# Punish it with y-cruncher



## storm-chaser

1st run and I must say I was not expecting that insane amount of heat. Needless to say, it's 20*F outside so I have moved my desk out to the yard to capitalize on the lower ambient temps for that very reason. All three pumps will go to full throttle and so will the fans. 

But also my vcore can come down a bit as well so that will help.










I'm also considering having a power/weight ratio category. So the lower core count machines can still be compared to the core monsters accurately.


----------



## domdtxdissar

Thanks for hosting this @storm-chaser 

I can start this machines punishment with the following run:

Memory @ 1900:3800 with tight CL13 timings
8 Zen3 cores with hyperthreading enabled
Stock cpu clockspeed (PBO disabled)
Stock cpu PPT powerbudget --> 142watt max 
PI-2.5B = 96.140 seconds


----------



## domdtxdissar

Next up we have the full 16 cores of a 5950x

Memory @ 1900:3800 with tight CL13 timings
16 Zen3 cores with hyperthreading enabled
Stock cpu clockspeed (PBO disabled)
Stock cpu PPT powerbudget --> 142watt max
Observation: since the stock PPT 142w limit still are enforced, and i'm now using both CCD's, the max cpu temp are much lower than with only 8 core enabled. (52 vs 72 degrees)

PI-2.5B = 69.484 seconds









Only seeing ~38% scaling with doable the core count.. Need to up the powerlimit if i want to see these puppies fly 😇

_edit_
I have a feeling Alder Lake with all e-cores disabled and avx512 enabled on the p-cores will smoke (literally ) this benchmark, anyone dare to test this ?


----------



## JSHamlet234

^
Nice times for that chip. Memory performance makes a big diff. I ran this on my sister's 5800X with just XMP (3200) enabled and all-core 4.5GHz, and it was a full 18 seconds slower than your 8-core result.

Here's the old 5960X @ 4.5.


----------



## Luggage

domdtxdissar said:


> [snip]
> 
> 
> _edit_
> I have a feeling Alder Lake with all e-cores disabled and avx512 enabled on the p-cores will smoke (literally ) this benchmark, anyone dare to test this ?


yes I saw bz run it with avx512 "by misstake"

As for this I'm 2nd place atm for 5800x with my ****ty ram








Luggage`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 1min 30sec 635ms with a Ryzen 7 5800X


The Ryzen 7 5800X @ 5050.5MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. Luggageranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org






http://imgur.com/a/w7giouc

But not very many run 2.5b with benchmate.

Cant beat it now, tuning a new curve on 1205 and the weather is warmer...


----------



## gtz

Once I get my setup running I will run. Y cruncher uses AVX 512, so my 9980XE should do well.

I am just waiting for my 360mm rad to arrive to go along my thick 240mm and 420mm rad.


----------



## storm-chaser

domdtxdissar said:


> I have a feeling Alder Lake with all e-cores disabled and avx512 enabled on the p-cores will smoke (literally ) this benchmark, anyone dare to test this ?


LMAO



domdtxdissar said:


> Observation: since the stock PPT 142w limit still are enforced, and i'm now using both CCD's, the max cpu temp are much lower than with only 8 core enabled. (52 vs 72 degrees)


Any possible way to lift the wattage limit or at least increase it so you can take advantage of all that processing power? Can u undervolt this chip and still maintain that clock speed? I was thinking that might help bring down peak wattage. Probably tried all these things but I'm just curious about what you have to do.


----------



## domdtxdissar

Luggage said:


> yes I saw bz run it with avx512 "by misstake"
> 
> As for this I'm 2nd place atm for 5800x with my ****ty ram
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luggage`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 1min 30sec 635ms with a Ryzen 7 5800X
> 
> 
> The Ryzen 7 5800X @ 5050.5MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. Luggageranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/w7giouc
> 
> But not very many run 2.5b with benchmate.
> 
> Cant beat it now, tuning a new curve on 1205 and the weather is warmer...


Managed just barely to beat your 8core Zen3 score, in normal ambient temp that is 










storm-chaser said:


> Any possible way to lift the wattage limit or at least increase it so you can take advantage of all that processing power? Can u undervolt this chip and still maintain that clock speed? I was thinking that might help bring down peak wattage. Probably tried all these things but I'm just curious about what you have to do.


Yes ofcourse i can.. Letting it run stock is pretty much worst case scenario for performance/watt 
If i want i can undervolt and even rise the performance doing so, or i can up the powerlimit for maximum performance, but i wanted to wait for some other "highscores" before doing so.. 

_edit_

I asked Markfw from* AnandTech to give this a try on his 64core/128thread EPYC machine, sadly he was running linux so he could not use benchmate.. but standalone y-cruncher is working just fine in Linux.. These are the numbers he got:*



Spoiler: 64cores/128 threads @ 2ghz



[email protected]:~/y-cruncher$ sudo ./y-cruncher.ex skip-warnings bench 500m
y-cruncher v0.7.8 Build 9507

Detecting Environment...

CPU Vendor:
AMD = Yes
Intel = No

OS Features:
* 64-bit = Yes
* OS AVX = Yes
* OS AVX512 = No

Hardware Features:
MMX = Yes
* x64 = Yes
* ABM = Yes
RDRAND = Yes
RDSEED = Yes
BMI1 = Yes
* BMI2 = Yes
* ADX = Yes
MPX = No
PREFETCHW = Yes
PREFETCHWT1 = No
RDPID = Yes
GFNI = No
VAES = No

SIMD: 128-bit
* SSE = Yes
* SSE2 = Yes
* SSE3 = Yes
* SSSE3 = Yes
SSE4a = Yes
* SSE4.1 = Yes
* SSE4.2 = Yes
AES-NI = Yes
SHA = Yes

SIMD: 256-bit
* AVX = Yes
XOP = No
* FMA3 = Yes
* FMA4 = No
* AVX2 = Yes

SIMD: 512-bit
* AVX512-F = No
AVX512-CD = No
AVX512-PF = No
AVX512-ER = No
* AVX512-VL = No
* AVX512-BW = No
* AVX512-DQ = No
* AVX512-IFMA = No
* AVX512-VBMI = No

Alright Intel, how many drinks have you had tonight?
AVX512-VPOPCNTDQ = No
AVX512-4FMAPS = No
AVX512-4VNNIW = No
AVX512-VBMI2 = No
AVX512-VPCLMUL = No
AVX512-VNNI = No
AVX512-BITALG = No
AVX512-BF16 = No


Auto-Selecting: 19-ZN2 ~ Kagari

/home/mark/y-cruncher/Binaries/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari


Launching y-cruncher...
================================================================



Checking processor/OS features...

Required Features:
x64, ABM, BMI1, BMI2, ADX,
SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2,
AVX, FMA3, AVX2



Parsing Core -> Handle Mappings...
Cores: 0-127

Parsing NUMA -> Core Mappings...
Node 0: 0-127


Constant: Pi
Algorithm: Chudnovsky (1988)

Decimal Digits: 500,000,000
Hexadecimal Digits: Disabled

Computation Mode: Ram Only
Multi-Threading: Push Pool -> 128 / ? (randomization on)

Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:09:29 2021

Working Memory... 3.98 GiB (locked, spread: ?)
Twiddle Tables... 283 MiB (locked, spread: ?)

Begin Computation:

Series CommonP2B3... 35,256,847 terms (Expansion Factor = 2.636)
Time: 6.431 seconds ( 0.107 minutes ) 
Large Division...
Time: 0.373 seconds ( 0.006 minutes ) 
InvSqrt(10005)...
Time: 0.250 seconds ( 0.004 minutes ) 
Large Multiply...
Time: 0.134 seconds ( 0.002 minutes ) 

Pi: 7.188 seconds ( 0.120 minutes )

Base Converting:
Time: 0.454 seconds ( 0.008 minutes ) 
Writing Decimal Digits:
Time: 0.406 seconds ( 0.007 minutes ) 

Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:09:29 2021
End Time: Fri Dec 17 19:09:39 2021

Total Computation Time: 7.642 seconds ( 0.127 minutes )
Start-to-End Wall Time: 10.062 seconds ( 0.168 minutes )

CPU Utilization: 10172.45 % + 100.36 % kernel overhead
Multi-core Efficiency: 79.47 % + 0.78 % kernel overhead

Last Decimal Digits: Pi
3896531789 0364496761 5664275325 5483742003 7847987772 : 499,999,950
5002477883 0364214864 5906800532 7052368734 3293261427 : 500,000,000

Spot Check: Good through 500,000,000

Version: 0.7.8.9507 (Linux/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari)
Processor(s): AMD Eng Sample: 100-000000020-02_30/20_N
Topology: 128 threads / 64 cores / 1 socket / 1 NUMA node
Usable Memory: 135,032,893,440 ( 126 GiB)
CPU Base Frequency: 1,996,240,000 Hz

Validation File: Pi - 20211217-190940.txt

[email protected]:~/y-cruncher$ sudo ./y-cruncher.ex skip-warnings bench 2.5b
y-cruncher v0.7.8 Build 9507

Detecting Environment...

CPU Vendor:
AMD = Yes
Intel = No

OS Features:
* 64-bit = Yes
* OS AVX = Yes
* OS AVX512 = No

Hardware Features:
MMX = Yes
* x64 = Yes
* ABM = Yes
RDRAND = Yes
RDSEED = Yes
BMI1 = Yes
* BMI2 = Yes
* ADX = Yes
MPX = No
PREFETCHW = Yes
PREFETCHWT1 = No
RDPID = Yes
GFNI = No
VAES = No

SIMD: 128-bit
* SSE = Yes
* SSE2 = Yes
* SSE3 = Yes
* SSSE3 = Yes
SSE4a = Yes
* SSE4.1 = Yes
* SSE4.2 = Yes
AES-NI = Yes
SHA = Yes

SIMD: 256-bit
* AVX = Yes
XOP = No
* FMA3 = Yes
* FMA4 = No
* AVX2 = Yes

SIMD: 512-bit
* AVX512-F = No
AVX512-CD = No
AVX512-PF = No
AVX512-ER = No
* AVX512-VL = No
* AVX512-BW = No
* AVX512-DQ = No
* AVX512-IFMA = No
* AVX512-VBMI = No

Alright Intel, how many drinks have you had tonight?
AVX512-VPOPCNTDQ = No
AVX512-4FMAPS = No
AVX512-4VNNIW = No
AVX512-VBMI2 = No
AVX512-VPCLMUL = No
AVX512-VNNI = No
AVX512-BITALG = No
AVX512-BF16 = No


Auto-Selecting: 19-ZN2 ~ Kagari

/home/mark/y-cruncher/Binaries/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari


Launching y-cruncher...
================================================================



Checking processor/OS features...

Required Features:
x64, ABM, BMI1, BMI2, ADX,
SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2,
AVX, FMA3, AVX2



Parsing Core -> Handle Mappings...
Cores: 0-127

Parsing NUMA -> Core Mappings...
Node 0: 0-127


Constant: Pi
Algorithm: Chudnovsky (1988)

Decimal Digits: 2,500,000,000
Hexadecimal Digits: Disabled

Computation Mode: Ram Only
Multi-Threading: Push Pool -> 128 / ? (randomization on)

Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:10:58 2021

Working Memory... 12.2 GiB (locked, spread: ?)
Twiddle Tables... 286 MiB (locked, spread: ?)

Begin Computation:

Series CommonP2B3... 176,284,185 terms (Expansion Factor = 2.784)
Time: 31.382 seconds ( 0.523 minutes ) 
Large Division...
Time: 1.667 seconds ( 0.028 minutes ) 
InvSqrt(10005)...
Time: 1.120 seconds ( 0.019 minutes ) 
Large Multiply...
Time: 0.697 seconds ( 0.012 minutes ) 

Pi: 34.866 seconds ( 0.581 minutes )

Base Converting:
Time: 2.273 seconds ( 0.038 minutes ) 
Writing Decimal Digits:
Time: 1.779 seconds ( 0.030 minutes ) 

Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:10:58 2021
End Time: Fri Dec 17 19:11:40 2021

Total Computation Time: 37.139 seconds ( 0.619 minutes )
Start-to-End Wall Time: 42.582 seconds ( 0.710 minutes )

CPU Utilization: 11225.23 % + 92.81 % kernel overhead
Multi-core Efficiency: 87.70 % + 0.73 % kernel overhead

Last Decimal Digits: Pi
0917027898 3554136437 7123165188 3528593128 0032489094 : 2,499,999,950
9228502005 4677489552 2459688725 5242233502 7255998083 : 2,500,000,000

Spot Check: Good through 2,500,000,000

Version: 0.7.8.9507 (Linux/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari)
Processor(s): AMD Eng Sample: 100-000000020-02_30/20_N
Topology: 128 threads / 64 cores / 1 socket / 1 NUMA node
Usable Memory: 135,032,893,440 ( 126 GiB)
CPU Base Frequency: 1,996,248,000 Hz

Validation File: Pi - 20211217-191142.txt

[email protected]:~/y-cruncher$


Total Computation Time: *37.139 seconds* ( 0.619 minutes )
Pi is 34 seconds.

Sick score


----------



## tps3443

Hey everyone! Figured I’d jump I’m and snatch a spot on the board.

I ran this on my 11900K. During the test my CPU forces 5.2Ghz. (Not sure why) it’s almost like a mandatory offset is being applied. It’s definitely not power related. I’ve ripped 500+ watts out of an 11900K before, and this CPU can manage SUB 260ish at 5.4Ghz. 

Anyways, no matter the frequency it just locks down to 5.2. Ive got the temperature headroom to run 5.4Ghz no questions asked. So, will post back once I take a closer look and get to the bottom of this ”Phantom offset”


So far, I have got 84 seconds though. So, that’s pretty cool!

I think it’s the TVB setting kicking in in the bios, because the CPU hits 71-72C range. Gonna double check, and re-run this test!! So, I will be back with some lower times veryyy soon!!

My cpu has like never hit 70C before lol. This test actually gets things warmish for me.


----------



## storm-chaser

leaderboard is up. 


review leaderboard and please let me know if you see anything amiss or something we need to add, it's still a work in progress. 

Going to try for a 5.3GHz run right now.

@tps3443 

Ill add your sub shortly.


----------



## storm-chaser

tps3443 said:


> My cpu has like never hit 70C before lol. This test gets things warmish.


I know right? I've never seen wattage like that from my 9600KF. Yup, it's pretty much the electric chair of benchmarks lol


----------



## geriatricpollywog

I’ll post some 12900K results, but I’m out of the country until late Dec or early January.


----------



## tps3443

storm-chaser said:


> leaderboard is up.
> 
> 
> review leaderboard and please let me know if you see anything amiss or something we need to add, it's still a work in progress.
> 
> Going to try for a 5.3GHz run right now.
> 
> @tps3443
> 
> Ill add your sub shortly.


Very cool! Yeah I’m gonna disabled “TVB Voltage Optimization” pretty sure that’s what’s causing the clock throttle. CPU is hotting 71C on just 1 core, and it’s forcing the chip downclock to 5.2Ghz. Gonna re-run this tomorrow, and I should slot right in to the 79 second mark “Hopefully”


----------



## kairi_zeroblade

plain office laptop..


