 run.  I settled on 5.0@1.328v which is 1.312v under load, and 0.03 above apparent minimum voltage for hours of compiling linux and prime95-non-avx.  Seems kind of slightly sub-average result even for an 8700K [I see 5.0 @ 1.27 being recommended for 8700K? While I needed 1.28 minimum.]  Just got the m.2 installed and Win10 installed.  That chip you've got is a humdinger!


----------



## kbk_75 (Jul 16, 2018)

So I just delided my 8086K and applied Conductonaut / Kryonaut. Managed to go from a stable 5.2GHz all core, no AVX offset @ 1.38V, 5.2 uncore to 5.4GHz, no AVX offset @ 1.50V, 4.7 uncore. Temps are going up to 91-93C while stress testing so I won’t be using this setting 24x7 for sure, just wanted to see how far I could push this chip on air. It can also do a stable 5.3 GHz all core, no AVX offset @ 1.45V, 5.2 uncore. That’s a little high for 24x7 use as well, so I might drop it to 5.3GHz all core, no AVX offset, 1.38V @ 4.7 or so uncore (haven’t tested 4.8 or 4.9 uncore yet). 

I’m pretty happy with this CPU, I seem to have got a decent one! Will play around with memory speed and timings tomorrow along with bus frequencies to see how much I can get outta it.


----------



## hat (Jul 17, 2018)

Wow, second post in over 10 years...

Wouldn't 1.38v even be a bit high for this chip?


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 17, 2018)

hat said:


> Wow, second post in over 10 years...
> 
> Wouldn't 1.38v even be a bit high for this chip?


That's why they use that silly paste... it really does prevent overvolting. He mentioned running 1.5V... That's hilarious. But the temps.. now that's interesting though. The temp drop allows for so much more voltage, but those gains aren't really worth all that added voltage and heat, really, are they?

Shows how well Intel is binning these chips though, and for such a special CPU, that's really important. That chip, delidded, is gonna run super cool @ 5.0 GHz on all cores, and that's quite nice.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 17, 2018)

5.2 at 1.38v is really good.  Turns out my second cpu can't hold 5.2 no matter how much voltage.  Well it ran CB in windows, but can't compile source code in Linux.  So I still got a bottom 40% sample, eh.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 17, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> That's why they use that silly paste... it really does prevent overvolting. He mentioned running 1.5V... That's hilarious.



Not according to Intel.  It's actually "in spec":





PS:  And then for comparison you have my coffee lake 8700k that can't do 4.8Ghz all cores in summer without at least 1.32+ volts... lol.


----------



## kbk_75 (Jul 17, 2018)

hat said:


> Wow, second post in over 10 years...
> 
> Wouldn't 1.38v even be a bit high for this chip?



Haha yup, guess I never posted back when I built my 2600K rig in 2011! That chip has run flawlessly at 4.6 GHz for 7 1/2 years at 1.42V. Different animal, I know, but I think 1.38V for everyday use shouldn’t degrade the IMC on this 8086K. Thoughts?

I do plan on keeping this chip for a while unless something else comes out that absolutely destroys it in the gaming arena, which I, honestly, cannot see happening anytime soon.



cadaveca said:


> That's why they use that silly paste... it really does prevent overvolting. He mentioned running 1.5V... That's hilarious. But the temps.. now that's interesting though. The temp drop allows for so much more voltage, but those gains aren't really worth all that added voltage and heat, really, are they?
> 
> Shows how well Intel is binning these chips though, and for such a special CPU, that's really important. That chip, delidded, is gonna run super cool @ 5.0 GHz on all cores, and that's quite nice.



I’d be a cynic and say it has nothing to do with anything other than saving a buck on each chip they sell.

I got a 15C drop after my delid Conductonaut / Kryonaut vs before with AS5. I’m running an NH-D15 so that gives you some perspective for the temps, plus it’s around 25-26C ambient right now and I’m still testing the whole rig outside my HAF-X case. Might get a little hotter once it’s all assembled inside the case and/or it gets warmer here, which it will in a couple months.




xorbe said:


> 5.2 at 1.38v is really good.  Turns out my second cpu can't hold 5.2 no matter how much voltage.  Well it ran CB in windows, but can't compile source code in Linux.  So I still got a bottom 40% sample, eh.



Is that 5.2 with no AVX offset or with an offset? I am seeing a ~.05V drop for each AVX offset I try. Might try to push for 5.5GHz today with an offset of -2 just to see if this thing will manage it! =)



R-T-B said:


> Not according to Intel.  It's actually "in spec":
> 
> View attachment 104000
> 
> PS:  And then for comparison you have my coffee lake 8700k that can't do 4.8Ghz all cores in summer without at least 1.32+ volts... lol.



From what I’ve read people have been getting 8086K units with production dates in late 2017, so Intel has been planning this chip for a while and binning the best CPUs as 8086Ks. I contemplated getting an 8700K and hoping for some luck but then went the 8086K route and I’m glad I did. I do not get all the hate this CPU is getting, tbh. They are cherry picked 8700Ks and if I have managed to get to 5.4GHz stable with AVX loads it proves that they are unquestionably the cream of the 8700K crop. May not be worth paying extra for, for most, but nobody’s forcing you to buy the top spec desktop part, right?

This chip ran 5.0GHz stable with no AVX offset but 4.5 uncore at around 1.21V 5 mins after I first fired it up, so I guess it is a good one.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Not according to Intel.  It's actually "in spec":
> 
> View attachment 104000
> 
> PS:  And then for comparison you have my coffee lake 8700k that can't do 4.8Ghz all cores in summer without at least 1.32+ volts... lol.


You are correct sir, but it's not as simple as just upping to voltage, and everything is good. Current limits need adjusting as well, and this does not happen when you overclock. It does should a CPU have this VID assigned, but a VID and actual voltage supplied to a CPU do not always coincide. Thing like current limits and loadline calibrations are big factors in this. I had those whitepapers with such info before the launch of Z370.  That's the sort of stuff signing NDAs gets you. 

But yeah, clearly these CPUs seem on average much better than 8700K, and very much reminds me of the Devil's Canyon 4790K CPUs, and how 4790K was binned for 4.6 GHz, which is a fair bit higher than the 4770K was, as well as being higher than their stock clocks. Intel says they binned 8086K CPUs for over 5 GHz, but how over was not disclosed. Could be simply 5 GHz within a target voltage that leaves some overhead, which could leave some CPUs barely able to get over 5 GHz (which I have seen some reports of, although they are few are far between).


----------



## FireFox (Jul 17, 2018)

kbk_75 said:


> 5.4GHz, no AVX offset @ 1.50V,



I will give it a shot at 1.50V for 5.5GHz

Of course not Delidded



R-T-B said:


> Not according to Intel. It's actually "in spec"



Link please.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 17, 2018)

I mean, Dave, I would think you'd know me well enough to know I also know how to calculate a wattage.  Yes, current is relevant, yes VIDs consider this and static voltage does not.  These are kind of "duh" things for me frankly, no offense intended.  Assuming you mean them for a more general reader then.

I was just kind of giggling at how you exclaimed "1.5 volts!" as if that meant everything.  It was worthy of a small jab even if we both know you know better.



Knoxx29 said:


> Link please.



I have it as a pdf on my phone.  It's an official intel doc though, somewhere.  Can't google it up tonight (again, on my phone) but will try tomorrow.

EDIT:  Here is the complete, unabridged doc.  Aparently googling on my phone is easier than I remember.

