Wednesday, June 28th 2017
Intel X299 Platform Called a "VRM Disaster" by Overclocker der8auer
It would seem Intel's X299 platform is already having some teething issues, with user "der8auer" of overclocking fame claiming the platform is essentially a complete "VRM disaster." In the video in which these claims are made, he levies the blame to both Intel and the motherboard manufacturers "50/50." For Intel's part, he blames them for the short product launch which was pulled in from August to June, giving the motherboard manufacturers in der8auer's words "almost zero time for developing proper products."
In the video, der8auer elaborates to basically claim a completely lack of consistency among the quality of VRMs and their heatsinks in various manufacturers. In his first test, he takes a CPU that is known to do 5.0 GHz and on a Gigabyte Aorus branded mainboard found himself unable to even hit 4.6 GHz with dangerously high VRM temperatures. He goes on to blame the heatsinks on the VRMs, going so far to call the Gigabyte solution more of a "heat insulation" device than a cooler, as a simple small fan over the bare VRM array did many magnitudes better than a simple standard install with the stock VRM cooler attached. After an MSI-branded board did similar, it became clear this was not an isolated issue.
der8auer also went on to criticize the lack of voltage input in the form of many boards having only a "single 8-pin connector" which der8auer claims is not nearly enough. He claims a cable temperature of nearly 65 degrees Celsius on the 8-pin EPS cable which is obviously disconcerting, though TechPowerUp has been in discussions with renowned PSU-tester Jon Gerow (Jonnyguru) who feels the "all-in-one" cable design on the Super Flower PSU shown in the video may be partially to blame here for the heat level with that current draw. It's hard to tell which part is more at fault for that temperature and we will update that as we know more. Until then, here's is Jon Gerow's direct comment on the matter:
"If you used the SuperFlower PSU in the video with the crystal connectors, that's part of your problem. Those "universal 9-pin connectors" have less conductors than most other modular PSUs because the same connector that's used for EPS12V, PCIe, etc. has to also support +5V and +3.3V for Molex and SATA and then there's an "LED pin" which, when grounded to a ground pin, turns on the interface's LED. A horribly bad design. This is why the wires would be so hot. I suggest checking the voltage at the PSU and then at the motherboard's EPS12V to see what the drop looks like under load. If the voltage is significantly lower than +12V, the board is going to have to pull more current than it normally would. I then suggest using that AX1500i you have on the shelf behind you and see if you end up with the same results since that modular cable for the EPS12V is four +12V pins and four grounds. -- jonny"
The frustrations expressed here have also been shared by Overclock.net user "Silicon Lottery," who sells prebinned overclockable CPUs to the general public. His statements on the matter mirror user der8auer's concerns, stating the following in a forum post at Overclock.net:
"I am having trouble with some of these X299 motherboards. I've bought a wide variety for this launch, and none of them are really handling the load of an overclocked 7900X as well as I'd expect. VRM temps through the roof and boards throttling."
One thing is for certain: The VRM situation is far from consistent at this point in time, and overclocking results on one board may not be consistent to another. Heatsinks may be inadequate, and as far as overclocking is concerned, it may get interesting folks, and not in a good way. In the end der8auer concluded he couldn't really give a solid recommendation to any of the launch boards put past his desk, all of them having one issue or another with VRM heat at some point.
Sources:
Youtube user der8auer, Overclock.net user "Silicon Lottery"
In the video, der8auer elaborates to basically claim a completely lack of consistency among the quality of VRMs and their heatsinks in various manufacturers. In his first test, he takes a CPU that is known to do 5.0 GHz and on a Gigabyte Aorus branded mainboard found himself unable to even hit 4.6 GHz with dangerously high VRM temperatures. He goes on to blame the heatsinks on the VRMs, going so far to call the Gigabyte solution more of a "heat insulation" device than a cooler, as a simple small fan over the bare VRM array did many magnitudes better than a simple standard install with the stock VRM cooler attached. After an MSI-branded board did similar, it became clear this was not an isolated issue.