----------



## storm-chaser

Leaderboard Updated


----------



## bscool

z690 Strix A d4

AI OC on AIO cooling


----------



## Luggage

tps3443 said:


> Hey everyone! Figured I’d jump I’m and snatch a spot on the board.
> 
> I ran this on my 11900K. During the test my CPU forces 5.2Ghz. (Not sure why) it’s almost like a mandatory offset is being applied. It’s definitely not power related. I’ve ripped 500+ watts out of an 11900K before, and this CPU can manage SUB 260ish at 5.4Ghz.
> 
> Anyways, no matter the frequency it just locks down to 5.2. Ive got the temperature headroom to run 5.4Ghz no questions asked. So, will post back once I take a closer look and get to the bottom of this ”Phantom offset”
> 
> 
> So far, I have got 84 seconds though. So, that’s pretty cool!
> 
> I think it’s the TVB setting kicking in in the bios, because the CPU hits 71-72C range. Gonna double check, and re-run this test!! So, I will be back with some lower times veryyy soon!!
> 
> My cpu has like never hit 70C before lol. This test actually gets things warmish for me.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2538131


For high temps try the stand alone y-cruncher. Run stress test with bpp. Gives me higher temps than linx or p95 small…
Linx and p95 use more power though.


----------



## Luggage

domdtxdissar said:


> Managed just barely to beat your 8core Zen3 score, in normal ambient temp that is
> View attachment 2538119
> 
> 
> Yes ofcourse i can.. Letting it run stock is pretty much worst case scenario for performance/watt
> If i want i can undervolt and even rise the performance doing so, or i can up the powerlimit for maximum performance, but i wanted to wait for some other "highscores" before doing so..
> 
> _edit_
> 
> I asked Markfw from* AnandTech to give this a try on his 64core/128thread EPYC machine, sadly he was running linux so he could not use benchmate.. but standalone y-cruncher is working just fine in Linux.. These are the numbers he got:*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 64cores/128 threads @ 2ghz
> 
> 
> 
> [email protected]:~/y-cruncher$ sudo ./y-cruncher.ex skip-warnings bench 500m
> y-cruncher v0.7.8 Build 9507
> 
> Detecting Environment...
> 
> CPU Vendor:
> AMD = Yes
> Intel = No
> 
> OS Features:
> * 64-bit = Yes
> * OS AVX = Yes
> * OS AVX512 = No
> 
> Hardware Features:
> MMX = Yes
> * x64 = Yes
> * ABM = Yes
> RDRAND = Yes
> RDSEED = Yes
> BMI1 = Yes
> * BMI2 = Yes
> * ADX = Yes
> MPX = No
> PREFETCHW = Yes
> PREFETCHWT1 = No
> RDPID = Yes
> GFNI = No
> VAES = No
> 
> SIMD: 128-bit
> * SSE = Yes
> * SSE2 = Yes
> * SSE3 = Yes
> * SSSE3 = Yes
> SSE4a = Yes
> * SSE4.1 = Yes
> * SSE4.2 = Yes
> AES-NI = Yes
> SHA = Yes
> 
> SIMD: 256-bit
> * AVX = Yes
> XOP = No
> * FMA3 = Yes
> * FMA4 = No
> * AVX2 = Yes
> 
> SIMD: 512-bit
> * AVX512-F = No
> AVX512-CD = No
> AVX512-PF = No
> AVX512-ER = No
> * AVX512-VL = No
> * AVX512-BW = No
> * AVX512-DQ = No
> * AVX512-IFMA = No
> * AVX512-VBMI = No
> 
> Alright Intel, how many drinks have you had tonight?
> AVX512-VPOPCNTDQ = No
> AVX512-4FMAPS = No
> AVX512-4VNNIW = No
> AVX512-VBMI2 = No
> AVX512-VPCLMUL = No
> AVX512-VNNI = No
> AVX512-BITALG = No
> AVX512-BF16 = No
> 
> 
> Auto-Selecting: 19-ZN2 ~ Kagari
> 
> /home/mark/y-cruncher/Binaries/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari
> 
> 
> Launching y-cruncher...
> ================================================================
> 
> 
> 
> Checking processor/OS features...
> 
> Required Features:
> x64, ABM, BMI1, BMI2, ADX,
> SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2,
> AVX, FMA3, AVX2
> 
> 
> 
> Parsing Core -> Handle Mappings...
> Cores: 0-127
> 
> Parsing NUMA -> Core Mappings...
> Node 0: 0-127
> 
> 
> Constant: Pi
> Algorithm: Chudnovsky (1988)
> 
> Decimal Digits: 500,000,000
> Hexadecimal Digits: Disabled
> 
> Computation Mode: Ram Only
> Multi-Threading: Push Pool -> 128 / ? (randomization on)
> 
> Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:09:29 2021
> 
> Working Memory... 3.98 GiB (locked, spread: ?)
> Twiddle Tables... 283 MiB (locked, spread: ?)
> 
> Begin Computation:
> 
> Series CommonP2B3... 35,256,847 terms (Expansion Factor = 2.636)
> Time: 6.431 seconds ( 0.107 minutes )
> Large Division...
> Time: 0.373 seconds ( 0.006 minutes )
> InvSqrt(10005)...
> Time: 0.250 seconds ( 0.004 minutes )
> Large Multiply...
> Time: 0.134 seconds ( 0.002 minutes )
> 
> Pi: 7.188 seconds ( 0.120 minutes )
> 
> Base Converting:
> Time: 0.454 seconds ( 0.008 minutes )
> Writing Decimal Digits:
> Time: 0.406 seconds ( 0.007 minutes )
> 
> Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:09:29 2021
> End Time: Fri Dec 17 19:09:39 2021
> 
> Total Computation Time: 7.642 seconds ( 0.127 minutes )
> Start-to-End Wall Time: 10.062 seconds ( 0.168 minutes )
> 
> CPU Utilization: 10172.45 % + 100.36 % kernel overhead
> Multi-core Efficiency: 79.47 % + 0.78 % kernel overhead
> 
> Last Decimal Digits: Pi
> 3896531789 0364496761 5664275325 5483742003 7847987772 : 499,999,950
> 5002477883 0364214864 5906800532 7052368734 3293261427 : 500,000,000
> 
> Spot Check: Good through 500,000,000
> 
> Version: 0.7.8.9507 (Linux/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari)
> Processor(s): AMD Eng Sample: 100-000000020-02_30/20_N
> Topology: 128 threads / 64 cores / 1 socket / 1 NUMA node
> Usable Memory: 135,032,893,440 ( 126 GiB)
> CPU Base Frequency: 1,996,240,000 Hz
> 
> Validation File: Pi - 20211217-190940.txt
> 
> [email protected]:~/y-cruncher$ sudo ./y-cruncher.ex skip-warnings bench 2.5b
> y-cruncher v0.7.8 Build 9507
> 
> Detecting Environment...
> 
> CPU Vendor:
> AMD = Yes
> Intel = No
> 
> OS Features:
> * 64-bit = Yes
> * OS AVX = Yes
> * OS AVX512 = No
> 
> Hardware Features:
> MMX = Yes
> * x64 = Yes
> * ABM = Yes
> RDRAND = Yes
> RDSEED = Yes
> BMI1 = Yes
> * BMI2 = Yes
> * ADX = Yes
> MPX = No
> PREFETCHW = Yes
> PREFETCHWT1 = No
> RDPID = Yes
> GFNI = No
> VAES = No
> 
> SIMD: 128-bit
> * SSE = Yes
> * SSE2 = Yes
> * SSE3 = Yes
> * SSSE3 = Yes
> SSE4a = Yes
> * SSE4.1 = Yes
> * SSE4.2 = Yes
> AES-NI = Yes
> SHA = Yes
> 
> SIMD: 256-bit
> * AVX = Yes
> XOP = No
> * FMA3 = Yes
> * FMA4 = No
> * AVX2 = Yes
> 
> SIMD: 512-bit
> * AVX512-F = No
> AVX512-CD = No
> AVX512-PF = No
> AVX512-ER = No
> * AVX512-VL = No
> * AVX512-BW = No
> * AVX512-DQ = No
> * AVX512-IFMA = No
> * AVX512-VBMI = No
> 
> Alright Intel, how many drinks have you had tonight?
> AVX512-VPOPCNTDQ = No
> AVX512-4FMAPS = No
> AVX512-4VNNIW = No
> AVX512-VBMI2 = No
> AVX512-VPCLMUL = No
> AVX512-VNNI = No
> AVX512-BITALG = No
> AVX512-BF16 = No
> 
> 
> Auto-Selecting: 19-ZN2 ~ Kagari
> 
> /home/mark/y-cruncher/Binaries/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari
> 
> 
> Launching y-cruncher...
> ================================================================
> 
> 
> 
> Checking processor/OS features...
> 
> Required Features:
> x64, ABM, BMI1, BMI2, ADX,
> SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2,
> AVX, FMA3, AVX2
> 
> 
> 
> Parsing Core -> Handle Mappings...
> Cores: 0-127
> 
> Parsing NUMA -> Core Mappings...
> Node 0: 0-127
> 
> 
> Constant: Pi
> Algorithm: Chudnovsky (1988)
> 
> Decimal Digits: 2,500,000,000
> Hexadecimal Digits: Disabled
> 
> Computation Mode: Ram Only
> Multi-Threading: Push Pool -> 128 / ? (randomization on)
> 
> Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:10:58 2021
> 
> Working Memory... 12.2 GiB (locked, spread: ?)
> Twiddle Tables... 286 MiB (locked, spread: ?)
> 
> Begin Computation:
> 
> Series CommonP2B3... 176,284,185 terms (Expansion Factor = 2.784)
> Time: 31.382 seconds ( 0.523 minutes )
> Large Division...
> Time: 1.667 seconds ( 0.028 minutes )
> InvSqrt(10005)...
> Time: 1.120 seconds ( 0.019 minutes )
> Large Multiply...
> Time: 0.697 seconds ( 0.012 minutes )
> 
> Pi: 34.866 seconds ( 0.581 minutes )
> 
> Base Converting:
> Time: 2.273 seconds ( 0.038 minutes )
> Writing Decimal Digits:
> Time: 1.779 seconds ( 0.030 minutes )
> 
> Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:10:58 2021
> End Time: Fri Dec 17 19:11:40 2021
> 
> Total Computation Time: 37.139 seconds ( 0.619 minutes )
> Start-to-End Wall Time: 42.582 seconds ( 0.710 minutes )
> 
> CPU Utilization: 11225.23 % + 92.81 % kernel overhead
> Multi-core Efficiency: 87.70 % + 0.73 % kernel overhead
> 
> Last Decimal Digits: Pi
> 0917027898 3554136437 7123165188 3528593128 0032489094 : 2,499,999,950
> 9228502005 4677489552 2459688725 5242233502 7255998083 : 2,500,000,000
> 
> Spot Check: Good through 2,500,000,000
> 
> Version: 0.7.8.9507 (Linux/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari)
> Processor(s): AMD Eng Sample: 100-000000020-02_30/20_N
> Topology: 128 threads / 64 cores / 1 socket / 1 NUMA node
> Usable Memory: 135,032,893,440 ( 126 GiB)
> CPU Base Frequency: 1,996,248,000 Hz
> 
> Validation File: Pi - 20211217-191142.txt
> 
> [email protected]:~/y-cruncher$
> 
> 
> Total Computation Time: *37.139 seconds* ( 0.619 minutes )
> Pi is 34 seconds.
> 
> Sick score


Yea your memory is tighter and I think your good ccx is better binned than 5800x.
All I want is stupid good bin 5800x  ( but I guess they all go to epyc and 5950x and we get the leaky hot chips since we have power headroom… at stock)


----------



## dk_mic

5950x that should go to RMA since its not stable at stock 
PPT 250 TDC 165 EDC 221 + CO per core (from -30 up to +6/+7 on the best ones)


----------



## domdtxdissar

@storm-chaser 

The next time you update the leaderboard: 
My 90.615 time was definitely not done on a stock clockspeed run 😇 

Single CCD was all maxed out, static 4750mhz clockspeed, 194watt @ max temp 85 degrees.



Luggage said:


> Yea your memory is tighter and I think your good ccx is better binned than 5800x.
> All I want is stupid good bin 5800x  ( but I guess they all go to epyc and 5950x and we get the leaky hot chips since we have power headroom… at stock)


Actually, my 5950x isn't all that good binned at all, atleast not for a 5950x..









Here is one of the prebinned 5950x's CENS sold: (wont mention the current owner)









Hoping i get better luck with 6950x 3d v-$ edition


----------



## Bix

Here's my first effort - working on voltages/PBO at the moment so will hopefully be able to improve a bit


----------



## domdtxdissar

Think the 5950x must be bandwidth limited or something else seeing how little performance increase there is going from stock clocks @ 142w to all out maxed cpu @ 4700/4600mhz sucking down ~300w
The time only decreased from 69 seconds to 62 seconds  (barely 11% faster)

Both CCD's all maxed out, static 4700/4600mhz clockspeed, 301watt @ max temp 85 degrees.
(still benching in normal ambient temp)








Atleast i managed to get #1 place from those jokers on hwbot for those running consumer Zen3 / 5950x 😅
5950x in second and third place seems to be running with *LN2 cooling* at upto static 5150mhz cpu clocks as they have decupled the infinity fabric, running UCLK @ 1033mhz (required for sub zero temps, otherwise computer wont boot when using LN2)


----------



## Luggage

domdtxdissar said:


> @storm-chaser
> 
> The next time you update the leaderboard:
> My 90.615 time was definitely not done on a stock clockspeed run 😇
> 
> Single CCD was all maxed out, static 4750mhz clockspeed, 194watt @ max temp 85 degrees.
> 
> 
> Actually, my 5950x isn't all that good binned at all, atleast not for a 5950x..
> View attachment 2538155
> 
> 
> Here is one of the prebinned 5950x's CENS sold: (wont mention the current owner)
> View attachment 2538156
> 
> 
> Hoping i get better luck with 6950x 3d v-$ edition


Is the ctr test useful at all (only tried really early version, no likey) or better just wait for hydra?


----------



## Luggage

domdtxdissar said:


> Think the 5950x must be bandwidth limited or something else seeing how little performance increase there is going from stock clocks @ 142w to all out maxed cpu @ 4700/4600mhz sucking down ~300w
> The time only decreased from 69 seconds to 62 seconds  (barely 11% faster)
> 
> Both CCD's all maxed out, static 4700/4600mhz clockspeed, 301watt @ max temp 85 degrees.
> (still benching in normal ambient temp)
> View attachment 2538159
> 
> Atleast i managed to get #1 place from those jokers on hwbot for those running consumer Zen3 / 5950x 😅
> 5950x in second and third place seems to be running with *LN2 cooling* at upto static 5150mhz cpu clocks as they have decupled the infinity fabric, running UCLK @ 1033mhz (required for sub zero temps, otherwise computer wont boot when using LN2)


Millosh is running PBO at least, has a thread on Reddit.

edit: yea it’s ram limit, set 3200 and watch it tank…


----------



## domdtxdissar

Luggage said:


> Is the ctr test useful at all (only tried really early version, no likey) or better just wait for hydra?