Page 110, specifically.


https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...cessor-family-s-platform-datasheet-vol-1.html


----------



## FireFox (Jul 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...cessor-family-s-platform-datasheet-vol-1.html



Thanks.

Later on turning on the Chiller and increasing voltages


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 17, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Thanks.
> 
> Later on turning on the Chiller and increasing voltages



Keep in mind as Dave pointed out, that is for stock products using vids with current limits in place.

Yes you can go higher than many think, especially with a chiller.  I would not exceed 1.4v for 247 though no matter the cooling.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> for 247




Joke.



R-T-B said:


> I would not exceed 1.4v



It's just for test.


----------



## kbk_75 (Jul 17, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I will give it a shot at 1.50V for 5.5GHz
> 
> Of course not Delidded



What cooler are you running? I could not even contemplate 1.45V + before I delided my chip. That’s a real golden sample you have if it can take 1.5V without a delid and not next to instantly hit max temp!


----------



## dj-electric (Jul 17, 2018)

Just got my hands on my ES 8086K unit. Its a little unfortunate to me that its an ES, so it holds much less value than a retail box that celebrate it, but i hope to get good numbers. Will test it without any modding and a D15 and report my findings - i am less of a ride or die runs and more of a "can we get this to 5Ghz on air and have decent system noise compered to 8700K".


----------



## FireFox (Jul 17, 2018)

kbk_75 said:


> What cooler are you running?



Waterchiller.


----------



## kbk_75 (Jul 17, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> i am less of a ride or die runs and more of a "can we get this to 5Ghz on air and have decent system noise compered to 8700K".



You should get well above 5GHz on a D15 with virtually zero system noise. My PSU and GPU fans don’t even spin when I test the CPU and the D15 is damn near silent sitting one foot from me on my desk! Good luck with your tests!


----------



## FireFox (Jul 17, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> Just got my hands on my ES 8086K unit. Its a little unfortunate to me that its an ES, so it holds much less value than a retail box that celebrate it, but i hope to get good numbers. Will test it without any modding and a D15 and report my findings - i am less of a ride or die runs and more of a "can we get this to 5Ghz on air and have decent system noise compered to 8700K".



To hit 5.0GHz/5.1GHz is pretty easy but i don't know if it is the same thing for an ES.


----------



## dj-electric (Jul 17, 2018)

I mean, there's not much of an engineering to be done. This isn't some early hardware of any kind, not since the 8700K exists in engineering almost a whole year earlier. I think its marked as ES to be used internally or by media instead of being sold outside.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 17, 2018)

kbk_75 said:


> Is that 5.2 with no AVX offset or with an offset? I am seeing a ~.05V drop for each AVX offset I try. Might try to push for 5.5GHz today with an offset of -2 just to see if this thing will manage it! =)  [...] This chip ran 5.0GHz stable with no AVX offset but 4.5 uncore at around 1.21V 5 mins after I first fired it up, so I guess it is a good one.



No AVX offset, as Linux seems to keep the offset active 100% of the time, so it becomes pointless.  1.21 @ 5.0 is incredible, that's 0.08v less than mine, that's a 14% power savings which makes it a lot easier to keep temps down for you.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 17, 2018)

I wanted to run a test but the Dew point is 11c


----------



## dj-electric (Jul 17, 2018)

Time to isolate, dude


----------



## FireFox (Jul 17, 2018)

dj-electric said:


> Time to isolate, dude



Nah, i will wait till the Dew point will be lower, when i said the Dew point is 11c i meant in the Room.

This is a Platinum CPU

i7 8086K 5.5 ghz / 5500 Mhz running Cinebench R15 on 1,408v


----------



## xorbe (Jul 28, 2018)

*YOU HAVE TO DELID!!!*

Slightly sanded under-edge of cap to make sure it would rest directly on die. Slammed back on with NT-H1 and nothing else to hold the cap (ghetto, eh).  It really is truly smashed against the die, lol.  Wowzers, it can run Prime95 AVX small FFT @ 5.0 without it immediately doing 100C within 3 seconds, niiiiiiice!  It ran AVX small FFTs 1 minute each for 15 minutes, bounces 82-84C.  Oh man so nice.  If I am not mistaken it runs avx slightly cooler than non-avx before delid.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

xorbe said:


> *YOU HAVE TO DELID!!!*



Why should I?


----------



## xorbe (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Why should I?



Still using play-doh paste?


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

What is the difference between Delidding and running the Chiller cooling the water at 5c?


----------



## phill (Jul 28, 2018)

I'd have hoped the temps would have been even better, but that's just crazy talk from me


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

phill said:


> I'd have hoped the temps would have been even better, but that's just crazy talk from me



Winter time is coming soon.


----------



## R0H1T (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> *Winter* time *is coming* soon.


I think the next winter is postponed, till spring 2019?


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> I think the next winter is postponed, till spring 2019?


----------



## R0H1T (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


>


Something to do with the knights & kings, totally off topic I know. Just reminding fans.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jul 28, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> Something to do with the knights & kings, totally off topic I know. Just reminding fans.



Since the first season I'm waiting for that spectacle and they never cease to disappoint tbh. Reminds me of Dragonball Z where an imminent destruction takes half a season.

ANYWAY...

Nice results on that 8086k, 5.5  :O


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

I have never asked or tried it before but is it possible to clean up the Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I have never asked or tried it before but is it possible to clean up the Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra?


I've run cooling fluids through a coffee filter, which works well if it has particulate matter.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

Still trying to figure out what you meant

I have one more question.

I have a tube of Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra which i used just once, i dont remember when i bought it (maybe 4 or 5 years ago ) does Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra expires?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Still trying to figure out what you meant


I feel smart.. Thought you were talking about a liquid coolant. Sorry Knoxx.


----------



## sneekypeet (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> does Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra expire



Squeeze out a little bit. If it is oily, it means it has separated. Also smell it for any off putting aroma, that is another sign it may have passed its prime. Usually, since the tubes can be resealed, they do tend to last quite a long time.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

i am tempted to Delidd the 8086K i was wrong, the Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra i have it is 1 year and 5 months old.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> i am tempted to Delidd the 8086K i was wrong, the Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra i have it is 1 year and 5 months old.


Question : Is a new and sealed 8086k worth getting at £300?


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Question : Is a new and sealed 8086k worth getting at £300?



Considering i paid 480€ i would say yes


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Considering i paid 480€ i would say yes


Wow that's a lot - Looks like I need to save ASAP


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Wow that's a lot - Looks like I need to save ASAP



The only thing i know is that someone in here will tell you that it is not worth


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> The only thing i know is that someone in here will tell you that it is not worth


Lol, I'm considering It since 8700k's are going for £235 here used with 2yrs warranty, I need to sell my 7740x ASAP then.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 28, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Question : Is a new and sealed 8086k worth getting at £300?


Yes, that a good deal. Make sure it's not a scam.


Knoxx29 said:


> The only thing i know is that someone in here will tell you that it is not worth


There's always going to be that lot being negative without cause. It's Intel first 5Ghz CPU and it seems to be a damn good one, based on the benchmark numbers, especially for gaming. For other computing tasks there is room for some healthy debate, but for gaming, the 8086k is a full on winner no one could go wrong choosing.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Lol, I'm considering It since 8700k's are going for £235 here used with 2yrs warranty, I need to sell my 7740x ASAP then.



And i have my 8700K in a corner begging me to put it back to work.



lexluthermiester said:


> for gaming, the 8086k is a full on winner no one could go wrong choosing.