"If you used the SuperFlower PSU in the video with the crystal connectors, that's part of your problem. Those "universal 9-pin connectors" have less conductors than most other modular PSUs because the same connector that's used for EPS12V, PCIe, etc. has to also support +5V and +3.3V for Molex and SATA and then there's an "LED pin" which, when grounded to a ground pin, turns on the interface's LED. A horribly bad design. This is why the wires would be so hot. I suggest checking the voltage at the PSU and then at the motherboard's EPS12V to see what the drop looks like under load. If the voltage is significantly lower than +12V, the board is going to have to pull more current than it normally would. I then suggest using that AX1500i you have on the shelf behind you and see if you end up with the same results since that modular cable for the EPS12V is four +12V pins and four grounds. -- jonny"
The frustrations expressed here have also been shared by Overclock.net user "Silicon Lottery," who sells prebinned overclockable CPUs to the general public. His statements on the matter mirror user der8auer's concerns, stating the following in a forum post at Overclock.net:
"I am having trouble with some of these X299 motherboards. I've bought a wide variety for this launch, and none of them are really handling the load of an overclocked 7900X as well as I'd expect. VRM temps through the roof and boards throttling."
One thing is for certain: The VRM situation is far from consistent at this point in time, and overclocking results on one board may not be consistent to another. Heatsinks may be inadequate, and as far as overclocking is concerned, it may get interesting folks, and not in a good way. In the end der8auer concluded he couldn't really give a solid recommendation to any of the launch boards put past his desk, all of them having one issue or another with VRM heat at some point.
80 Comments on Intel X299 Platform Called a "VRM Disaster" by Overclocker der8auer
:laugh:
PD: and for delivering amazing stuff and staying undead.
Seriously, you come across as some sort of paid for Intel shill.
I doubt there is a problem with the VRM design, or the heatsinks. Its most likely a very raw, unoptimized bios. These boards were rushed out, motherboard makers didnt have time to optimize the bios and the voltages.
My guess is an updated bios will solve this issue.
He is an overclocking expert, and many world records holder.
The guy probably knows more about hardware than the people who make it
It;s almost as bad as the FX 9570/90 except that was on 32nm. The BIOS won;t fix the leakage or high temps, that's dead certain.
Also i'd like to see how they fix bad VRM-s with a BIOS update. The only way to do that is to disable all voltage controls that could affect VRM temperature or maybe even undervolt (tho that would affect stability even at stock speeds). Essentially killing overcloking ability. Then again Intel might fly in and say that people should not overclock their unlocked processors right?
I suggest you watch this video taken from ASUS RealBench tool where you'll see one of the worlds most prominent and respected extreme overclockers and extreme modders... You may spot a familiar face and name through the video...
Conclusion
Perhaps you should Delete your Ill Informed Opinionated Post ( my Opinion )
Intel already told us guys ...
7900x paired with x299 will have more PCIe lanes then threadripper.
Threadripper CPU has 48(24x2) PCIe lanes split between two separate dies. The x399 chipset adds another 16 lanes which brings the platform total to 64 lanes. But you also lose 4(or maybe 8, need to do more research) lanes because they are used to connect the cpu to the chipset; so now you are at 60(or 56) usable lanes. Because of how the lanes are spread out between the dies; you can only get 2x full 16x PCIe slots.
The 7900x has 48 lanes minus 4 lanes for the DMI link to the chipset so 44 lanes. Then add the 24 lanes from the chipset and you get 68 total usable lanes.
source
We'll see how it pans out. I doubt all the manufacturers have the same problems with VRM at the same time. Motherboard makers usually choose VRM on their own boards, and for highend boards, they are usually overkill in specs. I dont believe there is a hardware problem, but we'll see.
A top-down cooler should work fine, but who wants to use one of those these days.....besides me...