My numbers are copied from Hydra diagnostic:










Luggage said:


> Millosh is running PBO at least, has a thread on Reddit.
> 
> edit: yea it’s ram limit, set 3200 and watch it tank…


Why the hell is he running decupled then ? 😅
Aha!, so its all bandwidth and don't care about latency then.. Ok now i understand the decupled mode, those sneaky bastards 
Think i have to do some new runs in couple of days... getting my MSI unify x max delivered on ~Monday 😇
(My current Crosshair VIII Hero will max do 4000MT/s decupled)


----------



## Luggage

Luggage said:


> Millosh is running PBO at least, has a thread on Reddit.





domdtxdissar said:


> My numbers are copied from Hydra diagnostic:
> View attachment 2538163
> 
> 
> 
> Why the hell is he running decupled then ? 😅
> Aha!, so its all bandwidth and don't care about latency then.. Ok now i understand the decupled mode, those sneaky bastards
> Think i have to do some new runs in couple of days... getting my MSI unify x max delivered on ~Monday 😇
> (My current Crosshair VIII Hero will max do 4000MT/s decupled)


Well it would be a departure from my daily so if I decouple I might as well just set a suicide all core and be done with it…


----------



## MrHoof

Memory @ 1900:3800 CL14 1T no setup timings
8 Zen3 cores with hyperthreading enabled
Stock cpu clockspeed
CO with Increased PPT/EDC/TDC slightly 146/144/98
Air cooled with Noctua U12A in a ITX case NR200


----------



## Arctucas




----------



## kairi_zeroblade

Trying this on the normal work desktop..


----------



## storm-chaser

Okay good competition so far guys. I color coded the teams. So it's red vs blue, you get the idea.

*Leaderboard updated.* There was some question over clocks on a couple of the AMD rigs. In some cases I used the stock base frequency. Anyway, if want me to update it PM with the correct information, there was just some doubt as to where it as falling in terms of base/boost clocks during the actual run. Anyway, that's it. Carry on!

@kairi_zeroblade
Ill get your second machine up after I next edit the leaderboard at lunchtime. thanks
@domdtxdissar I will update your clock speed at that point as well


----------



## cstkl1

tps3443 said:


> Very cool! Yeah I’m gonna disabled “TVB Voltage Optimization” pretty sure that’s what’s causing the clock throttle. CPU is hotting 71C on just 1 core, and it’s forcing the chip downclock to 5.2Ghz. Gonna re-run this tomorrow, and I should slot right in to the 79 second mark “Hopefully”


tvb voltage optimization infact the whole octvb doesnt really work well with rkl. 
rkl vcore requirement is very strict and requires a big diff in temps to lower vcore compare to other intel cpus.


----------



## MrHoof

storm-chaser said:


> *Leaderboard updated.* There was some question over clocks on a couple of the AMD rigs. In some cases I used the stock base frequency. Anyway, if want me to update it PM with the correct information, there was just some doubt as to where it as falling in terms of base/boost clocks during the actual run. Anyway, that's it. Carry on!


Just use the max effective clock reported by Benchmate if its included in the screenshot thats as close as u will get. Like in my case stock clock is max boost 4.85ghz but in this benchmark it could only hit 4.7ghz effective.


----------



## tps3443

Luggage said:


> For high temps try the stand alone y-cruncher. Run stress test with bpp. Gives me higher temps than linx or p95 small…
> Linx and p95 use more power though.


This 11900K is a great bin. I’m not trying to harm it intentionally. The chances of getting incredible cores, with an incredible IMC simultaneously are slim.


----------



## tps3443

cstkl1 said:


> tvb voltage optimization infact the whole octvb doesnt really work well with rkl.
> rkl vcore requirement is very strict and requires a big diff in temps to lower vcore compare to other intel cpus.




I run voltage optimization, and notice it gives me a wider Vf curve during normal usage. However, it does run really well with it off too. When I disable voltage optimization, oddly enough I can reduce the bios voltage even further for any given particular overclock to be stable. However, the vf curve in windows looks better, with it on by default.


----------



## Ichirou

I can't run y-cruncher as it errors out with the "Coefficient is too large" error on this CPU (i7-8086k).
Site says that it's something to do about an unstable OC, but I'm confident that that is not the case. I'm leaning towards some sort of bug with AVX on this CPU.

I'll have to try it again on a 12900k later on.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Since my desktop is 7,000 miles away, here are the results from my travel rig.


----------



## domdtxdissar

Ichirou said:


> I can't run y-cruncher as it errors out with the "Coefficient is too large" error on this CPU (i7-8086k).
> Site says that it's something to do about an unstable OC, but I'm confident that that is not the case. I'm leaning towards some sort of bug with AVX on this CPU.
> 
> I'll have to try it again on a 12900k later on.


99.999% unstable OC
Lower your clockspeed and see it complete, this is a very hard stresstest.


----------



## Ichirou

domdtxdissar said:


> 99.999% unstable OC
> Lower your clockspeed and see it complete, this is a very hard stresstest.


One thing I noticed when y-cruncher boots up is that it says that AVX isn't even working; not really sure what that is about. This is even before I start any tests. When I checked the site, it did mention something about older processor generations having issues with AVX, so that might be a sign. I can understand if the test fails because of the CPU ramping up to an insane temperature, but it has so far capped off at 80C, which isn't a lot for a stress test.

To be fair, I didn't run y-cruncher after a fresh restart; I still had other random stuff running as well. That might've influenced results. I just thought I'd give it a shot to see what'll happen, even if the score would end up being terrible. I will try again properly once I get my 12900k.


----------



## bscool

@Ichirou It could be your memory oc. That is how I found out my 4266c16 wasnt stable. Passed memtest and tm5 ultimate(i think it was?) but errored on y cruncher so now I use it to test also.

Good thing about y crunch it will show error in a few secounds vs hour plus of mem testing.


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> @Ichirou It could be your memory oc. That is how I found out my 4266c16 wasnt stable. Passed memtest and tm5 ultimate(i think it was?) but errored on y cruncher so now I use it to test also.
> 
> Good thing about y crunch it will show error in a few secounds vs hour plus of mem testing.


That certainly sounds like it could be a good way to test. But y-cruncher seems like an outlier in terms of use-case, so it might not be the ideal real-world scenario test. I'll have to try a few more times with less potential influences to be sure. (I didn't try it after a clean restart but with lots of stuff running, heh.)

I am also getting a 12900k in the mail, so... Might be better to try it then.


----------



## storm-chaser

geriatricpollywog said:


> Since my desktop is 7,000 miles away, here are the results from my travel rig.


Can you remote into it? Though, probably not the best idea if it crashes half way through and you have no way to restart it until you get back home.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

storm-chaser said:


> Can you remote into it? Though, probably not the best idea if it crashes half way through and you have no way to restart it until you get back home.


It’s mining right now and running safe boot with no memory OC, not even XMP. It wouldn’t crash but the score would be underwhelming.


----------



## thx1138

geriatricpollywog said:


> Since my desktop is 7,000 miles away, here are the results from my travel rig.


Laptop make/model? What temps were you getting?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

thx1138 said:


> Laptop make/model? What temps were you getting?


Its this laptop but with a 32GB Kingston Hyper-X CL20 kit

OMEN 15-en1007na QHD Gaming Laptop - NVIDIA® GeForce RTX™ 3060 - HP Store UK

Temperature doesn't matter since the score is the same whether its on my lap in front of the wood burner in my UK airbnb, or its on the window in the freezing night air. This laptop is heavily power limited. The wires going from the battery to the mainboard are super thin.


----------



## thx1138

geriatricpollywog said:


> Its this laptop but with a 32GB Kingston Hyper-X CL20 kit
> 
> OMEN 15-en1007na QHD Gaming Laptop - NVIDIA® GeForce RTX™ 3060 - HP Store UK
> 
> Temperature doesn't matter since the score is the same whether its on my lap in front of the wood burner in my UK airbnb, or its on the window in the freezing night air. This laptop is heavily power limited. The wires going from the battery to the mainboard are super thin.


Thanks. Just curious since we have similar specs.


----------



## rbys

5900X w/ PBO2 200W PPT 140A EDC 160A TDC
CO: -20 on the two best cores, -25 on the rest, +100MHz freq. override


----------



## Corhone

PBO (105W/65A/100A) CO (-28, -16, -11, +7, -25 & -9)


----------



## storm-chaser

Slightly OT but might have to come back at this with a better CPU...

I think it might be time to upgrade to a 9900KF/k and two more patriot viper steel memory modules, for 32GB of quad channel so I can at least chase the peloton lol. The cooling system should already be able to handle a decently overclocked 9900KF (heatkiller IV and three pumps) and the msi z390 motherboard ACE motherboard should have no problems with power delivery at any clock speed. Also note, while there are less overall "good" 9900KF overclocking samples, they tend to be bang on point if you can find one, and use lots less voltage than a comparable 9600KF.


----------



## tps3443

storm-chaser said:


> Slightly OT but might have to come back at this with a better CPU...
> 
> I think it might be time to upgrade to a 9900KF/k and two more patriot viper steel memory modules, for 32GB of quad channel so I can at least chase the peloton lol. The cooling system should already be able to handle a decently overclocked 9900KF (heatkiller IV and three pumps) and the msi z390 motherboard ACE motherboard should have no problems with power delivery at any clock speed. Also note, while there are less overall "good" 9900KF overclocking samples, they tend to be bang on point if you can find one, and use lots less voltage than a comparable 9600KF.


Yeah, I’d grab a 9900KS if you can. Great CPU!


----------



## storm-chaser

tps3443 said:


> Yeah, I’d grab a 9900KS if you can. Great CPU!


I would but the price is ridiculous. Might as well stick with a standard 9900KF for $300 vs $700
Alternatively, 9600KFs are selling on ebay for about $150. I could order a bunch of those and bin them myself but still stuck with hexacore at the end of the day.


----------



## tps3443

storm-chaser said:


> I would but the price is ridiculous. Might as well stick with a standard 9900KF for $300 vs $700
> Alternatively, 9600KFs are selling on ebay for about $150. I could order a bunch of those and bin them myself but still stuck with hexacore at the end of the day.


Some people may look at a 9900K, and think it cost too much. But, the fact is while there are newer CPU’s available for the same price or less even. It is the cost associated with upgrading the entire platform.

If you already have the Z390 platform setup. Then, absolutely!!

This is a 9900KF for $350. That is the most cost effective upgrade. 9900KF is still a beast to this day for gaming.












Intel Core I9-9900kf Desktop Processor 8 Cores Without Graphics BX80684I99900KF for sale online | eBay


Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Intel Core I9-9900kf Desktop Processor 8 Cores Without Graphics BX80684I99900KF at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!



www.ebay.com


----------



## JSHamlet234

storm-chaser said:


> Slightly OT but might have to come back at this with a better CPU...
> 
> I think it might be time to upgrade to a 9900KF/k and two more patriot viper steel memory modules, for 32GB of quad channel so I can at least chase the peloton lol. The cooling system should already be able to handle a decently overclocked 9900KF (heatkiller IV and three pumps) and the msi z390 motherboard ACE motherboard should have no problems with power delivery at any clock speed. Also note, while there are less overall "good" 9900KF overclocking samples, they tend to be bang on point if you can find one, and use lots less voltage than a comparable 9600KF.


Yeah, it's a worthwhile upgrade for sure. Going from 6 threads to 16 threads is a big deal. I did something similar last year - I had been running a 5820K for 5 years (actually 4 different ones - I managed to kill 3 of them), and I grabbed a 5960X on ebay for around $150. I found one from a specific batch that I was looking for, and I ended up with a pretty good chip. I actually bought several and they were all above average, but I only kept 2. My spare 5960X actually needs less voltage than this one at the same clocks, but it runs much hotter and therefore it can't actually go faster because it runs out of thermal headroom. It might be special with sub-zero cooling, but it'll probably sit in a drawer for the rest of eternity. Like you, I'm ready to move on to something else. It's funny how this particular competition has me giving AM4 a second look.


----------



## storm-chaser

tps3443 said:


> If you already have the Z390 platform setup. Then, absolutely!!


Yup. I've made up my mind. Next month.

ATTN
Leaderboard updated


----------



## tps3443

storm-chaser said:


> Yup. I've made up my mind. Next month.
> 
> ATTN
> Leaderboard updated


If I had a Z390 board, I’d be all over it.

You can easily delid that 9900KF too. And squeeze another 200Mhz out of its best daily overclock. If you look at these four CPU’s fully tuned out there is very minimal difference at 1080P in games. 
9900K/10900K/11900K/12900K.


----------



## Avacado

tps3443 said:


> If I had a Z390 board, I’d be all over it.
> 
> You can easily delid that 9900KF too. And squeeze another 200Mhz out of its best daily overclock. If you look at these four CPU’s fully tuned out there is very minimal difference at 1080P in games.
> 9900K/10900K/11900K/12900K.


I have 2 z390 boards with 9900k's and trust me, it's not as easy as @Arctucas makes it look. He has a golden chip shat out by god himself from above. I managed to get a run in at 5.2GHz, but did not save it and was not able to replicate it again without instability. was around 115 seconds or so. He has quite possibly the best sample of 9900k silicon iv'e ever seen and he knows it too.


----------



## Avacado

Heres a 5.2 run. RAM needs tightening, left tRFC on auto by accident. Can probably get away with a lot less voltage, but I sent damn near 1.5v through it pushing 5.4GHz and no joy.

Still good enough for 3rd on HWbot









AvacadoEHW`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 1min 56sec 934ms with a Core i9 9900K


The Core i9 9900K @ 5202.6MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. AvacadoEHWranks #null worldwide and #5 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org


----------



## tps3443

Avacado said:


> Heres a 5.2 run. RAM needs tightening, left tRFC on auto by accident. Can probably get away with a lot less voltage, but I sent damn near 1.5v through it pushing 5.4GHz and no joy.
> 
> Still good enough for 3rd on HWbot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AvacadoEHW`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 1min 56sec 934ms with a Core i9 9900K
> 
> 
> The Core i9 9900K @ 5202.6MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. AvacadoEHWranks #null worldwide and #5 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2538292



Its all about CPU quality. I know the feeling lol. I have two 11900K’s one is barely 5.2Ghz AVX stable. The other laughs at 5.4Ghz AVX stability. And what’s even dumber is, the one at 5.4 still uses less power and voltage than the other one at 5.2 lol.


If I was buying a 9900K right now. I would want two retail 9900KF’s from Amazon.com. Then I’d test them both, keep the best, and return the weaker one.

Amazon has them for $370 brand new for 9900KF. Pretty good dang buy honestly!


----------



## storm-chaser

storm-chaser said:


> Yup. I've made up my mind. Next month.
> 
> ATTN
> Leaderboard updated


AMD is definitely dominating this one there is no way around that. Where are my dual processor Xeon people at???



Avacado said:


> He has quite possibly the best sample of 9900k silicon iv'e ever seen and he knows it too.