Don't say that too loud


----------



## R0H1T (Jul 28, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> Yes, that a good deal. Make sure it's not a scam.
> 
> There's always going to be that lot being negative without cause. It's Intel first 5Ghz CPU and it seems to be a damn good one, based on the benchmark numbers, especially for gaming. For other computing tasks there is room for some healthy debate, but for gaming, *the 8086k is a full on winner no one could go wrong choosing*.


Yeah but then there's the 9700k & 9900k waiting in the wings, for anyone who hasn't chosen CFL atm now's not the time to hurry.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

Yo mean this?: Intel Core i9-9900K Flagship CPU Performance Benchmark Leaked –*Tested in 3DMark Performance Benchmark and Clocking Up To 5.0 GHz **Blue Team’s 8 Core is Way Faster Than Red Team’s 8 Core.*


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Yo mean this?: Intel Core i9-9900K Flagship CPU Performance Benchmark Leaked –*Tested in 3DMark Performance Benchmark and Clocking Up To 5.0 GHz **Blue Team’s 8 Core is Way Faster Than Red Team’s 8 Core.*


I won’t believe anything until I get proper reviews


----------



## R0H1T (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Yo mean this?: Intel Core i9-9900K Flagship CPU Performance Benchmark Leaked –*Tested in 3DMark Performance Benchmark and Clocking Up To 5.0 GHz **Blue Team’s 8 Core is Way Faster Than Red Team’s 8 Core.*


Yeah for anyone who hasn't gone the 8700k or 8086k route, the upcoming 8 cores are an enticing prospect, for gaming or otherwise.


Durvelle27 said:


> I won’t believe anything until I get proper reviews


Intel won't release the i9 unless it beat 8700k in majority of the tasks, including gaming.


----------



## hat (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> What is the difference between Delidding and running the Chiller cooling the water at 5c?


Well, you wouldn't have to run the chiller to get good temps... or, at least run it so low. When you run the chiller too cold not only would it burn more energy to get there but you also risk condensation and all that.


----------



## phill (Jul 28, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> Yeah for anyone who hasn't gone the 8700k or 8086k route, the upcoming 8 cores are an enticing prospect, for gaming or otherwise.
> Intel won't release the i9 unless it beat 8700k in majority of the tasks, including gaming.



I don't want to de-rail the thread here but what about the 5960X??  That was 8 cores...  Seems people forget or don't want to go back that far..  

I'm still hanging on to mine, all threads @ 4.62Ghz @ 1.23vcore...  Max load temp 60C ish..  What more does anyone need??


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> Yeah for anyone who hasn't gone the 8700k or 8086k route, the upcoming 8 cores are an enticing prospect, for gaming or otherwise.



I went that route but it doesn't mean that i won't buy a 9700k or 9900k


----------



## phill (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I went that route but it doesn't mean that i won't buy a 9700k or 9900k



Was I reading it right that Intel might not be putting hyper threading on the i7 9700k?  Rumour again??


----------



## FireFox (Jul 28, 2018)

phill said:


> Was I reading it right that Intel might not be putting hyper threading on the i7 9700k?  Rumour again??



I was reading that too.

https://www.techradar.com/news/intel-core-i7-9700k-rumored-to-abandon-hyper-threading


----------



## hat (Jul 28, 2018)

phill said:


> I don't want to de-rail the thread here but what about the 5960X??  That was 8 cores...  Seems people forget or don't want to go back that far..
> 
> I'm still hanging on to mine, all threads @ 4.62Ghz @ 1.23vcore...  Max load temp 60C ish..  What more does anyone need??



Sure, but that was HEDT. These are mainstream boards, so the fact that 8 core is finally available "for the masses" is a big deal. That, and for people like us, these 8 cores a are a bit more advanced than that 5960x. While still a great chip to be sure, and I wouldn't mind having one myself, the 9900k would be even better, along with whatever newer technologies Z390 offers over x99.



phill said:


> Was I reading it right that Intel might not be putting hyper threading on the i7 9700k?  Rumour again??


Isn't the 9700k like the 8600k equivalent, with the 9900k being the 8700k equivalent? Seems to make sense to me, given they can't name their product stack worth shit.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 28, 2018)

Doesn't seem to be a scam too - the guy bought it and cancelled his build - I'll have to get the money saved up first and hope on either a ryzen 7 2700x or this 8086k.


----------



## phill (Jul 28, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I was reading that too.
> 
> https://www.techradar.com/news/intel-core-i7-9700k-rumored-to-abandon-hyper-threading





hat said:


> Sure, but that was HEDT. These are mainstream boards, so the fact that 8 core is finally available "for the masses" is a big deal. That, and for people like us, these 8 cores a are a bit more advanced than that 5960x. While still a great chip to be sure, and I wouldn't mind having one myself, the 9900k would be even better, along with whatever newer technologies Z390 offers over x99.
> 
> Isn't the 9700k like the 8600k equivalent, with the 9900k being the 8700k equivalent? Seems to make sense to me, given they can't name their product stack worth shit.



There I was thinking that X99 was for the masses as well!  Well overkill masses maybe but still... 

Well I hope they solder the damn thing for a start, I'm guessing this is all down to AMD and I can't thank them enough for all the gains we've all had over the last year or so with Ryzen..  Intel have been plodding along ever since they haven't been a threat, now they are, they are probably still plodding along but in a bit of a panic...

I guess since the 5960X is what 3 years old, I'd bloody hope that the 9900k would have newer things going for it lol  The game Intel is playing will probably back fire at some point..  
The naming kinda makes sense but all the years before hand that have been no hyper threading i5's, why they haven't just stuck with that I've no idea..  I'd love to meet these people that think up these naming conventions..  Bloody hopeless!! lol
My 5960X is very much a cherry picked example and with it being possible to hit 4.8Ghz without to much more volts, I would like to hope that this new 9900k is going to be a little bit faster again..  But I will ask this, in games, do you really think there will be a noticeable difference between the two CPUs??  Screw the benchmarks, in game, FPS, would you be able to tell the difference?  That's what I'm looking forward to seeing and reading about


----------



## hat (Jul 28, 2018)

Well, anyone who wants it enough can get x99, but by "the masses" I meant your average guy getting a system from Best Buy or something... though that guy still isn't likely to buy the 8 core system... it's on the mainstream platform now at least, is what I'm saying. The top end chips are rumored to be soldered, whether they start soldering more remains to be seen... I'd be okay without solder if they at least used better paste, though.

I think the only discernible difference would come if the rest if your system is also comprised of -very- strong hardware, such as 1080Ti, and you're going for really high refresh rates, like 144hz or above... or if you're playing very CPU limited games. As good as Ryzen is right now, Intel has still been shown to have the lead in this scenario, most notably with better minimum FPS. That said, if you were to start your own thread on this topic, there would likely be much disagreement between two sides... one who say it's noticeable, one who say not so much.

To get right down to it, from 5960x to 9900k (or 9700k) you stand to gain maybe 10% improvement clock for clock, and I'd expect them to be able to hit 5.5GHz at best, with 5.3 being a more likely result. At 5.3, that would be roughly equivalent to running your 5960x at around 5.8GHz, maybe more given you'd likely have much faster RAM in this system as well.

It's not much, but that's what market stagnation does. Thankfully we haven't really had much of a need for faster hardware in recent years... even as tough as PS2 emulation can be, so far even my insignificant i5 2400 destroys it. I have one game that I find my processor insufficient for at times... but everyone else does too in that game.


