i9-9900KS OC high temps

[dgianstefani]

1.2V is a perfectly good voltage for a 9900KS installed in a Alienware which has a motherboard VRM design that is not suited for powering such a CPU. Ignore the Intel specification of 5+GHz turbo. Installed in an Alienware, 4.5GHz is plenty. Furthermore, the extra 500 MHz is not worth the increased risk of damage to the motherboard, powersupply, etc.

Intel designed these to boost to 5+ and draw unlimited quantities of power under an assumption that the owner is running a top of the line Z390 with a high airflow case, giant power supply, and an impressive watercooling loop.

Silly logic.

A chip specifically designed to push past the 9900k in efficiency and boost clocks shouldn't be used in a build that limits it to 5-700mhz lower than it's ideal frequency. The only reason to buy Intel, and even more specifically the 9900ks with it's extremely high prices is to get that sweet core frequency paired with the low system latency of a monolithic CPU.

Otherwise don't waste your time and go with a Ryzen build which is significantly more efficient and has higher IPC.

As stated before, this build needs a complete overhaul, not just some minor tweaks here and there. You have fundamental issues.
Trash tier VRM.
Trash tier airflow.
Trash tier cooling options - you can't improve it to the level that is appropriate due to case limitations.

What is the reason you need to stick with this Aurora bs? Aesthetics? Really?

Sell the case and mobo on eBay, where someone who likes aesthetics will buy it - and sort yourself out with a decent case, cooler, mobo combo. Then we can talk tweaks.

 

[Vayra86]

Thanks everybody, I have several stress tests that I have been using, from Kombustor, Intel's XTU, and yes Prime95. All of them have come up with similar readings. I just ordered an EVGA CLC 240mm cooler. I was going to go for the 360mm, however as @Regeneration & @Vario noted, space is pretty tight in the case. Additionally earlier today I ordered a 2080ti and had to opt out of the hybrid model for fear of lack of space to mount the extra fan, especially since eventual plan is another SLI setup. (Maybe) I've had so much trouble with RDR2 and my current SLI setup I'm beginning to have second thoughts on another SLI setup. Anyone know if the 240mm will be able to fit, or will I need to get creative? I'd really rather not have to cut holes into my new tower. I'm starting to wonder if I would get better performance if I reinstalled the original 9700k, gave it a strong OC and called it good.

You can disable HT and look at lowering volts for the same clock and see what you get.

 

[Vario]

You can disable HT and look at lowering volts for the same clock and see what you get.

He already had a 9700K which the Alienware came with. Lowering the voltage and clock solves the problem. Its already halfway solved if he is getting 1.2v for 4.6GHz and only seeing 71C. Nothing more needs doing, but I would put the power limit of 95W long 119W short, and ICCMax 193A just to be conservative, and probably try raising the cache multi, and check VCCSA and VCCIO voltages to make sure they aren't overvolted with XMP.

 

[R0H1T]

A chip specifically designed to push past the 9900k in efficiency and boost clocks

Not in efficiency, boost clocks sure. When you push the clocks efficiency takes a nosedive, a 9900k at 5GHz (or 4.9) can easily be much more efficient than 9900ks at 5.1GHz (or higher) even though the KS variant is binned. There's a clear tradeoff you make when reaching for extreme clocks, efficiency being the first to go out of the window!

 

[dgianstefani]

Not in efficiency, boost clocks sure. When you push the clocks efficiency takes a nosedive, a 9900k at 5GHz (or 4.9) can easily be much more efficient than 9900ks at 5.1GHz (or higher) even though the KS variant is binned. There's a clear tradeoff you make when reaching for extreme clocks, efficiency being the first to go out of the window!

Yes in efficiency. 9900ks is top binned 9900k. It hits the same clocks at around 100-150mv lower voltages. Therefore it's more efficient.

A 9900k needs around 1.35/1.4v to hit 5ghz all core typically. 9900ks can do it at 1.3v.

 

[mrthanhnguyen]

My ks can do 5ghz at 1.15v. Anyone want to buy?

 

[Arctucas]

My ks can do 5ghz at 1.15v. Anyone want to buy?

What is its max frequency?

I run my 9900K @ 5000 MHz, 1.225 VCore 24/7.

I have done some benchmarks @ 5500 MHz, 1.45 VCore.

 

[mrthanhnguyen]

1.15v in bios llc6 with apex XI, load vcore around 1.1v. 24/7 avx should be 1.2v in bios or less. I ran OCCT linpack at that voltage and it ran. Max frequency I hit only 5.3ghz ht on. 5.4Ghz should be h/t off. The seller of the cpu said he can do 5.4ghz at 1.35v on water with his asrock ocfm. Under ln2, it hit 6920.

 

[phanbuey]

1.15v in bios llc6 with apex XI, load vcore around 1.1v. 24/7 avx should be 1.2v in bios or less. I ran OCCT linpack at that voltage and it ran. Max frequency I hit only 5.3ghz ht on. 5.4Ghz should be h/t off. The seller of the cpu said he can do 5.4ghz at 1.35v on water with his asrock ocfm. Under ln2, it hit 6920.
View attachment 150808

thats a really nice chip.

 

[Arctucas]

~29°C ambient.

 

[mrthanhnguyen]

weird why my r20 point is so low. did u oc cache too? ram oc too? my cache is at stock and ram at 4000c16

 

[oxrufiioxo]

weird why my r20 point is so low. did u oc cache too? ram oc too? my cache is at stock and ram at 4000c16

View attachment 150816

View attachment 150817

5200-5300 is pretty normal for 5ghz and everything else left to stock keep in mind this is going to be slightly different motherboard to motherboard and his mobo is quite a bit better in both power delivery and PCB quality.