Yes, he has won more than a few of my competitions with that prized silicon. Benching at 5.5GHz, get outta town! Im still a little stunned at some of the runs he made with that thing. 



tps3443 said:


> Its all about CPU quality. I know the feeling lol. I have two 11900K’s one is barely 5.2Ghz AVX stable. The other laughs at 5.4Ghz AVX stability. And what’s even dumber is, the one at 5.4 still uses less power and voltage than the other one at 5.2 lol.
> 
> 
> If I was buying a 9900K right now. I would want two retail 9900KF’s from Amazon.com. Then I’d test them both, keep the best, and return the weaker one.
> 
> Amazon has them for $370 brand new for 9900KF. Pretty good dang buy honestly!


Okay smart thinking right there. I will do that for sure. You see these pop up used on eBay and you have to wonder how many of them are overclocking rejects, so Ill definitely buy new from amazon for that price. Also going to add a 4th pump just for kicks (and for balance) and a white 360mm radiator which will mount on top of the case. So I have about 1000mm of radiator right now if you add them all up, and with the addition of another 360, I should have a pretty decent OC ceiling ready for when the 9900K arrives.

Good. Just a crying shame I had to return my new z820 a couple days ago. They sent it with bent pins and no cooler on CPU #2!!!


----------



## Avacado

storm-chaser said:


> Okay smart thinking right there. I will do that for sure. You see these pop up used on eBay and you have to wonder how many of them are overclocking rejects, so Ill definitely buy new from amazon for that price. Also going to add a 4th pump just for kicks (and for balance) and a white 360mm radiator which will mount on top of the case. So I have about 1000mm of radiator right now if you add them all up, and with the addition of another 360, I should have a pretty decent OC ceiling ready for when the 9900K arrives.


I hope you get a good sample. Both my 9900k's are delidded and never get above 60c even at 5.3GHz. **** ain't easy.


----------



## Talon2016




----------



## storm-chaser

Oh boy.

I can see this back and forth between Intel and AMD getting out of hand rather quickly. lol
@dm

Both of you need to have the FD on speed dial just in case 🤣

great runs 
@Talon2016
and
@domdtxdissar


----------



## bscool

So the trick on 12th gen is disable e cores?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

No idea why people still use annoying image hosting sites when you can copy and paste directly into the message.


bscool said:


> So the trick on 12th gen is disable e cores?


I heard enabling AVX512 also helps.


----------



## storm-chaser

@cstkl1 

You have 6400MHz DDR5, no? Also an 12900K? 

I'd like to see you make a run here and we can measure performance against the very similar 6000MHz ddr5 setup from @Talon2016


----------



## Avacado

Ive


storm-chaser said:


> @cstkl1
> 
> You have 6400MHz DDR5, no? Also an 12900K?
> 
> I'd like to see you make a run here and we can measure performance against the very similar 6000MHz ddr5 setup from @Talon2016


 I've got a 12900KF and 5600 in the dungeon waiting to be built. Will post here when I do.


----------



## storm-chaser

Talon2016 said:


>


Leaderboard updated.


----------



## tps3443

@Talon2016 


Great run!!!!


----------



## JSHamlet234

Wow, the empire strikes back! I'd really like to see either side crack the 60 second barrier. At least before the X299 and TR guys show up.

If any of you haven't done this, make sure to enable large and locked pages. On some machines it'll get you a second or two improvement, and on some machines it doesn't seem to do anything at all, but it's worth a shot.

There's a few ways to do it, including using this tool.


----------



## gtz

This is not my final submission, did not know how well my setup would cool AVX 512. I ran the AVX512 clock at 3.5. Also this showed ram instability so had to dial back RAM. Will see if I could crack 40 secs tonight

Edit:

I lied, this is my limit as far as clocks are concerned. Re ran it with HWINFO64 and hit 96C.

Edit 2:

Will use LM as tim, that always shaves 8-12 C for me. I will at least attempt sub 50s.


----------



## storm-chaser

Quick update to include new leader gtz


----------



## gtz

storm-chaser said:


> Quick update to include new leader gtz


Love the notes lol, but there are more people with better tuned X299 systems.

I noticed this benchmark is hard on the memory controller. With that said it is very sensitive to RAM speed. I already hit 50 with just adding voltage to the dimms and memory controller and running 3733mhz on the ram. Will update when I use LM as and open the windows to let the 40c weather in the room.


----------



## thx1138

This kinds of threads are why I love OCN.


----------



## cstkl1

storm-chaser said:


> @cstkl1
> 
> You have 6400MHz DDR5, no? Also an 12900K?
> 
> I'd like to see you make a run here and we can measure performance against the very similar 6000MHz ddr5 setup from @Talon2016


later once i hit or give up or hit my ram oc target.


----------



## Luggage

gtz said:


> Love the notes lol, but there are more people with better tuned X299 systems.
> 
> I noticed this benchmark is hard on the memory controller. With that said it is very sensitive to RAM speed. I already hit 50 with just adding voltage to the dimms and memory controller and running 3733mhz on the ram. Will update when I use LM as and open the windows to let the 40c weather in the room.


Let the client get ready - you get a lot of statistics from the save window after a run …


----------



## Luggage

cstkl1 said:


> later once i hit give up or hit my ram oc target.


Running the stress test in the stand alone client is great for… stress testing


----------



## cstkl1

Luggage said:


> Running the stress test in the stand alone client is great for… stress testing


i am single track minded.. cant rest until i hit my stability requirement. so i think its better i try this with a superstable 6600c28 right?

btw is there a portable benchmate. dont like installers if possible and if i remembered correctly it installs some services..


----------



## tps3443

gtz said:


> View attachment 2538424
> 
> 
> This is not my final submission, did not know how well my setup would cool AVX 512. I ran the AVX512 clock at 3.5. Also this showed ram instability so had to dial back RAM. Will see if I could crack 40 secs tonight
> 
> Edit:
> 
> I lied, this is my limit as far as clocks are concerned. Re ran it with HWINFO64 and hit 96C.
> 
> Edit 2:
> 
> Will use LM as tim, that always shaves 8-12 C for me. I will at least attempt sub 50s.



I could run 4.4Ghz AVX 512 sustained in Y-Cruncher on my 7980XE direct die. That AVX 512 power is insane! And cooling that really took a perfect die mount with LM.

I was cooling 1,000-1,100 watts on the CPU sustained. And it’s just murderously powerful in AVX512. I manage 4.5Ghz AVX 512 during the winter months. My 7980XE was average at best. Around top 68%.


I bet your 9980XE would be great delidded. Better silicon, better IMC too.


----------



## gtz

tps3443 said:


> I could run 4.4Ghz AVX 512 sustained in Y-Cruncher on my 7980XE direct die. That AVX 512 power is insane! And cooling that really took a perfect die mount with LM.
> 
> I was cooling 1,000-1,100 watts on the CPU sustained. And it’s just murderously powerful in AVX512. I manage 4.5Ghz AVX 512 during the winter months. My 7980XE was average at best. Around top 68%.
> 
> 
> I bet your 9980XE would be great delidded. Better silicon, better IMC too.


Curious, what was your score at 4.4? 

Like I mentioned earlier I see big jump I'm the score by only adjusting RAM, I kinda want to buy a 4X8GB b-die like I was running before at 4000mhz CL15. But these quad dual rank b die sticks are really hard on the controller beyond 3600. I thought I would not care as much since I have 64GB of ram but for benches 4 single rank b die sticks is king vs 4 dual rank sticks.


----------



## cstkl1

are u sure u guys adl benching this correctly?

stock adl + 6400c281T = 63.433
stock same ram E core disable = 60.731










how do u show that benchmate stats thing?

seems to like ram oc. will come back when 6600c28 is superstable


----------



## tps3443

gtz said:


> Curious, what was your score at 4.4?
> 
> Like I mentioned earlier I see big jump I'm the score by only adjusting RAM, I kinda want to buy a 4X8GB b-die like I was running before at 4000mhz CL15. But these quad dual rank b die sticks are really hard on the controller beyond 3600. I thought I would not care as much since I have 64GB of ram but for benches 4 single rank b die sticks is king vs 4 dual rank sticks.


I never ran Y-Cruncher 2.5B on my 7980XE/X299 Dark/4000CL15 setup. (I sold the CPU to a member on here, and it’s living in Thailand lol)

I only ran the Y-Cruncher stress tester to confirm stability. I was using AVX512 software daily, so I squeezed out my max AVX512 overclock for 24/7 daily. That 4.4Ghz was great. But, it literally was a 1,000 watt CPU. It used more power than 5Ghz in normal AVX loads.


----------



## gtz

tps3443 said:


> I never ran Y-Cruncher 2.5B on my 7980XE/X299 Dark/4000CL15 setup. (I sold the CPU to a member on here, and it’s living in Thailand lol)
> 
> I only ran the Y-Cruncher stress tester to confirm stability. I was using AVX512 software daily, so I squeezed out my max AVX512 overclock for 24/7 daily. That 4.4Ghz was great. But, it literally was a 1,000 watt CPU. It used more power than 5Ghz in normal AVX loads.


I think we sold to the same person, I sold a X299 board to a member from Thailand. Member is @inlandchris, the package got lost but after a few months re appeared and he finally got it.


----------



## tps3443

gtz said:


> I think we sold to the same person, I sold a X299 board to a member from Thailand. Member is @inlandchris, the package got lost but after a few months re appeared and he finally got it.



Yeah that’s him lol!!

I delidded that 7980XE again, and re-lidded it. I wanted the LM to be good for the remainder of
its life, because he wanted the IHS re-sealed back on.

He is still running it too. That 7980XE was tough as nails! I Also sold him my Optimus Signature V2 with it.

I downgraded to a lower power Z490 system. Then my 10900K died, and I down graded even further to a Z590 11900K system lol. I’m impressed how one can go from (18/36) to (8/16) and still be very satisfied. I love that the 11900K supports AVX512 though, so I’m ok with it.


----------



## Luggage

cstkl1 said:


> are u sure u guys adl benching this correctly?
> 
> stock adl + 6400c281T = 63.433
> stock same ram E core disable = 60.731
> 
> View attachment 2538469
> 
> 
> how do u show that benchmate stats thing?
> 
> seems to like ram oc. will come back when 6600c28 is superstable


Click the “save result” button, on the launcher.


----------



## bscool

cstkl1 said:


> are u sure u guys adl benching this correctly?
> 
> stock adl + 6400c281T = 63.433
> stock same ram E core disable = 60.731
> 
> View attachment 2538469
> 
> 
> how do u show that benchmate stats thing?
> 
> seems to like ram oc. will come back when 6600c28 is superstable


F6 to show stats. I think the big jump for ADL in the bench is ddr5 speed and bandwidth. I have tried different setting on ddr4 setup and no where near low 60s like ddr5 guys. Even looking at hwbot scores top runs on 12th gen is ddr5 for y cruncher.


----------



## cstkl1

bscool said:


> F6 to show stats. I think the big jump for ADL in the bench is ddr5 speed and bandwidth. I have tried different setting on ddr4 setup and no where near low 60s like ddr5 guys. Even looking at hwbot scores top runs on 12th gen is ddr5 for y cruncher.


adl
avx 512 has a default offset of -1

@safedisk 7kc32 should he bonkers from the scaling i am seeing on ddr5 with y cruncher.

rkl guys should post gear 1 1T or gear 2 high clock 1T


----------



## storm-chaser

Leaderboard updated to include @cstkl1

great run!


----------



## kairi_zeroblade

Ryzen bonkers..


----------



## JSHamlet234

cstkl1 said:


> adl
> avx 512 has a default offset of -1
> 
> @safedisk 7kc32 should he bonkers from the scaling i am seeing on ddr5 with y cruncher.
> 
> rkl guys should post gear 1 1T or gear 2 high clock 1T


My guess is that high clocks in gear 2 will be faster for RKL. Likewise for Ryzen, high-speed with decoupled FCLK might be faster than keeping it 1:1, especially for 5900X/5950X.


----------



## cstkl1

JSHamlet234 said:


> My guess is that high clocks in gear 2 will be faster for RKL. Likewise for Ryzen, high-speed with decoupled FCLK might be faster than keeping it 1:1, especially for 5900X/5950X.


seems like it. it wants high speed ram.

ryzen gear 2 a mess. should be worse

for rkl gear 1 1t might take da cake from 5kc17
@WebsterRKL bro try your 5333 on rkl.


----------



## gtz

Here is my current run, I hit 49.133 but did not take a screenshot and can't replicate. Same settings but running 3733 with a +.400 offset on the mem controller. Anyway with the room at a temp of 70 degrees Fahrenheit I only max out at 85C now. Will increase my AVX clock of 3.5 next.












Edit:

Just reviewed my clocks and they did not dip below 4.1, so I don't know if it is following the 3.5ghz in BIOS. This is a tough benchmark and is brutal on the CPU, very similar to linpack.


----------



## rbys

I'm just curious if anyone has tried y-cruncher on Linux. I'm a few seconds slower on Linux. ~78s on Linux (Fedora 35, 5900X) vs ~75s on Windows.


----------



## storm-chaser

Update to include @gtz latest run


----------



## JSHamlet234

10 billion digit run at very conservative clocks / voltages.


----------



## storm-chaser

tps3443 said:


> If I was buying a 9900K right now. I would want two retail 9900KF’s from Amazon.com. Then I’d test them both, keep the best, and return the weaker one.


Sorry slightly OT (casual benchmark comp anyway) but you know what, screw this. Despite the cost, I think I'm going to proceed with the 9900KS due to the fact that it will be binned higher than pretty much every 9900K in the wild. Plus it has a 5GHz all core turbo right out of the box. Cooling system should be able to handle approximately 5.5Ghz benching in it's current form. I just had the water block apart last night and cleaned that heat killer up real nice in preparation. Also the 9900KS is very rare In fact I've never seen one in any of the competitions I've hosted, ever. So I like rare chips as well 

*#danger close*


----------



## JSHamlet234

Ryzen 1700 @ 3.8. This processor has a very poor implementation of AVX2. It barely even got warm at 62C and 96 watts.


----------



## gtz

storm-chaser said:


> Sorry slightly OT (casual benchmark comp anyway) but you know what, screw this. Despite the cost, I think I'm going to proceed with the 9900KS due to the fact that it will be binned higher than pretty much every 9900K in the wild. Plus it has a 5GHz all core turbo right out of the box. Cooling system should be able to handle approximately 5.5Ghz benching in it's current form. I just had the water block apart last night and cleaned that heat killer up real nice in preparation. Also the 9900KS is very rare In fact I've never seen one in any of the competitions I've hosted, ever. So I like rare chips as well
> 
> *#danger close*


Do it!!!


----------



## storm-chaser

JSHamlet234 said:


> 10 billion digit run at very conservative clocks / voltages.
> 
> View attachment 2538584


What's your cooling system on this rig like? I noticed you only reached about 74*C which is still pretty good with a benchmark like this; considering the OC TDP of that processor you have.



gtz said:


> Do it!!!


YOLO right??!!