----------



## phill (Jul 28, 2018)

hat said:


> Well, anyone who wants it enough can get x99, but by "the masses" I meant your average guy getting a system from Best Buy or something... though that guy still isn't likely to buy the 8 core system... it's on the mainstream platform now at least, is what I'm saying. The top end chips are rumored to be soldered, whether they start soldering more remains to be seen... I'd be okay without solder if they at least used better paste, though.
> 
> I think the only discernible difference would come if the rest if your system is also comprised of -very- strong hardware, such as 1080Ti, and you're going for really high refresh rates, like 144hz or above... or if you're playing very CPU limited games. As good as Ryzen is right now, Intel has still been shown to have the lead in this scenario, most notably with better minimum FPS. That said, if you were to start your own thread on this topic, there would likely be much disagreement between two sides... one who say it's noticeable, one who say not so much.
> 
> ...



Give me some LN2 and this 5960X does do about the 5.7Ghz I'm told, so....   It'll cost a bit to run but then maybe I could try a chiller and see how I get on like Intel did 

Jokes aside, since Ryzen has come out, 8 core CPUs have become cheaper and been amazing value for money...  I'd hazard a guess unless people are wanting 1080P res to be as fast as possible for competition gaming etc, it might be the only area it will be best at..  Anything else, has been proven with X58 even, 1440P and even 4k, the CPU performance is pretty null and void..  That said, you'd hope that even at 1440P/4k, there might be a bit of an increase in performance but would it be noticeable?  Well, depends on how deep your wallets are I suppose   Which is why I guess some people have gone to Ryzen??  But I'm unsure why you'd want to run 1080P if you run 1080/1080 Ti anyways (aside from competition etc...  Must be a numbers or e-peen thing maybe??)  

I understand you logic and respect the reply, shall we both agree on the upcoming review to see how it actually fairs and go from there??  
Just out of pure interest, what is the game that your current setup/CPU struggles with??


----------



## hat (Jul 29, 2018)

CPU performance is pretty much "null and void" past a certain point, for the most part (especially at 4k)... but, it mostly becomes relevant again once you start pushing high refresh rates, like 144hz. Almost any CPU (unless it's a very demanding game) these days can keep up with 60hz. Look at any CPU review, or any kind of comparison that shows what results look like at 4k. There is very little difference between even Pentium chips and the 8700k because at that point the limiting factor is very much the GPU. If you had a magical GPU 5x faster than the 1080Ti, the differences between the CPUs would soon become apparent again. If you're running 1920x1080 with a 1080Ti, it's because you're more interested in hitting high refresh rates (144hz).

A lot of people have gone for Ryzen because they're more interested in... a whole list of possible reasons. Maybe they'd rather give their money to AMD than Intel, or they're interested in the high multithread performance, or the price. Ryzen does very well, it's not a bad chip by any means, nothing like Bulldozer. All that said, sure, go ahead and wait it out and take a look at the reviews that will surface. It's the best way for anyone to make an informed decision. You know yourself better than anyone else knows you, so you can judge what hardware is best with your own needs in mind.

The game I have trouble with is 7 Days to Die... it seems really CPU bound. While playing the game my 1070 doesn't even run at high clocks or show high utilization, but I still get low frames, especially when a lot is going on.


----------



## phill (Jul 29, 2018)

hat said:


> CPU performance is pretty much "null and void" past a certain point, for the most part (especially at 4k)... but, it mostly becomes relevant again once you start pushing high refresh rates, like 144hz. Almost any CPU (unless it's a very demanding game) these days can keep up with 60hz. Look at any CPU review, or any kind of comparison that shows what results look like at 4k. There is very little difference between even Pentium chips and the 8700k because at that point the limiting factor is very much the GPU. If you had a magical GPU 5x faster than the 1080Ti, the differences between the CPUs would soon become apparent again. If you're running 1920x1080 with a 1080Ti, it's because you're more interested in hitting high refresh rates (144hz).
> 
> A lot of people have gone for Ryzen because they're more interested in... a whole list of possible reasons. Maybe they'd rather give their money to AMD than Intel, or they're interested in the high multithread performance, or the price. Ryzen does very well, it's not a bad chip by any means, nothing like Bulldozer. All that said, sure, go ahead and wait it out and take a look at the reviews that will surface. It's the best way for anyone to make an informed decision. You know yourself better than anyone else knows you, so you can judge what hardware is best with your own needs in mind.
> 
> The game I have trouble with is 7 Days to Die... it seems really CPU bound. While playing the game my 1070 doesn't even run at high clocks or show high utilization, but I still get low frames, especially when a lot is going on.



Again, I agree with what your saying   As I mentioned, the Ryzen CPUs will do well, but the Intel clock speeds are slightly higher and will clock higher again have that edge..  Would I personally consider one over an Intel?  Damn right I would but I'm not worried about the 144hz at the moment, that's when I go for bigger screens myself as I currently game on triple 1080P..  

I've not heard of the game before, what is the CPU that your currently running?  The i5 2400?  The spec list of the game on Steam, doesn't really give masses of hints to what it needs, just says a quad faster than 3Ghz...  I didn't really notice any issues with my 2600k and 1070 whilst gaming so might just be a bit of clock speed on your side of things it's having a struggle with?  Noticed that with a G3258 then swapping over to a 4770k..  But I digress...


----------



## hat (Jul 29, 2018)

Yeah, the i5 2400. It runs acceptable most of the time, but there are sudden, seemingly random and noticeable FPS drops, and during a big fight things can get rough. I do want to upgrade my system sometime, mostly because of that game... but I know outside of that I'll likely not notice much difference, and the money is best held on to when it's something I don't really need. Every once in a while though I try to see if I can find a Z68 or P67 board for super cheap so I can bump it up a little bit, but I never find one cheap enough.


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 29, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Yo mean this?: Intel Core i9-9900K Flagship CPU Performance Benchmark Leaked –*Tested in 3DMark Performance Benchmark and Clocking Up To 5.0 GHz **Blue Team’s 8 Core is Way Faster Than Red Team’s 8 Core.*


In other news, *Flagship* Veyron faster than average family car.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 29, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> Yeah but then there's the 9700k & 9900k waiting in the wings, for anyone who hasn't chosen CFL atm now's not the time to hurry.


Those will be $1000+ cpu's. The 8086k is reasonably priced for the performance it offers.


phill said:


> I don't want to de-rail the thread here but what about the 5960X??  That was 8 cores...  Seems people forget or don't want to go back that far..
> I'm still hanging on to mine, all threads @ 4.62Ghz @ 1.23vcore...  Max load temp 60C ish..  What more does anyone need??


Good point. I think the purpose of this discussion is for those who don't already have a top-tier CPU. Going from a 5960X to a 8086k would not be an upgrade. But going from an older quad-core or even older 6-core would. I'm betting that the new i9's won't even be much of an upgrade from your 5960x and thus not worth the money.


----------



## phill (Jul 29, 2018)

hat said:


> Yeah, the i5 2400. It runs acceptable most of the time, but there are sudden, seemingly random and noticeable FPS drops, and during a big fight things can get rough. I do want to upgrade my system sometime, mostly because of that game... but I know outside of that I'll likely not notice much difference, and the money is best held on to when it's something I don't really need. Every once in a while though I try to see if I can find a Z68 or P67 board for super cheap so I can bump it up a little bit, but I never find one cheap enough.



My 2600k sits in an Asrock Z77 OCF Formula board, as does my 4770k and 6700k, they all have OCF boards..  I don't personally like trying to cheap out on things because I find I have to buy twice, waste more money and so on..  I spend a bit more the first time, get the board I really want and go from there..
I suppose that said you could always upgrade to a Ryzen or the new i9 if you wanted too 



lexluthermiester said:


> Those will be $1000+ cpu's. The 8086k is reasonably priced for the performance it offers.
> 
> Good point. I think the purpose of this discussion is for those who don't already have a top-tier CPU. Going from a 5960X to a 8086k would not be an upgrade. But going from an older quad-core or even older 6-core would. I'm betting that the new i9's won't even be much of an upgrade from your 5960x and thus not worth the money.



I'm looking forward to the reviews @lexluthermiester , I'm just surprised that its the first for the masses type thing..  It was one reason why I went for the 5960X as it was an 8 core beast from a 920 D0...  I've most of the sockets in between granted but this is the system I use every day   Which reminds me, its cooler today..  Must start pushing it a little more...


----------



## dorsetknob (Jul 29, 2018)

Caring1 said:


> In other news, *Flagship* Veyron faster than average family car.


you bring the Veyron and i'll Bring a DAF 33
i bet that old DAF wipes the Floor with the Veyron  ( in Reverse )


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 31, 2018)

That 8086k that I found sold already, damn it.

Gotta love how the solid old tech makes more sense still - a 6950x costs £440 at CEX used with 2yrs warranty whilst the 7820x costs that much alone.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 31, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> That 8086k that I found sold already, damn it.
> 
> Gotta love how the solid old tech makes more sense still - a 6950x costs £440 at CEX used with 2yrs warranty whilst the 7820x costs that much alone.



If i wouldn't pay that much for mine i would sell it to you


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 31, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> If i wouldn't pay that much for mine i would sell it to you


Or sell your 8700k to me


----------



## las (Jul 31, 2018)

I'd choose 9700K 8C/8T over 8700K 6C/12T any day of the week. Especially considering it's has soldered IHS. Lets see tho. I find it strange that Intel does not release any new 6C/12T, unless they keep selling 8700K/8086K. Maybe we'll know more tomorrow.

8700K performs better in pretty much all games with HT disabled. So does Ryzen with SMT off. 9700K will have it's place. Could turn out to be the best gaming chip.



lexluthermiester said:


> Those will be $1000+ cpu's.



Haha, no way. Rumour is $450 for 9900K and $350 for 9700K.

I'd gladly pay $500 for that i9 if rumours are true tho. Day one purchase.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 31, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> those will be $1000+ cpu's.



Even If so i would give it a try as always


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 31, 2018)

las said:


> Haha, no way. Rumour is $450 for 9900K and $350 for 9700K.





Knoxx29 said:


> Even If so i would give it a try as always


We'll see. Intel may decide to compete with AMD on price. Could be interesting. Then again, those are top shelf offerings from Intel's line-up. If they let those loose for a bargin, they would need to discount the rest of their offerings and it just doesn't seem likely..


----------



## las (Aug 1, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> We'll see. Intel may decide to compete with AMD on price. Could be interesting. Then again, those are top shelf offerings from Intel's line-up. If they let those loose for a bargin, they would need to discount the rest of their offerings and it just doesn't seem likely..



It's stil MSDT and the "Limited Edition" i7-8086K is $429 MSRP I doubt i9-9900K is going to be much more than this. Hopefully we'll know soon. I'm getting 9700K or 9900K ASAP. I hope to see some Z390 board specs/pictures soon.


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 1, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> Those will be $1000+ cpu's. The 8086k is reasonably priced for the performance it offers.
> 
> Good point. I think the purpose of this discussion is for those who don't already have a top-tier CPU. Going from a 5960X to a 8086k would not be an upgrade. But going from an older quad-core or even older 6-core would. I'm betting that the new i9's won't even be much of an upgrade from your 5960x and thus not worth the money.



Intel will put an 8 core, mainstream part at 1k versus AMD's Ryzen offering? Not very likely...


----------



## kbk_75 (Aug 1, 2018)

I can’t see the so-called i9-9900k being anywhere near $1000. I would imagine more in the region of $550 or so. If these 8C/16T chips can do 5 GHz on all cores at sensible volts for 24x7 operation, Intel will have done well. 

My overclocked 8086K scores within 3-4% of a stock 2700X on multi-core benchmarks and wipes the floor with them in single core tests, so an all core 5GHz 9900k should be around 25-30% faster than a stock 2700X, I’d wager. Either way I can’t see a huge improvement to gaming FPS going from 8086K @ 5.2GHz to 9900K even @ 5GHz. It would be nice for encoding / converting / compression though.


----------



## xorbe (Aug 1, 2018)

Intel better hurry, everyone will be broke after the 1180 arrives!


----------



## FireFox (Aug 1, 2018)

xorbe said:


> Intel better hurry, everyone will be broke after the 1180 arrives!



Considering we don't know the prices yet i have 1000€ under the pillow just for the CPU


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 1, 2018)

las said:


> the "Limited Edition" i7-8086K is $429 MSRP I doubt i9-9900K is going to be much more than this.





Vayra86 said:


> Intel will put an 8 core, mainstream part at 1k versus AMD's Ryzen offering? Not very likely...


My guess is about $850 for the 9900k and $750 it baby brother. Again, we shall see.


----------



## Caring1 (Aug 1, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> Intel will put an 8 core, mainstream part at 1k versus AMD's Ryzen offering? Not very likely...


But they would have if it wasn't for AMD.


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 2, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> My guess is about $850 for the 9900k and $750 it baby brother. Again, we shall see.



If that's the case they are going to lose a lot of customers to the previous gen...


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 2, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> If that's the case they are going to lose a lot of customers to the previous gen...


How do you figure?


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 3, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> How do you figure?



... is that a rhetorical or genuine question?

Its not like the world is eagerly awaiting the first octacores and definitely not at that price point. Its already niche territory. Mainstream bought 6 core Ryzens, not the 8 cores with a higher price tag; that should tell you enough.


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 3, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> Mainstream bought 6 core Ryzens, not the 8 cores with a higher price tag; that should tell you enough.



I know more people in person that bought the 1700 over the 1600/1600X. I'm sure overall they did outsell the 8 core parts but plenty bought those as well. High core counts CPU are not that uncommon anymore.

And a 300$ octa core sounds pretty mainstream to me , the milestone has already been set actually.


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 3, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> I know more people in person that bought the 1700 over the 1600/1600X. I'm sure overall they did outsell the 8 core parts but plenty bought those as well. High core counts CPU are not that uncommon anymore.
> 
> And a 300$ octa core sounds pretty mainstream to me , the milestone has already been set actually.



Aye, can only agree on that, but the point was, there is no way in hell those CPUs will cost nearly double of the current high end MSDT offering from Intel. Ryzen 5 was ultimately touted as the bang/buck gaming CPU of the line up. Not Ryzen 7. And the majority of this market really is gaming. Not half-assed workstations


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 3, 2018)

Yeah I don't think it will cost that much either but I do definitely expect it to be more expensive than their current 6 core flagship.


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 3, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> Yeah I don't think it will cost that much either but I do definitely expect it to be more expensive than their current 6 core flagship.



499~599 EUR/$ is my wild guess


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 4, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> ... is that a rhetorical or genuine question?


Genuine.


Vayra86 said:


> Its not like the world is eagerly awaiting the first octacores and definitely not at that price point. Its already niche territory. Mainstream bought 6 core Ryzens, not the 8 cores with a higher price tag; that should tell you enough.


While those are valid points, Intel is not going to massively discount their entire line-up to introduce a few "niche", but higher end CPU's. Just don't see that happening.



Vayra86 said:


> 499~599 EUR/$ is my wild guess


Not seeing that happen either.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 18, 2018)

Sup People.