----------



## JSHamlet234

storm-chaser said:


> What's your cooling system on this rig like? I noticed you only reached about 74*C which is still pretty good with a benchmark like this; considering the OC TDP of that processor you have.


Nothing fancy at all, just an EVGA CLC 280 with Arctic P14 PWM's in push/pull. This sample is a very cool runner.


----------



## tps3443

@storm-chaser 


I was gonna say, Amazon had brand new 9900KF’s (Retail sealed) for $349.99 which is an amazing price!! 


But, if you are after a 9900KS then that’s a great option too. There is also binning with the 9900KS lol. Fortunately most all of them are really good already. But, silicon lottery did bin them as well haha.

Honestly, a bone stock 9900KS would destroy your 9600KF.

High frequency 8/16 is really where it’s at for optimal gaming performance.


----------



## domdtxdissar

rbys said:


> I'm just curious if anyone has tried y-cruncher on Linux. I'm a few seconds slower on Linux. ~78s on Linux (Fedora 35, 5900X) vs ~75s on Windows.


The EPYC with the 37second run i posted earlier was using Linux.



domdtxdissar said:


> I asked Markfw from* AnandTech to give this a try on his 64core/128thread EPYC machine, sadly he was running linux so he could not use benchmate.. but standalone y-cruncher is working just fine in Linux.. These are the numbers he got:*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 64cores/128 threads @ 2ghz
> 
> 
> 
> [email protected]:~/y-cruncher$ sudo ./y-cruncher.ex skip-warnings bench 500m
> y-cruncher v0.7.8 Build 9507
> 
> Detecting Environment...
> 
> CPU Vendor:
> AMD = Yes
> Intel = No
> 
> OS Features:
> * 64-bit = Yes
> * OS AVX = Yes
> * OS AVX512 = No
> 
> Hardware Features:
> MMX = Yes
> * x64 = Yes
> * ABM = Yes
> RDRAND = Yes
> RDSEED = Yes
> BMI1 = Yes
> * BMI2 = Yes
> * ADX = Yes
> MPX = No
> PREFETCHW = Yes
> PREFETCHWT1 = No
> RDPID = Yes
> GFNI = No
> VAES = No
> 
> SIMD: 128-bit
> * SSE = Yes
> * SSE2 = Yes
> * SSE3 = Yes
> * SSSE3 = Yes
> SSE4a = Yes
> * SSE4.1 = Yes
> * SSE4.2 = Yes
> AES-NI = Yes
> SHA = Yes
> 
> SIMD: 256-bit
> * AVX = Yes
> XOP = No
> * FMA3 = Yes
> * FMA4 = No
> * AVX2 = Yes
> 
> SIMD: 512-bit
> * AVX512-F = No
> AVX512-CD = No
> AVX512-PF = No
> AVX512-ER = No
> * AVX512-VL = No
> * AVX512-BW = No
> * AVX512-DQ = No
> * AVX512-IFMA = No
> * AVX512-VBMI = No
> 
> Alright Intel, how many drinks have you had tonight?
> AVX512-VPOPCNTDQ = No
> AVX512-4FMAPS = No
> AVX512-4VNNIW = No
> AVX512-VBMI2 = No
> AVX512-VPCLMUL = No
> AVX512-VNNI = No
> AVX512-BITALG = No
> AVX512-BF16 = No
> 
> 
> Auto-Selecting: 19-ZN2 ~ Kagari
> 
> /home/mark/y-cruncher/Binaries/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari
> 
> 
> Launching y-cruncher...
> ================================================================
> 
> 
> 
> Checking processor/OS features...
> 
> Required Features:
> x64, ABM, BMI1, BMI2, ADX,
> SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2,
> AVX, FMA3, AVX2
> 
> 
> 
> Parsing Core -> Handle Mappings...
> Cores: 0-127
> 
> Parsing NUMA -> Core Mappings...
> Node 0: 0-127
> 
> 
> Constant: Pi
> Algorithm: Chudnovsky (1988)
> 
> Decimal Digits: 500,000,000
> Hexadecimal Digits: Disabled
> 
> Computation Mode: Ram Only
> Multi-Threading: Push Pool -> 128 / ? (randomization on)
> 
> Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:09:29 2021
> 
> Working Memory... 3.98 GiB (locked, spread: ?)
> Twiddle Tables... 283 MiB (locked, spread: ?)
> 
> Begin Computation:
> 
> Series CommonP2B3... 35,256,847 terms (Expansion Factor = 2.636)
> Time: 6.431 seconds ( 0.107 minutes )
> Large Division...
> Time: 0.373 seconds ( 0.006 minutes )
> InvSqrt(10005)...
> Time: 0.250 seconds ( 0.004 minutes )
> Large Multiply...
> Time: 0.134 seconds ( 0.002 minutes )
> 
> Pi: 7.188 seconds ( 0.120 minutes )
> 
> Base Converting:
> Time: 0.454 seconds ( 0.008 minutes )
> Writing Decimal Digits:
> Time: 0.406 seconds ( 0.007 minutes )
> 
> Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:09:29 2021
> End Time: Fri Dec 17 19:09:39 2021
> 
> Total Computation Time: 7.642 seconds ( 0.127 minutes )
> Start-to-End Wall Time: 10.062 seconds ( 0.168 minutes )
> 
> CPU Utilization: 10172.45 % + 100.36 % kernel overhead
> Multi-core Efficiency: 79.47 % + 0.78 % kernel overhead
> 
> Last Decimal Digits: Pi
> 3896531789 0364496761 5664275325 5483742003 7847987772 : 499,999,950
> 5002477883 0364214864 5906800532 7052368734 3293261427 : 500,000,000
> 
> Spot Check: Good through 500,000,000
> 
> Version: 0.7.8.9507 (Linux/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari)
> Processor(s): AMD Eng Sample: 100-000000020-02_30/20_N
> Topology: 128 threads / 64 cores / 1 socket / 1 NUMA node
> Usable Memory: 135,032,893,440 ( 126 GiB)
> CPU Base Frequency: 1,996,240,000 Hz
> 
> Validation File: Pi - 20211217-190940.txt
> 
> [email protected]:~/y-cruncher$ sudo ./y-cruncher.ex skip-warnings bench 2.5b
> y-cruncher v0.7.8 Build 9507
> 
> Detecting Environment...
> 
> CPU Vendor:
> AMD = Yes
> Intel = No
> 
> OS Features:
> * 64-bit = Yes
> * OS AVX = Yes
> * OS AVX512 = No
> 
> Hardware Features:
> MMX = Yes
> * x64 = Yes
> * ABM = Yes
> RDRAND = Yes
> RDSEED = Yes
> BMI1 = Yes
> * BMI2 = Yes
> * ADX = Yes
> MPX = No
> PREFETCHW = Yes
> PREFETCHWT1 = No
> RDPID = Yes
> GFNI = No
> VAES = No
> 
> SIMD: 128-bit
> * SSE = Yes
> * SSE2 = Yes
> * SSE3 = Yes
> * SSSE3 = Yes
> SSE4a = Yes
> * SSE4.1 = Yes
> * SSE4.2 = Yes
> AES-NI = Yes
> SHA = Yes
> 
> SIMD: 256-bit
> * AVX = Yes
> XOP = No
> * FMA3 = Yes
> * FMA4 = No
> * AVX2 = Yes
> 
> SIMD: 512-bit
> * AVX512-F = No
> AVX512-CD = No
> AVX512-PF = No
> AVX512-ER = No
> * AVX512-VL = No
> * AVX512-BW = No
> * AVX512-DQ = No
> * AVX512-IFMA = No
> * AVX512-VBMI = No
> 
> Alright Intel, how many drinks have you had tonight?
> AVX512-VPOPCNTDQ = No
> AVX512-4FMAPS = No
> AVX512-4VNNIW = No
> AVX512-VBMI2 = No
> AVX512-VPCLMUL = No
> AVX512-VNNI = No
> AVX512-BITALG = No
> AVX512-BF16 = No
> 
> 
> Auto-Selecting: 19-ZN2 ~ Kagari
> 
> /home/mark/y-cruncher/Binaries/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari
> 
> 
> Launching y-cruncher...
> ================================================================
> 
> 
> 
> Checking processor/OS features...
> 
> Required Features:
> x64, ABM, BMI1, BMI2, ADX,
> SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2,
> AVX, FMA3, AVX2
> 
> 
> 
> Parsing Core -> Handle Mappings...
> Cores: 0-127
> 
> Parsing NUMA -> Core Mappings...
> Node 0: 0-127
> 
> 
> Constant: Pi
> Algorithm: Chudnovsky (1988)
> 
> Decimal Digits: 2,500,000,000
> Hexadecimal Digits: Disabled
> 
> Computation Mode: Ram Only
> Multi-Threading: Push Pool -> 128 / ? (randomization on)
> 
> Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:10:58 2021
> 
> Working Memory... 12.2 GiB (locked, spread: ?)
> Twiddle Tables... 286 MiB (locked, spread: ?)
> 
> Begin Computation:
> 
> Series CommonP2B3... 176,284,185 terms (Expansion Factor = 2.784)
> Time: 31.382 seconds ( 0.523 minutes )
> Large Division...
> Time: 1.667 seconds ( 0.028 minutes )
> InvSqrt(10005)...
> Time: 1.120 seconds ( 0.019 minutes )
> Large Multiply...
> Time: 0.697 seconds ( 0.012 minutes )
> 
> Pi: 34.866 seconds ( 0.581 minutes )
> 
> Base Converting:
> Time: 2.273 seconds ( 0.038 minutes )
> Writing Decimal Digits:
> Time: 1.779 seconds ( 0.030 minutes )
> 
> Start Time: Fri Dec 17 19:10:58 2021
> End Time: Fri Dec 17 19:11:40 2021
> 
> Total Computation Time: 37.139 seconds ( 0.619 minutes )
> Start-to-End Wall Time: 42.582 seconds ( 0.710 minutes )
> 
> CPU Utilization: 11225.23 % + 92.81 % kernel overhead
> Multi-core Efficiency: 87.70 % + 0.73 % kernel overhead
> 
> Last Decimal Digits: Pi
> 0917027898 3554136437 7123165188 3528593128 0032489094 : 2,499,999,950
> 9228502005 4677489552 2459688725 5242233502 7255998083 : 2,500,000,000
> 
> Spot Check: Good through 2,500,000,000
> 
> Version: 0.7.8.9507 (Linux/19-ZN2 ~ Kagari)
> Processor(s): AMD Eng Sample: 100-000000020-02_30/20_N
> Topology: 128 threads / 64 cores / 1 socket / 1 NUMA node
> Usable Memory: 135,032,893,440 ( 126 GiB)
> CPU Base Frequency: 1,996,248,000 Hz
> 
> Validation File: Pi - 20211217-191142.txt
> 
> [email protected]:~/y-cruncher$
> 
> 
> Total Computation Time: *37.139 seconds* ( 0.619 minutes )
> Pi is 34 seconds.
> 
> Sick score


----------



## Avacado

My contribution. 5.3GHz (5.2 Effective). E cores disabled. RAM at default XMP of 5600. Looks like RAM does indeed make a difference. I am sure I can get it down to 60 seconds with tuning. Just built it tonight.


----------



## storm-chaser

Leaderboard


tps3443 said:


> @storm-chaser
> 
> 
> I was gonna say, Amazon had brand new 9900KF’s (Retail sealed) for $349.99 which is an amazing price!!
> 
> 
> But, if you are after a 9900KS then that’s a great option too. There is also binning with the 9900KS lol. Fortunately most all of them are really good already. But, silicon lottery did bin them as well haha.
> 
> Honestly, a bone stock 9900KS would destroy your 9600KF.
> 
> High frequency 8/16 is really where it’s at for optimal gaming performance.


Sad to see Silicon lottery went out of business. Yes 9600KF is pretty much only good for learning the platforms OC potential and finding the best tweaks and tunes to apply. 

There is a 9900KS on ebay right now for $725, but that's about the limit I will pay for a 9900KS. If someone buys before me, I will re-evaluate my plan. 

A brand new 9900K @ 350.00 on amazon is very tempting as well, we will see what happens. I have to wait till after Christmas to buy this stuff anyway.


----------



## Avacado

domdtxdissar said:


> The EPYC with the 37second run i posted earlier was using Linux.


Get a screenie


----------



## JSHamlet234

storm-chaser said:


> Leaderboard
> 
> Sad to see Silicon lottery went out of business. Yes 9600KF is pretty much only good for learning the platforms OC potential and finding the best tweaks and tunes to apply.
> 
> There is a 9900KS on ebay right now for $725, but that's about the limit I will pay for a 9900KS. If someone buys before me, I will re-evaluate my plan.
> 
> A brand new 9900K @ 350.00 on amazon is very tempting as well, we will see what happens. I have to wait till after Christmas to buy this stuff anyway.


I would be concerned about getting a CPU that was abused. I saw one on ebay, a binned sample with documentation from Overclockers UK for over $1000. The seller claimed it was only ever run at stock settings. Riiiiiight.


----------



## Avacado

JSHamlet234 said:


> I would be concerned about getting a CPU that was abused. I saw one on ebay, a binned sample with documentation from Overclockers UK for over $1000. The seller claimed it was only ever run at stock settings. Riiiiiight.


Now that I have upgraded to a 12900k, I would be willing to let my delidded 9900k go. It can daily at 5.2 and benches at 5.3/5.4

Define "abused"


----------



## storm-chaser

Update


----------



## JSHamlet234

Avacado said:


> Now that I have upgraded to a 12900k, I would be willing to let my delidded 9900k go. It can daily at 5.2 and benches at 5.3/5.4
> 
> Define "abused"


By abused, I mean a chip that barely holds stock clocks any more.


----------



## Avacado

3 things.

1. My 9900K result is flagged in RED 
2. My 12900K result is indeed a KF!
3. Where are Cstkl1's results? I want to examine the fastest 12900K.


----------



## storm-chaser

Avacado said:


> 3 things.
> 
> 1. My 9900K result is flagged in RED
> 2. My 12900K result is indeed a KF!
> 3. Where are Cstkl1's results? I want to examine the fastest 12900K.


Fixed.


----------



## storm-chaser

Avacado said:


> 3. Where are Cstkl1's results? I want to examine the fastest 12900K.


He is in second place overall on the chart.


----------



## Avacado

storm-chaser said:


> He is in second place overall on the chart.


I don't see his results posted in the thread. I must have missed them. Which post number is his?


----------



## storm-chaser

Avacado said:


> I don't see his results posted in the thread. I must have missed them. Which post number is his?


Post #80


----------



## storm-chaser

Avacado said:


> I don't see his results posted in the thread. I must have missed them. Which post number is his?


He doesn't have the full results (with detail window) if that's what you are looking for. Just a snip of his run.


----------



## gtz

storm-chaser said:


> YOLO right??!!


Yep

I just bought a 4X8GB B-die set just for this benchmark. Since I can push single rank sticks further since it is a lot easier on the memory controller. Pushed memory @ 4000 before when I had single rank b die. Won't be limited by the dual rank 64gb kit, which is 3600-3733 CL14. 

Goal is to try to hit 45 seconds on this benchmark. Will also be install liquid metal aswell soon. Wish somebody with a 3175X would post, 28 AVX512 cores and hexa channel should destroy this benchmark.


----------



## cstkl1

storm-chaser said:


> He doesn't have the full results (with detail window) if that's what you are looking for. Just a snip of his run.


if u want i have. but i think the ddr5 6800-7k 2T guys are gonna wreck the scores. 
6400 to 6600 1T diff was 0.6sec
every 0.1ghz P core only is also 0.6secs.

@Jpmboy should be wrecking this


----------



## storm-chaser

cstkl1 said:


> if u want i have. but i think the ddr5 6800-7k 2T guys are gonna wreck the scores.
> 6400 to 6600 1T diff was 0.6sec
> every 0.1ghz P core only is also 0.6secs.
> 
> @Jpmboy should be wrecking this


Please post your detail result for reference purposes. 



gtz said:


> Yep
> 
> I just bought a 4X8GB B-die set just for this benchmark. Since I can push single rank sticks further since it is a lot easier on the memory controller. Pushed memory @ 4000 before when I had single rank b die. Won't be limited by the dual rank 64gb kit, which is 3600-3733 CL14.
> 
> Goal is to try to hit 45 seconds on this benchmark. Will also be install liquid metal aswell soon. Wish somebody with a 3175X would post, 28 AVX512 cores and hexa channel should destroy this benchmark.


Nice!

Yeah, that should give you a pretty substantial boost right out of the gate. I'm going liquid metal as well for the 9900k/ks when the time comes. 

Looking forward to seeing your results, I think that goal is definitely within reach given your plan to move forward with better memory.


----------



## cstkl1

storm-chaser said:


> Please post your detail result for reference purposes.
> 
> 
> Nice!
> 
> Yeah, that should give you a pretty substantial boost right out of the gate. I'm going liquid metal as well for the 9900k/ks when the time comes.
> 
> Looking forward to seeing your results, I think that goal is definitely within reach given your plan to move forward with better memory.


@sugi0lover


----------



## Cncrcmoto

I'll throw my 3800X in the mix: 112.182s
These are my daily settings (CCX OC: 4.3, 4.275) 3600mhz CL14


----------



## cstkl1

12900k : Stock
6400 28-37-37-28-1T








6600 28-37-37-28-1T









12900k : P 51|48 (avx512 load)
6400 28-37-37-28-1T








12900k : P 52|49 (avx512 load)
6400 28-37-37-28-1T









last one is really unstable. but thats the aim to run 6600-6666 with this.


----------



## gtz

cstkl1 said:


> 12900k : Stock
> 6400 28-37-37-28-1T
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6600 28-37-37-28-1T
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12900k : P 51|48 (avx512 load)
> 6400 28-37-37-28-1T
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12900k : P 52|49 (avx512 load)
> 6400 28-37-37-28-1T
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> last one is really unstable. but thats the aim to run 6600-6666 with this.


Unstable or not it finished the run, very impressive on just 8 cores. Can't wait to see what Sapphire Rapids X can do.


----------



## domdtxdissar

Return of the 5950x









Pretty sure ive hit the floor for ambient cooled 5950x before subzero is needed..
#1 place on hwbot.org for 5950x, and that by a good margin

_edit_
Ah i forgot, while at it i also took first place for 5950x in y-cruncher 1b


----------



## storm-chaser

update


----------



## dk_mic

domdtxdissar said:


> Pretty sure ive hit the floor for ambient cooled 5950x before subzero is needed..
> #1 place on hwbot.org for 5950x, and that by a good margin
> 
> _edit_
> Ah i forgot, while at it i also took first place for 5950x in y-cruncher 1b


Impressive, what was ambient temperature and what cooling system do you have mounted?
1.41 VCore and which LLC for that?


----------



## gtz

Liquid metal is applied and am happy with the improved temps. Also the single rank b die quad channel kit arrives on Friday. 

So if everything goes as planned hopefully I can get close to 45s.

Also hoping Jpmboy and MrTOOSHORT run this, curious what their tuned 10980XEs can do.


----------



## domdtxdissar

dk_mic said:


> Impressive, what was ambient temperature and what cooling system do you have mounted?
> 1.41 VCore and which LLC for that?


Ambient temp was around 12-15 degrees.
Cooling is provided by a custom watercooling setup using liquid metal:

TechN AMA4 CPU block
2x DDC 4.2 PWM Elite pumps
1x EK-CoolStream CE 280 in push
1x EK-CoolStream XE 360 (60mm thick) in push/pull
1x Monsta Full Copper 400mm Radiator (*87mm thick*) in push/pull

1425mv SET = ~1290mv GET @ LLC auto


----------



## Luggage

domdtxdissar said:


> Ambient temp was around 12-15 degrees.
> Cooling is provided by a custom watercooling setup using liquid metal:
> 
> TechN AMA4 CPU block
> 2x DDC 4.2 PWM Elite pumps
> 1x EK-CoolStream CE 280 in push
> 1x EK-CoolStream XE 360 (60mm thick) in push/pull
> 1x Monsta Full Copper 400mm Radiator (*87mm thick*) in push/pull
> 
> 1425mv SET = ~1290mv GET @ LLC auto


So decoupling work  nice to see clearly that bandwidth is more important latency for y-cruncher.


----------



## cstkl1

domdtxdissar said:


> Return of the 5950x
> View attachment 2538779
> 
> 
> Pretty sure ive hit the floor for ambient cooled 5950x before subzero is needed..
> #1 place on hwbot.org for 5950x, and that by a good margin
> 
> _edit_
> Ah i forgot, while at it i also took first place for 5950x in y-cruncher 1b


can u try ghost spectre windows 11 compact + defender

i think this os giving me incredible scores on win 11 with adl.

cause i think i can beat splave if i went dry ice maybe 5.6-5.7ghz


----------



## Avacado

cstkl1 said:


> can u try ghost spectre windows 11 compact + defender
> 
> i think this os giving me incredible scores on win 11 with adl.
> 
> cause i think i can beat splave if i went dry ice maybe 5.6-5.7ghz


That would be cool to see. He is however running 6.5GHz ADL. Not exactly a core for core match. Go get him!


----------



## cstkl1

Avacado said:


> That would be cool to see. He is however running 6.5GHz ADL. Not exactly a core for core match. Go get him!


high chance when he did it. the avx 512 cpu ucode was not out


----------



## domdtxdissar

cstkl1 said:


> can u try ghost spectre windows 11 compact + defender
> 
> i think this os giving me incredible scores on win 11 with adl.
> 
> cause i think i can beat splave if i went dry ice maybe 5.6-5.7ghz


Already running ghost spectre windows 10 super light (without def), dont really feel like changing OS again... This benchmarks really love memory bandwidth, that's probably why you get so close to splave's score.. That or the avx512


----------



## cstkl1

domdtxdissar said:


> Already running ghost spectre windows 10 super light (without def), dont really feel like changing OS again... This benchmarks really love memory bandwidth, that's probably why you get so close to splave's score.. That or the avx512


cause even on stock cpu.. something off with the scaling i am seeing


----------



## cstkl1

52 | 48 ( avx 512 load)
6600c28-37-37-28-1T


----------



## L0nerism

Not really extremely tuned, though I would like to eventually try some more memory tightening. I'm keeping the power limits stock and slowly working on the curve optimizer over the next few months to see where it lands, PBO2 isn't an option since the silicon quality on this chip isn't the greatest.


----------



## storm-chaser

update


----------



## Avacado

You updated me back to red on the 9900k and 12900k from KF


----------



## storm-chaser

Avacado said:


> You updated me back to red on the 9900k and 12900k from KF


oh god. sorry im really distracted right now not going on much sleep i think what happened is I saved the recovered file in place of the new one during a failed OC attempt. sorry about that.

but i did finally make 5.8Ghz so it's not all bad


----------



## Avacado

storm-chaser said:


> oh god. sorry im really distracted right now not going on much sleep i think what happened is I saved the recovered file in place of the new one during a failed OC attempt. sorry about that.
> 
> but i did finally make 5.8Ghz so it's not all bad
> 
> View attachment 2539162


That poor, sad, abused 9600k. Let me know when your ready to buy my binned/delidded 5.3GHz 9900k for $325 shipped. Ill even throw in the LM stained Optimus WB. But your cleaning it!


----------



## storm-chaser

Avacado said:


> That poor, sad, abused 9600k. Let me know when your ready to buy my binned/delidded 5.3GHz 9900k for $325 shipped.


No no no, you have it all wrong! My 9600KF is happy because it's in first place at HW bot, lol

I will definitely consider it. And yeah, this CPU is not long for this world. I think if it's not broken by the end of the month, Im going to kill it just for fun anyway. since amazingly, i've never destroyed a CPU by overclocking. But I've always wanted too...lol


----------



## Avacado

storm-chaser said:


> No no no, you have it all wrong! My 9600KF is happy because it's in first place at HW bot, lol
> 
> I will definitely consider it. And yeah, this CPU is not long for this world. I think if it's not broken by the end of the month, Im going to kill it just for fun anyway. since amazingly, i've never destroyed a CPU by overclocking. But I've always wanted too...lol


Nice RAM timinigs on that run BTW 15-15-15-28 @4133


----------



## storm-chaser

Okay, there is definitely something wrong with the excel file because I didn't change those back, it somehow automatically happened when I sorted the results. So I will have to do a check each time to make sure that doesn't happen again.

Should be fixed now.


----------



## gtz

Avacado said:


> That poor, sad, abused 9600k. Let me know when your ready to buy my binned/delidded 5.3GHz 9900k for $325 shipped. Ill even throw in the LM stained Optimus WB. But your cleaning it!


Great price, and free block to boot. 

Also something to consider is the money saved on taxes.


----------



## sugi0lover

This is SP91 12900K. When I get back SP103 12900K, I will see what I can do more.


----------



## storm-chaser

updated to include the latest runs


----------



## domdtxdissar

In other news, eager HWbot admins have removed most my scores from their site because i was showing memory timings/settings in screenshot with "Zentimings" instead of useless CPU-Z memory tab which actually don't show anything you wanna know.. _That _m_ust be the most petty "benchmark-site" ever, where members report all new scores that's faster than their own on stupid technicality instead of trying to beat them, but that is a story for a other day_... Think i'm done uploading scores there lol

In anycase, i had the 5950x #1 (and all Zen3 i think?) for both "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-1B" and "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-2.5B"













Bonus superpi 32m








_edit_
lol they removed all my 3dmark runs also because i didn't have "cpu-z open in screenshot" when i went out of my way to show all useful data with even logging of real clockspeeds in afterburner 







All my 3dmark runs were in the format above, with link to the 3dmark result page.

_edit2_
Sorry for rant 😅


----------



## Avacado

domdtxdissar said:


> In other news, eager HWbot admins have removed most my scores from their site because i was showing memory timings/settings in screenshot with "Zentimings" instead of useless CPU-Z memory tab which actually don't show anything you wanna know.. _That _m_ust be the most petty "benchmark-site" ever, where members report all new scores that's faster than their own on stupid technicality instead of trying to beat them, but that is a story for a other day_... Think i'm done uploading scores there lol
> 
> In anycase, i had the 5950x #1 (and all Zen3 i think?) for both "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-1B" and "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-2.5B"
> View attachment 2539216
> View attachment 2539217
> 
> Bonus superpi 32m
> View attachment 2539218


At least the admins ARE working. I have a guy blowing me out of the water and I have complained about his lacking proof and CPU-z without version numbers. They won't do anything about him though and punish you.


----------



## storm-chaser

Sorry to hear that.

Thats just wrong on every level. You might talk to @Mr.Scott at overclockers.com. He has a pretty good working relationship with the admins that run HWBOT. Perhaps they can be -reinstated, might be worth a shot. Because those are some really impressive numbers.


----------



## cstkl1

domdtxdissar said:


> In other news, eager HWbot admins have removed most my scores from their site because i was showing memory timings/settings in screenshot with "Zentimings" instead of useless CPU-Z memory tab which actually don't show anything you wanna know.. _That _m_ust be the most petty "benchmark-site" ever, where members report all new scores that's faster than their own on stupid technicality instead of trying to beat them, but that is a story for a other day_... Think i'm done uploading scores there lol
> 
> In anycase, i had the 5950x #1 (and all Zen3 i think?) for both "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-1B" and "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-2.5B"
> View attachment 2539216
> View attachment 2539217
> 
> Bonus superpi 32m
> View attachment 2539218
> 
> 
> _edit_
> lol they removed all my 3dmark runs also because i didn't have "cpu-z open in screenshot" when i went out of my way to show all useful data with even logging of real clockspeeds in afterburner
> View attachment 2539219
> 
> All my 3dmark runs were in the format above, with link to the 3dmark result page.
> 
> _edit2_
> Sorry for rant 😅


no suprised after what they did to snakeyes


----------



## cstkl1

storm-chaser said:


> updated to include the latest runs


mine is 5.2 avx load bro 264 watts
this is enforced offset that cannot be altered. set bios will end up -1 on core clock during 512 load.


----------



## Luggage

Wheather turned cold again 



http://imgur.com/pMXMk2E




http://imgur.com/zjiMP2s


So small improvements though, think I have to really tune or decouple memory to get some place. (or YOLO manual AC)


----------



## gtz

Luggage said:


> Wheather turned cold again
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/pMXMk2E
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/zjiMP2s
> 
> 
> So small improvements though, think I have to really tune or decouple memory to get some place. (or YOLO manual AC)


I am jealous about the weather, where I'm at the high today will be 81F (27C). On Christmas Eve, it is usually between 30F and 40F (-1C and 4C) this time a year where I'm at.


----------



## Avacado

gtz said:


> I am jealous about the weather, where I'm at the high today will be 81F (27C). On Christmas Eve, it is usually between 30F and 40F (-1C and 4C) this time a year where I'm at.


Same, it's going to be a high of 68 tomorrow in the mountains of NC.


----------



## gtz

Avacado said:


> Same, it's going to be a high of 68 tomorrow in the mountains of NC.


Weather has been very weird lately, earlier this year in February it was -20F and almost 20in of snow. Very rare occurrence in Oklahoma.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Not sure why my AVX clocks are stuck at only 5.2GHz


----------



## Avacado

SuperMumrik said:


> Not sure why my AVX clocks are stuck at only 5.2GHz


That is a sick run. And AVX clocks set to 5.2GHz is normal behavior for AI tuner even with E-cores disabled. You wouldn't be able to run 5.5GHz all core with AVX load(Would take over 1.5v). I realize that I won't be able to break 60 secs with this Samsung 5600 I have and thats ok. You really need 6000+ to make it happen.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Avacado said:


> And AVX clocks set to 5.2GHz is normal behavior for AI tuner even with E-cores disabled. You wouldn't be able to run 5.5GHz all core with AVX load(Would take over 1.5v).


yeah, I'm not expecting 5.5, but 5.3-5.4 should be ok. No matter what AVX offset I set, I'll end up with 5.2 max regardless.
Looking at sugi and cstkl1 it is obvious that memory is king


----------



## JSHamlet234

I'm visiting my parents for Christmas and decided to bench the PC I built for Mama Dukes. 11600K, ASUS Prime H510M-A mobo, 16GB Micron E-Die. It's locked down pretty hard because of the H510 board, but I managed to undervolt it and tighten the memory from CL16 to CL14. Unfortunately, the chipset forces gear 2 at 3200. It was still faster than 2933 gear 1. Temps didn't register, but they were hovering just under 70 on the hottest core with a Noctua U12S redux.