Am back with some of my stupid ideas.

For a while i have played with 8086K doing a few stress tests and benchmarks etc etc and now i got to the point where i got bored, this is the way i am and i cant do anything about it, so something came across my mind ( Delid to have a few minutes of fun) this time i want to delid (depending what you people suggest me ) but instead the original IHS i would like to use a Cooper IHS

https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/copper-ihs-for-lga-1150-1151?variant=2955766300685


I would like to hear your thoughts/comments/Advice and critics are welcome too

Edit: I am concerned about Cooper + Coollaboratory Liquid Ultra


----------



## DR4G00N (Sep 18, 2018)

The machined copper IHS will have minimal gains over the stock IHS, maybe a degree or two from the extra mass and surface area. I have one of those for Kaby lake but I've never actually used it.
And CLU will stain the copper but it's not like you'll ever see it anyway.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 18, 2018)

DR4G00N said:


> The machined copper IHS will have minimal gains over the stock IHS, maybe a degree or two from the extra mass and surface area. I have one of those for Kaby lake but I've never actually used it.
> And CLU will stain the copper but it's not like you'll ever see it anyway.


Exactly. The stock IHS is copper anyway, just nickle plated. If you don't believe it, scrape a bit away on a non-vital, non-contact area. You'll see it.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 18, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> The stock IHS is copper anyway



I know that but i have thought that full cooper would work better.



DR4G00N said:


> maybe a degree or two from the extra mass and surface area



I have Watched a few Videos where the temps have dropped from 3c to 7c, now if a delidded CPU could drop around 20c using the stock IHS would that means that using the full Cooper will add around 5c drop to the 20c gained from the Delidded?


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Sep 18, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> now if a delidded CPU could drop around 20c using the stock IHS would that means that using the full Cooper will add around 5c drop to the 20c gained from the Delidded?


I doubt that, It'll more realistically be around 2-3c off the stock one, Or less even.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 18, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> I doubt that, It'll more realistically be around 2-3c off the stock one, Or less even.



That said 20c + 2c/3c?


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Sep 18, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> That said 20c + 2c/3c?


It's likely, since the copper ihs shaves around 5c without a delid, with a delid it will not yield the same temperature drop but I'd expect around 2-3c + 20~ for the delid, it varies by processor.


----------



## mouacyk (Sep 18, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> It's likely, since the copper ihs shaves around 5c without a delid, with a delid it will not yield the same temperature drop but I'd expect around 2-3c + 20~ for the delid, it varies by processor.



Excuse me, must be a Tuesday... but how exactly do you test the copper IHS without a delid?


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Sep 18, 2018)

mouacyk said:


> Excuse me, must be a Tuesday... but how exactly do you test the copper IHS without a delid?


Delid the cpu without changing intel poo


----------



## kbk_75 (Sep 18, 2018)

Personally I wouldn’t (and didn’t) bother with the slightly larger copper IHS. I just did the delid, Conductonaut on the die, Kryonaut on the IHS, popped my NH-D15 back on and that was that. 15°C + reduction in load temps if I recall correctly.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 18, 2018)

kbk_75 said:


> Personally I wouldn’t (and didn’t) bother with the slightly larger copper IHS. I just did the delid, Conductonaut on the die, Kryonaut on the IHS, popped my NH-D15 back on and that was that. 15°C + reduction in load temps if I recall correctly.



Honestly i don't have any issues with temp it was just for fun ( to do something different ) *Coollaboratory Ultra* that is what i use.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 19, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Honestly i don't have any issues with temp it was just for fun ( to do something different ) *Coollaboratory Ultra* that is what i use.


Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut seems to be the better product. Below is an independent review of it and CLLU;
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...t-vs-cool-laboratory-liquid-ultra-pro.791489/ 

I used it once on a very high end client build. You have to be very careful using it, but amazing stuff!


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 19, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut seems to be the better product. Below is an independent review of it and CLLU;
> http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...t-vs-cool-laboratory-liquid-ultra-pro.791489/
> 
> I used it once on a very high end client build. You have to be very careful using it, but amazing stuff!



Yeah isn't that the one that actually eats metal if you're not careful when you're mixing two different metals?


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 19, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> Yeah isn't that the one that actually eats metal if you're not careful when you're mixing two different metals?



Aluminum, which we are not dealing with.


----------



## hat (Sep 19, 2018)

Thought it also damaged copper?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 19, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> Yeah isn't that the one that actually eats metal if you're not careful when you're mixing two different metals?


Sort of, it contains Gallium which will severely react with Aluminum and destroys the structure of it. Other metals are, IIRC, unaffected. So you have to be very careful with it and use Steel, Brass, Nickle and Copper based parts. Copper is really the best. And the thermal conductivity is amazing.



hat said:


> Thought it also damaged copper?


No, Copper is completely unaffected.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 19, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut seems to be the better product. Below is an independent review of it and CLLU;



Thanks for the advice but i prefer CLLU.


----------



## kbk_75 (Sep 19, 2018)

Who here is considering getting the so-called i9-9900K as a replacement of their i7-8086K?

If the rumours are correct, it’s Intel’s first mainstream chip since the Sandies that has solder instead of pigeon poop, 8C/16T and all core 5GHz apparently all but guaranteed!


----------



## hat (Sep 19, 2018)

Only the K series are soldered BTW - with the possible exception of the 9600k.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 19, 2018)

kbk_75 said:


> Who here is considering getting the so-called i9-9900K as a replacement of their i7-8086K?



I am not replacing the 8086K but i will buy a 9900K or 9700K even if the 9900K wouldn't be the right choice for Gaming.


----------



## kbk_75 (Sep 19, 2018)

9700K would be pretty perfect for gaming tbh, and the 9900K would be more or less ideal as a solid all around home office / home / gaming do-it-All rig.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 19, 2018)

kbk_75 said:


> 9700K would be pretty perfect for gaming tbh, and the 9900K would be more or less ideal as a solid all around home office / home / gaming do-it-All rig.



You got my point


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 19, 2018)

hat said:


> Thought it also damaged copper?



Stains, not damages.

...

Well come to think about it, it stains pretty much everything.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Sep 19, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I am not replacing the 8086K but i will buy a 9900K or 9700K even if the 9900K wouldn't be the right choice for Gaming.


buy one for me too


----------



## xorbe (Sep 19, 2018)

kbk_75 said:


> i9-9900K as a replacement of their i7-8086K?



Waiting for reviews, only because 8086K's 12MB cache vs 9900K's 16MB cache.  If I got the 9900K then I'd probably run with HT off.  Given how toasty a delidded 5GHz 8086K is, am curious if the 9900K can really do 5GHz all cores with regular loads (ie, not pure AVX).  It's probably not worth the hassle for me though.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 19, 2018)

xorbe said:


> Given how toasty a delidded 5GHz 8086K is



Toasty, voltage and clock speeds please?


----------



## xorbe (Sep 19, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Toasty, voltage and clock speeds please?



1.36v to stabilize AVX, and that leads to thermal throttling still even delidded.  Replacement cpu was better but still not stellar.  At least it didn't take 1.425 like siliconlottery bins at. For everyday use it works great, don't want to give the wrong impression.  If I had to run Prime95 loads, I'd knock it back to 4.8 though and reduced voltage.


----------



## FireFox (Sep 19, 2018)

you are not the first one i hear saying that the 8086K still even Delidded runs hot, i keep mine at 5.0GHz with 1.248V ( summertime )  it could runs with 1.226V but i always add a little more Voltage, nothing to say about temps.