----------



## Avacado

I knew something was wrong with my RAM. I couldn't adjust ANY timings without having crashes or reset BIOS. Man, I'm down for RMA. Back to 9900k. Timing and speed are off in memtest as well. Whats crazy is it is failing but is lower than the 5600 speed and the timings are looser than the default XMP of 36-36-36-70.

Time to buy a DDR4 board in the interim and see what the difference is.


----------



## Arctucas

A nice cool (~40°F) Sunday morning, thought I would give 5400 MHZ a try.










Knocked a whole second off my 5300 MHZ time.

Was watching motherboard POST LED, CPU max temp was 75°C.


----------



## storm-chaser

cstkl1 said:


> mine is 5.2 avx load bro 264 watts
> this is enforced offset that cannot be altered. set bios will end up -1 on core clock during 512 load.


Interesting. So the only way to bump this up at this point would be FSB overclocking?


----------



## storm-chaser

JSHamlet234 said:


> I'm visiting my parents for Christmas and decided to bench the PC I built for Mama Dukes. 11600K, ASUS Prime H510M-A mobo, 16GB Micron E-Die. It's locked down pretty hard because of the H510 board, but I managed to undervolt it and tighten the memory from CL16 to CL14. Unfortunately, the chipset forces gear 2 at 3200. It was still faster than 2933 gear 1. Temps didn't register, but they were hovering just under 70 on the hottest core with a Noctua U12S redux.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2539478


Possible u could OC this rig with throttlestop? Or Intel XTU?


----------



## storm-chaser

Updation (As zenith NOC used to say)
I may have had a few drinks so if anything looks amiss, it's probably that. lol


----------



## Avacado

Arctucas said:


> A nice cool (~40°F) Sunday morning, thought I would give 5400 MHZ a try.
> 
> View attachment 2539551
> 
> 
> Knocked a whole second off my 5300 MHZ time.
> 
> Was watching motherboard POST LED, CPU max temp was 75°C.


How much voltage are you running through that chip?


----------



## Arctucas

Avacado said:


> How much voltage are you running through that chip?


UEFI:











With HWiNFO running concurrently:











Mid 40°F outside air.


----------



## Luggage

Sorry I yoloed some all core since it's cold still.



http://imgur.com/a/3oRFYo6


----------



## domdtxdissar

Luggage said:


> Sorry I yoloed some all core since it's cold still.
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/3oRFYo6


Impressive, loop running on alcohol or glycol ?  

~200w single CCD 🥵🥵
(~30w for io die)

One of these days i will also do a proper run


----------



## Luggage

domdtxdissar said:


> Impressive, loop running on alcohol or glycol ?
> 
> ~200w single CCD 🥵🥵
> (~30w for io die)
> 
> One of these days i will also do a proper run


Guessing water temp 2-5C at CPU, perhaps 10-15% glycol.
My hygrometer says dew point is -2C in case... don't know about that.

5G only stable for CPU-Z even at 1.5V


----------



## gtz

I have not forgotten about this bench, just waiting until all the parts are installed. Managed to get back my 10980XE from the member I sold it to (thanks again Outlaw4lf). This chip ran cooler and lower vcore than my current 9980XE. Runs almost .1 volts less for any given clock and around 10-15 degrees cooler. Also now running DDR4 4000CL15 flat, this is lower tier b die so flat CL 14 needs 1.625 to even post.


----------



## storm-chaser

Where are my threadripper people?
Someone has to give this guy a run for his money!

lol


----------



## Avacado

storm-chaser said:


> Where are my threadripper people?
> Someone has to give this guy a run for his money!
> 
> lol


Sold my 2950x a month ago. Sowee.


----------



## Avacado

I actually found a link for a 2.5B run. It's not good at all. So....









AvacadoEHW`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 1min 53sec 544ms with a Ryzen Threadripper 2950X


The Ryzen Threadripper 2950X @ 4315.7MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. AvacadoEHWranks #null worldwide and #1 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org


----------



## JSHamlet234

Luggage said:


> Sorry I yoloed some all core since it's cold still.
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/3oRFYo6





storm-chaser said:


> Possible u could OC this rig with throttlestop? Or Intel XTU?


I'll have to try those the next time I'm there.


----------



## JSHamlet234

Avacado said:


> I actually found a link for a 2.5B run. It's not good at all. So....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AvacadoEHW`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 1min 53sec 544ms with a Ryzen Threadripper 2950X
> 
> 
> The Ryzen Threadripper 2950X @ 4315.7MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. AvacadoEHWranks #null worldwide and #1 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org


Two clock cycles per instruction for AVX2 with Zen1/Zen+


----------



## Avacado

So the DDR4 z690 board arrives today and i'll be able to do some comparisons with the 12900KF and DDR vs DDR5 while waiting for this RMA. Will post some results by this weekend.


----------



## Avacado

NVM, Board DOA. I am having **** luck with 12th gen parts.


----------



## storm-chaser

Avacado said:


> NVM, Board DOA. I am having **** luck with 12th gen parts.


***????


----------



## Arni90

I opened the window, and got this 

EDIT: 1B too


----------



## Audioboxer

Hey guys was made aware of this topic by another poster after asking a question about y-cruncher benching in the AMD memory stability topic. I've only ever used y-cruncher stability testing before, so I'm new to benching with this. Main reason I'm having a go is experimenting running my memory out of sync to push frequency. Someone told me y-cruncher likes bandwidth and wouldn't be too concerned about the latency penalty










But now I'm beginning to wonder if this bench more about your CPU? Skimming this topic folks are talking about cooling/opening windows (lol) to presumably push numbers lower. I don't have a test bench OS setup as of yet, so above is just my daily Windows. Do background apps and Windows services impact this score?

My kernel overhead seems to be higher than most of the pictures I've skimmed in here. Above is PBO for what it is worth, just my daily settings on CPU.

Either way above isn't a submission, mostly here for advice. I'm going to switch to my 3800C13 in sync profile now and see how it scores compared to the above.

*edit* - 










Answered part of my own question! Back to my 3800, in sync, daily profile, and we're scoring worse. y-cruncher obviously likes the extra memory bandwidth!

I guess from here if I were to want to take part in the competition it's about how the CPU is overclocked, cooling and maybe even trying to strip down Windows background processes?


----------



## Luggage

Audioboxer said:


> Hey guys was made aware of this topic by another poster after asking a question about y-cruncher benching in the AMD memory stability topic. I've only ever used y-cruncher stability testing before, so I'm new to benching with this. Main reason I'm having a go is experimenting running my memory out of sync to push frequency. Someone told me y-cruncher likes bandwidth and wouldn't be too concerned about the latency penalty
> 
> View attachment 2541419
> 
> 
> But now I'm beginning to wonder if this bench more about your CPU? Skimming this topic folks are talking about cooling/opening windows (lol) to presumably push numbers lower. I don't have a test bench OS setup as of yet, so above is just my daily Windows. Do background apps and Windows services impact this score?
> 
> My kernel overhead seems to be higher than most of the pictures I've skimmed in here. Above is PBO for what it is worth, just my daily settings on CPU.
> 
> Either way above isn't a submission, mostly here for advice. I'm going to switch to my 3800C13 in sync profile now and see how it scores compared to the above.
> 
> *edit* -
> 
> View attachment 2541425
> 
> 
> Answered part of my own question! Back to my 3800, in sync, daily profile, and we're scoring worse. y-cruncher obviously likes the extra memory bandwidth!
> 
> I guess from here if I were to want to take part in the competition it's about how the CPU is overclocked, cooling and maybe even trying to strip down Windows background processes?


All benchmarking for performance is that - only with stability you can run un-optimized


----------



## Audioboxer

Luggage said:


> All benchmarking for performance is that - only with stability you can run un-optimized


Well, I've figured out a manual OC seems it will always trump PBO










But I'm not really the biggest fan of doing manual OCs on Zen, and I would never run it daily. Even with a weak LLC, the voltage required for like 4.7/4.6 just isn't worth it. Might be able to go a bit lower than 1.4v, but yeah, nice to see that y-cruncher result, but not really "real world".

I'll plug away at seeing how low I can get with PBO. My PBO settings and memory settings are fully stable, I don't fancy stability testing 1.35~1.4v through the CPU for hours lol.

@domdtxdissar is still beating the above with a static OC and he has the same CPU/memory as me, so I think I'll just leave the more "dangerous" stuff to the experts LOL. Speaking of the same memory, dom, you should try your 4400 DDR4 profile and see how low you get your score!

*edit *- Ah sneaky @domdtxdissar, his score is already with 4400 on the memory! Punish it with y-cruncher Forgot he beat me to discovering 4400 boots weeks ago LOL. This makes me feel better. I thought Dom's 59.872 was at 3800 and with a bump to 4400 he'd be at like 57.xxx   So I'm only just behind him!!! 🤝

Dom, any tips for how I can beat you? 👀 brb, putting my PC inside a freezer.


----------



## Audioboxer

Got you @domdtxdissar lol 👀

Changes from earlier, tRCDWR down to 8 and I closed as much Windows junk as I could. I've tried my hardest to go above 4.7ghz, but it's not happening. Your 5950x is likely better than mine and I'm not comfortable going higher than 1.425v. I'm not even comforable there LOL. Don't really want to mess with LLCs either.

I think if you drop your tRFC that might have an impact and you'll take the lead again. Especially reaching 4.75ghz.

This is pure bench only though, I will now go back to PBO and try and see the best I can do with something resembling what I'd call a daily use setup.

Also the temperature this test gets the CPU going to is insane, even on watercooling with fans ramped up can still go over 90 degrees, especially with the manual overclock and a voltage like 1.4~1.41v 

Rename y-cruncher to CPU-melter 🌞


----------



## domdtxdissar

Audioboxer said:


> View attachment 2541457
> 
> 
> Got you @domdtxdissar lol 👀


Not so fast buddy! 

*The revenge of the 5950x*

Rank #1 on hwbot for 2.5B Zen3










Rank #1 on hwbot for 1B Zen3


----------



## Audioboxer

domdtxdissar said:


> Not so fast buddy!
> 
> *The revenge of the 5950x*
> 
> Rank #1 on hwbot for 2.5B Zen3
> View attachment 2541484
> 
> 
> 
> Rank #1 on hwbot for 1B Zen3
> View attachment 2541485


You're using your SR, that's cheating! 😂👀

Congrats, those are bloody ridiculous scores.


----------



## cstkl1

Audioboxer said:


> Well, I've figured out a manual OC seems it will always trump PBO
> 
> View attachment 2541438
> 
> 
> But I'm not really the biggest fan of doing manual OCs on Zen, and I would never run it daily. Even with a weak LLC, the voltage required for like 4.7/4.6 just isn't worth it. Might be able to go a bit lower than 1.4v, but yeah, nice to see that y-cruncher result, but not really "real world".
> 
> I'll plug away at seeing how low I can get with PBO. My PBO settings and memory settings are fully stable, I don't fancy stability testing 1.35~1.4v through the CPU for hours lol.
> 
> @domdtxdissar is still beating the above with a static OC and he has the same CPU/memory as me, so I think I'll just leave the more "dangerous" stuff to the experts LOL. Speaking of the same memory, dom, you should try your 4400 DDR4 profile and see how low you get your score!
> 
> *edit *- Ah sneaky @domdtxdissar, his score is already with 4400 on the memory! Punish it with y-cruncher Forgot he beat me to discovering 4400 boots weeks ago LOL. This makes me feel better. I thought Dom's 59.872 was at 3800 and with a bump to 4400 he'd be at like 57.xxx   So I'm only just behind him!!! 🤝
> 
> Dom, any tips for how I can beat you? 👀 brb, putting my PC inside a freezer.


we all noticed this benchmark wants high bandwidth . not latency. 

u can read from the first few pages.


----------



## storm-chaser

thanks for the continued interest. I will update scores tomorrow fyi


----------



## dk_mic

@domdtxdissar @Audioboxer 
you might want to give it a shot with SMT disabled, if i understand this here correctly, you could gain 5% or so








Investigating Performance of Multi-Threading on Zen 3 and AMD Ryzen 5000







www.anandtech.com





I am out, don't have the cooling, silicon quality and ram to compete


----------



## Audioboxer

dk_mic said:


> @domdtxdissar @Audioboxer
> you might want to give it a shot with SMT disabled, if i understand this here correctly, you could gain 5% or so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Investigating Performance of Multi-Threading on Zen 3 and AMD Ryzen 5000
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.anandtech.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am out, don't have the cooling, silicon quality and ram to compete


I was already bricking it pumping 1.4~1.41v through my CPU even just for a few minutes, so I think I'll let @domdtxdissar win this one lmao.

What I will do is see if I can improve my PBO score a bit. Feel more comfortable there! I'll see if the above makes a difference though even with PBO.


----------



## domdtxdissar

dk_mic said:


> @domdtxdissar @Audioboxer
> you might want to give it a shot with SMT disabled, if i understand this here correctly, you could gain 5% or so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Investigating Performance of Multi-Threading on Zen 3 and AMD Ryzen 5000
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.anandtech.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am out, don't have the cooling, silicon quality and ram to compete


Thanks for the tip 
I'm at work atm so cant test it myself, but looking at the other top submissions for 5950x's on hwbot, non of them had SMT disabled.

If i were to guesstimate, the reason Anandtech is seeing a ~5% performance increase in y-cruncher with SMT disabled, could maybe be because they dont have the bandwidth to feed the cores.. (?) They are using mem @ 3200 MT/s with unknown timings on 32 threads.

Do you get any performance increase by turning off SMT ?


----------



## dk_mic

domdtxdissar said:


> If i were to guesstimate, the reason Anandtech is seeing a ~5% performance increase in y-cruncher with SMT disabled, could maybe be because they dont have the bandwidth to feed the cores.. (?) They are using mem @ 3200 MT/s with unknown timings on 32 threads.
> 
> Do you get any performance increase by turning off SMT ?


no, you are right, it actually makes things a bit worse @3800 CL14
just used my daily settings in a nice warm room


----------



## Luggage

dk_mic said:


> no, you are right, it actually makes things a bit worse @3800 CL14
> just used my daily settings in a nice warm room
> View attachment 2541598


Yea but quite a small regression so if turning off smt means you can run a higher clock speed then perhaps...


----------



## JSHamlet234

domdtxdissar said:


> Thanks for the tip
> I'm at work atm so cant test it myself, but looking at the other top submissions for 5950x's on hwbot, non of them had SMT disabled.
> 
> If i were to guesstimate, the reason Anandtech is seeing a ~5% performance increase in y-cruncher with SMT disabled, could maybe be because they dont have the bandwidth to feed the cores.. (?) They are using mem @ 3200 MT/s with unknown timings on 32 threads.
> 
> Do you get any performance increase by turning off SMT ?