----------



## kbk_75 (Sep 19, 2018)

xorbe said:


> If I got the 9900K then I'd probably run with HT off.



May as well just get the 9700K then, if the leaked specs are accurate.



Knoxx29 said:


> you are not the first one i hear saying that the 8086K still even Delidded runs hot, i keep mine at 5.0GHz with 1.248V ( summertime )  it could runs with 1.226V but i always add a little more Voltage, nothing to say about temps.



Mine goes into the low 80s °C on air (ambient around 30°C) with 5.2GHz  under AVX loads at 1.38V. Maybe the delidding process wasn’t that great on xorbe’s chips?


----------



## FireFox (Sep 19, 2018)

kbk_75 said:


> Mine goes into the low 80s °C on air (ambient around 30°C) with 5.2GHz under AVX loads at 1.38V. Maybe the delidding process wasn’t that great on xorbe’s chips?



Could be but if something went wrong i guess he tried to correct it


----------



## Spaceman Spiff (Sep 19, 2018)

xorbe said:


> 1.36v to stabilize AVX, and that leads to thermal throttling still even delidded.  Replacement cpu was better but still not stellar.  At least it didn't take 1.425 like siliconlottery bins at. For everyday use it works great, don't want to give the wrong impression.  If I had to run Prime95 loads, I'd knock it back to 4.8 though and reduced voltage.




How are you cooling that 8086k? I don't think I can trust your system specs....


----------



## FireFox (Sep 19, 2018)

Spaceman Spiff said:


> I don't think I can trust your system specs....



Of course that is not his real System specs


----------



## Spaceman Spiff (Sep 19, 2018)

Yup, that was the joke.  And why i asked.


----------



## kbk_75 (Oct 20, 2018)

So it looks as though the 9900K struggles to maintain a 5GHz all core OC with even an NH-D15 without thermal throttling. Guess I’ll stick with the 8086K @ 5.3 then. Might see a 10% improvement in things like Handbrake but will probably see a slight drop in low-core usage, so I just can’t see the sense in ‘upgrading’ to the 9900K.


----------



## FireFox (Oct 20, 2018)

kbk_75 said:


> So it looks as though the 9900K struggles to maintain a 5GHz all core OC with even an NH-D15 without thermal throttling.



Well, i guess a Watercooling/Waterchiller loop will do better the jog


----------



## puma99dk| (Oct 20, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Quick Question.
> 
> Does anyone own a i7-8086K?



I know it's late had mine since the start of August, it's a great cpu and collectable afterwards.

Talking about Collectable so got the Intel Pentium G3258, not home it's in the UK but it's there 

*EDIT* forgot to add it's running on a ASRock Z370 Taichi with a modded bios by @R-T-B with disabled Intel ME.


----------



## FireFox (Oct 20, 2018)

puma99dk| said:


> it's a great cpu and collectable afterwards.



Agree with you, honestly i shouldn't upgrade to a 9900K/9700K but meh i know how i am already picked the MainBoard


----------



## phill (Oct 20, 2018)

@Knoxx29 You need more Intel stuff!!  

Judging by the TPU it seemed somewhat of a let down the new 9900k..  I'm still so pleased with my 5960X I've not even considered buying it, that and the massively high price for it put me right off!  Intel got some nerve at the mo with their pricing....


----------



## puma99dk| (Oct 20, 2018)

@Knoxx29 I had 1 Extreme in my life if I remember correctly it was the Asus Maximus VI Extreme great board but not worth the price for me.

For the few last gens from that Extreme I tried MSI Z87 Gaming AC ITX, MSI Z97 Gaming AC ITX, going back to ATX Z170 (Asus I don't remember) then I did Gigabyte for Z270, Asus for X299 and not last ASRock Z370 Taichi always wanted to try a ASRock and it haven't disappoint me and I know in the future if I need another board I will go ASRock again because of it's value, updated drivers/bios and so on.


----------



## kbk_75 (Oct 20, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Agree with you, honestly i shouldn't upgrade to a 9900K/9700K but meh i know how i am already picked the MainBoard
> 
> View attachment 109014View attachment 109015



Tbh if it had pigeon poop I might still have been tempted to delid one and see whether a 5.1-5.2 all core oc was possible. No way I’m gonna risk ruining a CPU by taking a knife to the STIM, though. Just not worth it tbh. Guess they’re absolutely pushing the limit of what their 14nm process can achieve now. Maybe 10nm, when it finally launches, will allow 8086K speeds with 8C/16T.


----------



## FireFox (Oct 20, 2018)

phill said:


> Judging by the TPU it seemed somewhat of a let down the new 9900k..



If so anyway i will get the Motherboard i showed above considering it is compatible with the 8th Gen CPU.



puma99dk| said:


> @Knoxx29 I had 1 Extreme in my life if I remember correctly it was the Asus Maximus VI Extreme great board but not worth the price for me.



Almost every Motherboard i have owned is an Asus Extreme version i don't mind the price at all, i hate the one i own right now ( Rog Maximus X hero ) because it doesn't fit in the kind of Motherboard i am use to own/use/buy, at the time when the Z370 was launched Asus did not released any Extreme version and that is why i was forced to buy the Maximus X hero  i was pissed off Tbh, i am still pissed off


----------



## puma99dk| (Oct 20, 2018)

@Knoxx29 wasn't the Asus ROG Maximus X Apex considered as Extreme board?

It sure had the price and crazy looking to be one 

Link: https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-APEX/


----------



## FireFox (Oct 20, 2018)

puma99dk| said:


> @Knoxx29 wasn't the Asus ROG Maximus X Apex considered as Extreme board?
> 
> It sure had the price and crazy looking to be one
> 
> Link: https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/ROG-MAXIMUS-X-APEX/




Look carefully and tell me if you see any difference


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 20, 2018)

puma99dk| said:


> Asus ROG Maximus X Apex considered as Extreme board?


X apex are aimed at LN2 users and Water cooling / extreme OC the XI extreme is the more consumer focused board.


----------



## phill (Oct 20, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Look carefully and tell me if you see any difference
> 
> View attachment 109018View attachment 109019



One box is nearly all black and the other one has some red on it??   Oh and one says Apex X and the other says Extreme XI....??


----------



## FireFox (Oct 20, 2018)

phill said:


> Oh and one says Apex X and the other says Extreme XI....??


----------



## phill (Oct 20, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


>



So in all seriousness, what were the differences?  Did @Xx Tek Tip xX have it correct?


----------



## FireFox (Oct 20, 2018)

phill said:


> So in all seriousness, what were the differences?  Did @Xx Tek Tip xX have it correct?



I prefer the one that says Extreme.

Note: that's just me spending money i don't have to.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 20, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I prefer the one that says Extreme.
> 
> Note: that's just me spending money i don't have to.


Well - I would've personally went with the apex if your sole purpose is overclocking - Apex boards are designed to OC like a champ and will always be superior to the "extreme board" - the extreme boards is the best available board for features but it will not provide the same grade of overclocking as the apex does.


----------



## phill (Oct 20, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I prefer the one that says Extreme.
> 
> Note: that's just me spending money i don't have to.



Everyone needs a little Extreme in their lives   Although I have wondered whether or not the Asrock OCF boards are a little better for the overclocking compared to the Asus boards of late?


----------



## FireFox (Oct 20, 2018)

phill said:


> Although I have wondered whether or not the Asrock OCF boards are a little better for the overclocking compared to the Asus boards of late?



I cant say anything about it because i dont even know what Asrock OCF is 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	






Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> the extreme boards is the best available board for features but it will not provide the same grade of overclocking as the apex does.



So far any of my ex Asus Extreme boards had disappointed me.


----------



## phill (Oct 20, 2018)

Ones like this @Knoxx29 

Z77 Asrock OC Forumla OCF
Z97 Asrock OC Forumla OCF
Z170 Asrock OC Forumla OCF





I'm trying to track down a Z170M OCF but they are a little on the rare side sadly...  Might take me a little while...


----------



## rtwjunkie (Oct 20, 2018)

phill said:


> @Knoxx29 You need more Intel stuff!!
> 
> Judging by the TPU it seemed somewhat of a let down the new 9900k..  I'm still so pleased with my 5960X I've not even considered buying it, that and the massively high price for it put me right off!  Intel got some nerve at the mo with their pricing....


Same prices they have had all the way back to P4 era with their top of the line cpu’s.


----------



## FireFox (Oct 20, 2018)

phill said:


> Ones like this @Knoxx29
> 
> Z77 Asrock OC Forumla OCF
> Z97 Asrock OC Forumla OCF
> Z170 Asrock OC Forumla OCF



Dont make me Rate your post with a -1 

This one:


----------



## phill (Oct 20, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Dont make me Rate your post with a -1



So is this one more acceptable??  





Or would you prefer this one....





Since they are both Asus and all


----------



## FireFox (Oct 20, 2018)

rtwjunkie said:


> Same prices they have had all the way back to P4 era with their top of the line cpu’s.



Indeed, not even me a freaky Intel's fanboy is going to buy it, i guess the 8086K will stick around for a while.




phill said:


> So is this one more acceptable??





phill said:


> Since they are both Asus and all



My eyes are delighted.


----------



## phill (Oct 20, 2018)

Glad you like them both   I've a few Asus pieces of hardware here, but not masses


----------



## puma99dk| (Oct 20, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> So far any of my ex Asus Extreme boards had disappointed me.



So you say that all your ex Asus ROG Extreme boards has disappointed you yet you keep buying them 

I think you mean that none of your previous Asus ROG Extreme boards has ever disappointed you


----------



## FireFox (Oct 20, 2018)

puma99dk| said:


> So you say that all your ex Asus ROG Extreme boards has disappointed you yet you keep buying them










puma99dk| said:


> I think you mean that none of your previous Asus ROG Extreme boards has ever disappointed you



My bad, i didn't notice that


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 20, 2018)

phill said:


> 170M OCF but they are a little on the rare side sadly... Might take me a little while...


Good luck with that - that board can handle a 8700k guaranteed with a mod and 9th gen is working on it and yes it's the z170 board.


----------



## puma99dk| (Oct 20, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Good luck with that - that board can handle a 8700k guaranteed with a mod and 9th gen is working on it and yes it's the z170 board.



@Mork_vom_Ork here on TPU is running a i3-8350K Coffee Cups in a ASRock Z270 Super Carrier: Post Link

So with some bios modding a i7 8gen can properly run in a Z170.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 20, 2018)

puma99dk| said:


> @Mork_vom_Ork here on TPU is running a i3-8350K Coffee Cups in a ASRock Z270 Super Carrier: Post Link
> 
> So with some bios modding a i7 8gen can properly run in a Z170.


True but it appears that it's the ASRock boards that seem to be the most easiest to do - I'm tempted to try running a 8700k in my z270x gaming 7


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 21, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> True but it appears that it's the ASRock boards that seem to be the most easiest to do - I'm tempted to try running a 8700k in my z270x gaming 7



You will need a bios mod.  But GIGABYTE boards are amongst the easiest to modify in my experience, one thing I like about them.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 21, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> You will need a bios mod. But GIGABYTE boards are amongst the easiest to modify in my experience, one thing I like about them.


Well that sounds awesome then, However there's no predone modded bioses for this board, so it's not going to be too straight forward, I'll definitely take a shot if I can score a deal on a 8700k.


----------



## FireFox (Oct 21, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> I'll definitely take a shot if I can score a deal on a 8700k.



I swear you had a 8700K/8086K


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 21, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> I swear you had a 8700K/8086K


Nope, I have a 7740x @ 5.0 delidded, a 6600k @ 4.5 and tons of other fm2 / am3+ / tons of older cpus, but no 8700ks here, I had sold my x58 system, but I had spent the cash on a clevo x7200 instead of a 8700k lol.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 21, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> I'll definitely take a shot if I can score a deal on a 8700k.



Shoot me a pm if going that route.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 21, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Shoot me a pm if going that route.


DM me what your selling and the price, I'm based in the UK btw. 
I'm holding out though before I pull the trigger to get one that's priced well, that is, if my friend doesn't give me his if he decides not to upgrade (he's considering a 9900k)


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 21, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> DM me what your selling and the price, I'm based in the UK btw.
> I'm holding out though before I pull the trigger to get one that's priced well, that is, if my friend doesn't give me his if he decides not to upgrade (he's considering a 9900k)



Oh, not really selling.  But I am a bios modder.  Would offer assistance there.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Oct 21, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Oh, not really selling. But I am a bios modder. Would offer assistance there.


Awesome! I have 0 experience in BIOS modding so that would be a great help to me, I left you a PM so I remember to contact you once I've got a 8700k for my z270x gaming 7 board.


----------



## FireFox (Oct 21, 2018)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> Nope, I have a 7740x @ 5.0 delidded, a 6600k @ 4.5 and tons of other fm2 / am3+ / tons of older cpus, but no 8700ks here, I had sold my x58 system, but I had spent the cash on a clevo x7200 instead of a 8700k lol.



I just remembered what we talked last time via PM


----------



## FireFox (Nov 14, 2018)

As i said in one of my post the ASUS ROG Maximus XI Extreme Gaming is coming Home to pair it with the 8086K 







If @EarthDog was around here he will tells me that it's a waste of money


----------



## phill (Nov 14, 2018)

Very nice there @Knoxx29   Look forward to seeing some in the flesh pics


----------



## lexluthermiester (Nov 14, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> If @EarthDog was around here he will tells me that it's a waste of money


Very likely. Hopefully that board doesn't have the "install stuff automatically" nonsense.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 15, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> Hopefully that board doesn't have the "install stuff automatically




Am lost, am i missing something?


----------



## xorbe (Nov 15, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Am lost, am i missing something?



Win10 is auto-installing software from the bios these days.  Fresh install of Win10, and there's already vendor bloatware before you can do anything. iirc, ASUS is on the shortlist of motherboards doing that.


----------



## puma99dk| (Nov 15, 2018)

xorbe said:


> Win10 is auto-installing software from the bios these days.  Fresh install of Win10, and there's already vendor bloatware before you can do anything. iirc, ASUS is on the shortlist of motherboards doing that.



I only found this usually on pre-built systems not build-a-system (no not talking about build-a-bear )


----------



## FireFox (Nov 15, 2018)

xorbe said:


> Win10 is auto-installing software from the bios these days.  Fresh install of Win10, and there's already vendor bloatware before you can do anything. iirc, ASUS is on the shortlist of motherboards doing that.



Something to be worried about it?


----------



## Kissamies (Nov 17, 2018)

Knoxx29 said:


> Something to be worried about it?


Well, IMO it always sucks when something installs what I don't want to install.


----------



## FireFox (Nov 17, 2018)

Chloe Price said:


> Well, IMO it always sucks when something installs what I don't want to install.



Well, that's just in case you do a clean install of windows but it doesn't have to be if you just install Windows from a System Image.


----------