I'm obviously on a very different and very ancient platform, but I got horrible performance with HT disabled on my 5960X. Something like 15% slower IIRC.


----------



## Corhone

PBO (MB limits) + CO


----------



## sugi0lover




----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Just got done installing the old 10980xe system into my son's pc. He has a AIO Arctic 360. Not a bad system for him I might say. 👍

@3900MHz:


----------



## gtz

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Just got done installing the old 10980xe system into my son's pc. He has a AIO Arctic 360. Not a bad system for him I might say. 👍
> 
> @3900MHz:
> 
> View attachment 2547600


So I break my back, I switched CPUs and switched to a 4X8GB kit just to get sub 50s on a triple rad setup and you just do it with a AIO. 

In all seriousness that is impressive for this bench.


----------



## sugi0lover




----------



## SuperMumrik




----------



## nickolp1974




----------



## Theo164




----------



## storm-chaser




----------



## sugi0lover




----------



## domdtxdissar

5800x3d @ stock ~4450mhz


----------



## ToyTen




----------



## KedarWolf

This with a CO Curve Core Cycler 720-720 FFTs stable and RAM TM5 stable. A decent score for a CO Curve.


----------



## KedarWolf

64.191 if I run it without using BenchMate, but likely won't count here because I never used it.


----------



## KedarWolf

Pro Tip: Google how to use GPEDIT to lock pages in memory and shave a second off your y-cruncher score.

Just remember to run BenchMate as Admin and reboot after using GPEDIT.


----------



## z390e

12900KS, Liquid Freezer 420, GSkill DDR5 @ 6400 XMP3


----------



## KedarWolf

My best ever y-cruncher using PBO Tuner. 64.043 This is TM5 and Core Cycler 720-720 FFTs stable, my 24/7 overclock.


----------



## z390e

I see a lot of variance in y-cruncher between max core frequency and max effective clock on most submissions, but all the best scores have almost identical max core frequency and max effective clock.

What am I doing wrong that I have this variance? I thought it was Intel TVB but I am not sure.


----------



## Luggage

z390e said:


> I see a lot of variance in y-cruncher between max core frequency and max effective clock on most submissions, but all the best scores have almost identical max core frequency and max effective clock.
> 
> What am I doing wrong that I have this variance? I thought it was Intel TVB but I am not sure.


If amd you see the difference between max boost and all core boost while running PBO. If the clocks are the same on amd it’s with manual all core OC.
As for Intel it might be avx offset?


----------



## z390e

@Luggage great call I bet that's it


----------



## sniperpowa

I’ll have to try this when I get back home


----------



## ToyTen

Having some fun with all slots populated


----------



## storm-chaser

Those R/W/C numbers make all things warm and fuzzy. good job!


----------



## sniperpowa




----------



## JSHamlet234

sniperpowa said:


> View attachment 2564557


It took 11 pages for us to get here, but it was worth the wait. It would be cool to see the stats reported by benchmate - peak power consumption, temps, effective clocks, etc


----------



## sniperpowa

JSHamlet234 said:


> It took 11 pages for us to get here, but it was worth the wait. It would be cool to see the stats reported by benchmate - peak power consumption, temps, effective clocks, etc


It uses a ton of power and it runs hot. Ill do some more runs later. 4ghz is all I can do without a avx offset in ycruncher. Software power consumption is 550watts but that’s not correct this cpu pulls more power than that.


----------



## Luggage

sniperpowa said:


> It uses a ton of power and it runs hot. Ill do some more runs later. 4ghz is all I can do without a avx offset in ycruncher. Software power consumption is 550watts but that’s not correct this cpu pulls more power than that.


Press F6 after the run


----------



## z390e

Just a casual top 6 world y-cruncher score, great stuff @sniperpowa hot on the heels of those 7T83's and neck and neck with the 3990x's 

incredible run


----------



## sniperpowa

So I rigged up elmor labs pmd cpu pulls over 1000w in y cruncher lol


----------



## Netarangi

Ichirou said:


> I can't run y-cruncher as it errors out with the "Coefficient is too large" error on this CPU (i7-8086k).
> Site says that it's something to do about an unstable OC, but I'm confident that that is not the case. I'm leaning towards some sort of bug with AVX on this CPU.
> 
> I'll have to try it again on a 12900k later on.


Hey I have been getting this too so I googled "Coefficient is too large y cruncher" and it's given me your post haha.. 

Anyway, did you find the answer to this? Is it unstable dram OC?


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> Hey I have been getting this too so I googled "Coefficient is too large y cruncher" and it's given me your post haha..
> 
> Anyway, did you find the answer to this? Is it unstable dram OC?


There is no clear solution for why y-cruncher errors, but it tends to be too low Vcore/VCCSA/VCCIO on older generations
If you can pass TM5 1usmus/anta777 with your RAM, the RAM itself is fine for y-cruncher. The CPU or IMC isn't.


----------



## KedarWolf

FINALLY got under 64 seconds.


----------



## z390e

Got my temperatures much more in line, going to go to per core OC shortly since I can't get all of my pcores to run 5.4


----------



## stahlhart

Assuming my rightful place somewhere in the middle of the pack.

Edit: was I supposed to have disabled e-cores for this? Sorry if I messed up.


----------



## bscool

stahlhart said:


> View attachment 2568163
> 
> 
> Assuming my rightful place somewhere in the middle of the pack.
> 
> Edit: was I supposed to have disabled e-cores for this? Sorry if I messed up.


Disabling e cores only helps if your CPU supports avx512. Also need to use a bios that has avx512 or use older u code 15 in a newer bios.


----------



## Avacado

z390e said:


> Got my temperatures much more in line, going to go to per core OC shortly since I can't get all of my pcores to run 5.4


_Cough_ 2.5b _Cough_


----------



## z390e

1b gives global HWBot points and 2.5b doesnt heh

My current best 2.5b is a full 10c lower than my previous one in this thread though.


----------



## Spit051261




----------



## Spit051261

Not too bad for a 6 core non K CPU .


----------



## tubs2x4

Spit051261 said:


> Not too bad for a 6 core non K CPU .
> View attachment 2568703


Hauling for a smaller cpu. How you set up voltage / core speed and cache for that 12400?


----------



## Spit051261

what board are you using ?
I am playing with something else at the moment .
I'll give you all my settings via PM when I get chance


----------



## Spit051261

This CPU is AVX enabled so that makes a difference I believe .


----------



## BNSoul

I can't see any 5800X3D here... so many hard locks in place to keep that big L3 healthy, I did a run just for laughs while testing the IMC, I used PPT limited to 114w, TDC 75 and EDC 115, also an all-core CO of -30 (done on PBO2 Tuner app). My stock BCLK 100MHz air-cooled 5800X3D result is not far from that of a stock 5800X I guess, 98-ish seconds. NO vcore offset, LLC auto... most BIOS settings on auto, this is my gaming rig after all. Crappy Hinix d-die 3600MT/s kit with a lazy tuning to 3800MT/s. Clocks during test should have been somewhere 4200-4400, no thermal throttling but not hitting 4450 for some reason on this test.


----------



## Luggage

BNSoul said:


> I can't see any 5800X3D here... so many hard locks in place to keep that big L3 healthy, I did a run just for laughs while testing the IMC, I used PPT limited to 114w, TDC 75 and EDC 115, also an all-core CO of -30 (done on PBO2 Tuner app). My stock BCLK 100MHz air-cooled 5800X3D result is not far from that of a stock 5800X I guess, 98-ish seconds. NO vcore offset, LLC auto... most BIOS settings on auto, this is my gaming rig after all. Crappy Hinix d-die 3600MT/s kit with a lazy tuning to 3800MT/s. Clocks during test should have been somewhere 4200-4400, no thermal throttling but not hitting 4450 for some reason on this test.
> 
> View attachment 2571458


Y-cruncher is much heavier than r23 and might perform better with higher PBO limits even if temps go up.


----------



## domdtxdissar

BNSoul said:


> I can't see any 5800X3D here... so many hard locks in place to keep that big L3 healthy, I did a run just for laughs while testing the IMC, I used PPT limited to 114w, TDC 75 and EDC 115, also an all-core CO of -30 (done on PBO2 Tuner app). My stock BCLK 100MHz air-cooled 5800X3D result is not far from that of a stock 5800X I guess, 98-ish seconds. NO vcore offset, LLC auto... most BIOS settings on auto, this is my gaming rig after all. Crappy Hinix d-die 3600MT/s kit with a lazy tuning to 3800MT/s. Clocks during test should have been somewhere 4200-4400, no thermal throttling but not hitting 4450 for some reason on this test.
> 
> View attachment 2571458


I had a 5800x3d entry on last page


----------



## BNSoul

domdtxdissar said:


> I had a 5800x3d entry on last page


Impressive, 4433 RAM at 1,6v 😬 
What temps did that setup reach?? I don't dare trying anything above 114w and -30 all-core.


----------



## Luggage

BNSoul said:


> Impressive, 4433 RAM at 1,6v 😬
> What temps did that setup reach?? I don't dare trying anything above 114w and -30 all-core.


I really don't want to step on your toes but I did some theory crafting again - if your cooling keeps up you might see postive scaling up to somewhere between 133 and 142W but it seems to level out at stock levels.



http://imgur.com/a/D4BUzEu


----------



## domdtxdissar

BNSoul said:


> Impressive, 4433 RAM at 1,6v 😬
> What temps did that setup reach?? I don't dare trying anything above 114w and -30 all-core.


Temp and everything is in the screenshot 








I had no problem cooling 120-140w 5800x3d with my pretty large custom loop with TechN Zen3 block and liquid metal 
(especially when i use alittle cold air as i did in that run)


----------



## Raphie

12900KS Stock on Noctua D15 with DDR5 @ 6800Mhz


----------



## Arni90

Time for some slightly impressive results with a poorly binned 12900K and some Hynix 16Gb A-die:


----------



## nickolp1974

Arni90 said:


> Time for some slightly impressive results with a poorly binned 12900K and some Hynix 16Gb A-die:
> 
> View attachment 2573332
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2573333



beating Splave on LN2 with this, GREAT!!!


----------



## z390e

AVX512 ftw


----------



## domdtxdissar

All auto pbo clocking.. just trying to get to know the platform:
Normal ambient temperatures


----------



## domdtxdissar

Killed HWbot 

7950x is a beast...

Y-CRUNCHER - PI-25M








Y-CRUNCHER - PI-1B








Y-CRUNCHER - PI-2.5B








Also did some other scores at the same time 😇

WPRIME - 32M score








WPRIME - 1024M score








SUPERPI - 1M score








SUPERPI - 32M score









7-ZIP score








PIFAST score








All my scores are done with custom watercooling
Will be back with improved scores once Asus manage to release a bios that let me run 6400MT/s speed with/or dual rank memory, like the other motherboard supports atm..


----------



## storm-chaser




----------



## z390e




----------



## criccio

I'm very new to this but learning. This is an aircooled 7900x.


----------



## domdtxdissar

domdtxdissar said:


> Killed HWbot
> 
> 7950x is a beast...
> 
> Y-CRUNCHER - PI-25M
> View attachment 2574937
> 
> 
> Y-CRUNCHER - PI-1B
> View attachment 2574938
> 
> 
> Y-CRUNCHER - PI-2.5B
> View attachment 2574939
> 
> 
> Also did some other scores at the same time 😇
> 
> WPRIME - 32M score
> View attachment 2574940
> 
> 
> WPRIME - 1024M score
> View attachment 2574941
> 
> 
> SUPERPI - 1M score
> View attachment 2574942
> 
> 
> SUPERPI - 32M score
> View attachment 2574943
> 
> 
> 
> 7-ZIP score
> View attachment 2574944
> 
> 
> PIFAST score
> View attachment 2574945
> 
> 
> All my scores are done with custom watercooling
> Will be back with improved scores once Asus manage to release a bios that let me run 6400MT/s speed with/or dual rank memory, like the other motherboard supports atm..


Updates 

Asus rog crosshair x670e hero
7950x with handtuned PBO CO
3090 with unlimited bios
32GB DDR @ 6200MT/s 28-35-35-36-38-48
FCLK @ 2200mhz
Single m.2 sk hynix platinum p41 1tb
Custom liquid cooling
25mil = 0.321s








1b = 15.546s








2.5b = 43.169s


----------



## Raphie

Finally sub 60sec on air


----------



## Avacado

Raphie said:


> Finally sub 60sec on air
> 
> View attachment 2577948


Looks like you have headroom on your E-Cores. Bet you could break 59 seconds at 4.1. 1.36v is already high for E-cores.


----------



## Raphie

Could be, the KS is still stock, only optimized -VF 
I would like to keep the downclock to 500mHz when idle, need to figure out how to increase max MP without pegging the cores 24/7


----------



## z390e

sub 60s on air with ADL for 2.5b is really good


----------



## KedarWolf

I was excited I got this, but then I see 43.169. But I'm running my CPU on a 2800 RPM pump with one 360 RAD. 

I should load my Windows 10 Macrium image though, might do better.


----------



## domdtxdissar

Did a clean sweep on hwbot, #1 place in every category with this fully maxed out Zen4, not even LN2 guys can catch me 

Asus rog crosshair x670e hero
7950x with handtuned PBO CO
3090 with unlimited bios
32GB DDR @ 6600MT/s 28(30)-38-38-36-30-40
FCLK @ 2200mhz
Single m.2 sk hynix platinum p41 1tb
Custom liquid cooling
25mil = 0.319s 









1b= 15.135s









2.5b = 41.903s


----------



## storm-chaser

That unlimited BIOS looks to be the magic bullet!


----------



## storm-chaser

KedarWolf said:


> I was excited I got this, but then I see 43.169. But I'm running my CPU on a 2800 RPM pump with one 360 RAD.
> 
> I should load my Windows 10 Macrium image though, might do better.
> 
> View attachment 2581916


@KedarWolf do u have a BIOS for the Z390 Ultra


----------



## stahlhart

Updated for new CPU. Daily driver overclock to keep Vcores < 1.4V.


----------



## stahlhart

Side note -- ran a thorough component stress test last night; temperatures only rose slightly (apart from that bizarre spike on DIMM #1) and voltages remained consistent.

With the latest BIOS, I somehow lost the ability to keep x58 within constraints -- previously I had been 57-57-56-56-55-55-55-55 with +1 TVB, but now x58 pushes me up to and usually over 1.4V maximums. At the moment I am at x55 for all P cores with +2. The scoring and performance are about the same, and it probably didn't spend all that much time at the highest bin anyway. The other strange thing is that up until now I've never messed with the loadline settings, just kept those at Auto and everything was okay... I have to dial them in now, and they are at 1.10 DC and 0.15 AC.










Edit: left the monitor running overnight; Vcore maximums crept up but stayed under 1.4V. Since temperatures are also under 90C at maximum stress, I'm going to call this good and be done with it.


----------



## z390e

great flex @domdtxdissar


----------

